I have read the paper in detail along with comments of previous reviewers. Author(s) still needs to work for enhancing the quality of the manuscript significantly. I have few major concerns as follows:
• Why paper has been titled as socioeconomic determinants of savings if dependency ratio is only socioeconomic variable?
• What is the justification of using time-series analysis, particularly the Canonical Cointegrating regression model?
Besides, all the sections of the paper need better clarity and readability for the international audience. All the comments of earlier reviewers to be visible in the manuscript and may not be required to be answered individually. Eg. Dependency ratio is still not clear. Is it percent of non-working population?
Introduction is weak and needs to be supported with literature. There has been a significant decline in domestic savings in Saudi Arabia during recent years (what is the source?). There are many such sentences without any support. Introduction is still not setting a good context of the study.
Literature review is inconsistent.
Model, Methodology and Data are poorly written.
Results of the study are poorly discussion. It has no academic rigour. This paper has the potential for converting into a good scientific research piece.
What is the need of a heading on the impulse function?
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations are to be strictly based on the findings of this paper.
Overall, this paper still needs major work.

All headings and sub-heading are to be properly checked. The presentation of results needs improvement. Decimal places in tables should follow a uniform pattern. Why only policy recommendations?? Paper may also reflect the implications for other stakeholders. Paper requires proper professional language editing.