News1 min ago
Pensions
Many people will see their April take home reduced with the Government's requirement for people to to contribute a minimum of 8% of salary into their pension (granted this will be a mix of employee and employer contributions). I find this completely laudable and prudent.
I accept employees can opt-out, but am I the only person who thinks society has a problem when those that are looking after themselves are being told how much they must contribute when there's certain members of our society who do the square root of F all for their future (or their present) leaving the responsible to fund them by the government giving them free money?
In 7 years time I will have paid my total NI contribution to receive my maximum state pension. In 7 years time I will be a long way from retirement so will still be paying NI, and yet bizarrely those that have paid nothing will receive a larger state pension than me. On what planet is that correct?
I accept employees can opt-out, but am I the only person who thinks society has a problem when those that are looking after themselves are being told how much they must contribute when there's certain members of our society who do the square root of F all for their future (or their present) leaving the responsible to fund them by the government giving them free money?
In 7 years time I will have paid my total NI contribution to receive my maximum state pension. In 7 years time I will be a long way from retirement so will still be paying NI, and yet bizarrely those that have paid nothing will receive a larger state pension than me. On what planet is that correct?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Deskdiary, and furthermore, when you eventually receive your pension you will be paying tax on money that has already been taxed.//
weird and er wong actually but what the hell this is AB!
some deep thinking reqd
Pensions conts are tax free - ( and therefore are NOT taxed)
and accummulation of the pension fund ( sorry long word alert) is also untaxed ( er was until 1997 when Mr Brown ruined the private pension sytem)
and disbursement is taxed - my mother seemed to think that money should be taxed only once rather than whenever there is a transaction ( VAT etc). girlie thing I think
NICs are a tax by the way - dont be deceived
so the employers pension system is AAT ( untaxed untaxed taxed)
and after 1997 - A A(T) T
so you COULD have untaxed pensions but it is likely that either contribution or accummulation would be taxed instead.
technical I know
but taxation of pension funz is kinda er technical
Didja laugh at the Beeb hackettes asking the man and girl in the street - "da pension - offul the pension hike innit?"
and the man in the street saying it was daylight robbery and if it werent then he didnt know what was
and all the while the Been hacks have finely crafted great big fat pensions paid for partly by us the tax payer ?
yes I did notice the irony
have fun boys and girls
weird and er wong actually but what the hell this is AB!
some deep thinking reqd
Pensions conts are tax free - ( and therefore are NOT taxed)
and accummulation of the pension fund ( sorry long word alert) is also untaxed ( er was until 1997 when Mr Brown ruined the private pension sytem)
and disbursement is taxed - my mother seemed to think that money should be taxed only once rather than whenever there is a transaction ( VAT etc). girlie thing I think
NICs are a tax by the way - dont be deceived
so the employers pension system is AAT ( untaxed untaxed taxed)
and after 1997 - A A(T) T
so you COULD have untaxed pensions but it is likely that either contribution or accummulation would be taxed instead.
technical I know
but taxation of pension funz is kinda er technical
Didja laugh at the Beeb hackettes asking the man and girl in the street - "da pension - offul the pension hike innit?"
and the man in the street saying it was daylight robbery and if it werent then he didnt know what was
and all the while the Been hacks have finely crafted great big fat pensions paid for partly by us the tax payer ?
yes I did notice the irony
have fun boys and girls
Originally Nat Ins contributions contained and element called SERPS, this ensured everyone got the basic state pension, but those working and contributing got extra related to their earnings. Around the late seventies/early eighties Companies providing pension schemes could opt out of the SERPS element and both employer and employee paid lower rate of NI. The employer had to pay a minimum guaranteed pension payment.
In 2016 the new higher flat pension was introduced which everyone who has a full NI record will get. There was a bit of a hooha because those that had paid into SERPS will lose out.
Some Company Schemes also have a clause whereby when you receive your State Pension, your Company Pension is reduced by that sum.
Along the way SERPS changed it's name to SSP.
In 2016 the new higher flat pension was introduced which everyone who has a full NI record will get. There was a bit of a hooha because those that had paid into SERPS will lose out.
Some Company Schemes also have a clause whereby when you receive your State Pension, your Company Pension is reduced by that sum.
Along the way SERPS changed it's name to SSP.
No, anyone reaching state retirement age after 2016 will receive the new higher flat rate pension, around £168. To get this in full 35 years NI contributions will be required, as long as you have made 10 years you will get some pension. This includes NI credits given if you have been unemployed, a carer or ill.
The downside is what Prudie was referring to, if you have been contracted out to a Company scheme and have paid a lower rate of NI you will get a reduction on the state pension. Since 2016 nobody has been contracted out so the longer you have to retirement age the lower the deduction will be.
The downside is what Prudie was referring to, if you have been contracted out to a Company scheme and have paid a lower rate of NI you will get a reduction on the state pension. Since 2016 nobody has been contracted out so the longer you have to retirement age the lower the deduction will be.
"hose that have contributed £0 or very little into either NI or the enforced pension scheme and those that do? "
Undoubtedly. It will go like this:
Sit on your fat backside on benefits all your life pay nothing in and you will get full State Pension.
Pay tax, save into your own pension and be means tested for the State Pension.
Already the Government is starting to refer to the State Pension as a 'benefit'.
The problem is the great Ponzi scheme is about to collapse. Governments didnt invest the money they took for pensions instead wasted it on other things. People moan at Maxwell, Green etc but successive Governments have done (and are still doing) the same.
Undoubtedly. It will go like this:
Sit on your fat backside on benefits all your life pay nothing in and you will get full State Pension.
Pay tax, save into your own pension and be means tested for the State Pension.
Already the Government is starting to refer to the State Pension as a 'benefit'.
The problem is the great Ponzi scheme is about to collapse. Governments didnt invest the money they took for pensions instead wasted it on other things. People moan at Maxwell, Green etc but successive Governments have done (and are still doing) the same.
Not for anyone already retired or for anyone retiring in the next 10 years at least, YMB, given all the upheaval caused by changes to state pension age. The state pensions is taxable for those with reasonable private pensions so the government already gets 20% back in those cases. If it does happen eventually I doubt it will affect most of us- maybe just those with pensions over something like £150000 pa.
They have the option of easier targets like means testing the winter fuel allowance.
It's more likely the tax free lump sum allowance will be reduced or the higher tax relief on contributions will be cut closer to the basic rate figure).
They have the option of easier targets like means testing the winter fuel allowance.
It's more likely the tax free lump sum allowance will be reduced or the higher tax relief on contributions will be cut closer to the basic rate figure).
Yeah, you said it was based on people using the term 'benefit'. Well it is really - most people take out far more in state pension than they put in, and as you say quite a lot put in nothing. It's been called a benefit since 1946, by the way, so it's not a sinister new change.
https:/
My private pension was also called a 'defined benefit' scheme- I didn't argue 'no it's not a benefit'.
https:/
My private pension was also called a 'defined benefit' scheme- I didn't argue 'no it's not a benefit'.
You can never rule anything out forever but I see no reason to think that it will happen 'anytime soon'.
I'm not even sure a Corbyn government would tackle this one- except perhaps for say 45% taxpayers but that wouldn't save much.
Which reminds me- out of interest does anyone know whether Jeremy Corbyn draws his state pension?
I'm not even sure a Corbyn government would tackle this one- except perhaps for say 45% taxpayers but that wouldn't save much.
Which reminds me- out of interest does anyone know whether Jeremy Corbyn draws his state pension?
I'm not sure that any Government can rule out not changing the rules. Yes it will be bought in for high income earners, then that limit will be gradually reduced.
"They have the option of easier targets like means testing the winter fuel allowance."
Unless you cut it for everyone, that is not worth touching, it would cost more to administer than you gain. Stopping a large weekly sum however ....
But hopefully I will be wrong.
"They have the option of easier targets like means testing the winter fuel allowance."
Unless you cut it for everyone, that is not worth touching, it would cost more to administer than you gain. Stopping a large weekly sum however ....
But hopefully I will be wrong.
