Private pension age going up from 55.....
Discussion
RYH64E said:
if and when I sell the business I'll get entrepreneurs relief on a very significant sum.
1. A house is a home, not an investment. You can't "spend" your supposed profit unless you sell the house.2. If your business fails you lose your job AND your pension.
Investing in a pension makes good sense, especially with all the tax reliefs available. It's simply not true to say "the whole thing's a rip-off".
Qwert1e said:
1. A house is a home, not an investment. You can't "spend" your supposed profit unless you sell the house.
I've got 3 houses and 2 commercial properties, I can't live in them all...Qwert1e said:
2. If your business fails you lose your job AND your pension.
Anything's possible, but it's under my control and if it fails it will be my fault. It's not looking likely though...RYH64E said:
Not at all.
I was referring to the previous poster who seemed keen to have a baseless rant, rather than add anything worthwhile or relevant.RYH64E said:
If I'd had access to a public sector pension or a blue chip final salary private sector pension I'd have been very happy, unfortunately the pension schemes available to me weren't worth a carrot and I'm glad I realised this early, before I'd paid a fortune in contributions. The investments I did make (property and business) have done very well in the last 20 years, far better than any pension could possibly have achieved. Just the house I bought (£60k in '95) has tripled in value and returned the equivalent of £800/month every year since, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. As for tax relief, if and when I sell the business I'll get entrepreneurs relief on a very significant sum.
Put simply, a pension is purely a tax-efficient investment wrapper - the performance of the pension is simply the performance of the underlying investment choice that you make. There are few things that you can buy directly that you cannot access via a pension.Pensions have positives and negatives and aren't the best or most appropriate thing for everyone, but there can be perfectly attractive and appropriate for many people if you understand what they are (and equally importantly, what they are not).
Some of the ill-informed crap that gets claimed about pensions on here is ridiculous.
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 26th July 23:18
RYH64E said:
Qwert1e said:
1. A house is a home, not an investment. You can't "spend" your supposed profit unless you sell the house.
I've got 3 houses and 2 commercial properties, I can't live in them all...Qwert1e said:
2. If your business fails you lose your job AND your pension.
Anything's possible, but it's under my control and if it fails it will be my fault. It's not looking likely though...I've had interesting conversations with account managers and financial advisers over the years with them telling me how to make a few extra quid from this or that route, but that's all it would be i.e. a couple of quid in relative terms.
If you're paddling your own canoe and it's staying afloat then there's not much that can beat the return, and this makes placing significant sums elsewhere largely redundant - though I wouldn't pursue that route to the extent that every egg remains in the same basket.
With a future Labour government still possible, amazingly enough given their serial incompetence and disastrous track record, you have to wonder which is at greater risk: extra-statutory concessions / entrepreneurs' relief or the tax-free lump sum arrangements. When the left runs out of other people's money by available routes, anything is possible.
Is a proposed cut off date for this listed anywhere? My 40th birthday was in January this year, and as I've been in my pension scheme since I was 16, I'll have made my maximum contribution by age 56, so it appears I'll be caught up in this - depending on where the date of birth cut off is.
sidicks said:
mph1977 said:
given the vastest majority of remaining DB schemes are 50 % / 40years full time schemes
Surely most of the public sector schemes were (originally at least) 1/60ths schemes, and those that were 1/80ths schemes had additional lump sum benefits (3/80ths) to make them equivalent to 1/60ths schemes!the NHS FS scheme is 1/80th
a 1/80th scheme even with a lump sum can not be equivalent to a 1/60th scheme regardless of lump sums
a 1/80th scheme requires 40 years service -
a 1/60 scheme requires 30 years service -
sidicks said:
mph1977 said:
a 30K pension means retiring from job paying in excess of 60k
NHS doctors and dentists, senior managers , chief Officer ranks in the mergency services, head teachers
most normal Public sector Professionals will retire , assuming they have 40 years service - and many female professionals won't ) will be looking at a pension in the realms of 15k -20 pa from theier jobs paying high 20ies to 40 k pa
But there are lots of them and the liability for benefits accrued to date is now well over £2 trillion (assets = zero)NHS doctors and dentists, senior managers , chief Officer ranks in the mergency services, head teachers
most normal Public sector Professionals will retire , assuming they have 40 years service - and many female professionals won't ) will be looking at a pension in the realms of 15k -20 pa from theier jobs paying high 20ies to 40 k pa
Edited by sidicks on Friday 25th July 21:03
the whole 'unfunded PS pensions liability timebomb' is chicken little journalism from the pets of the libertarian idiots who believe the 'reds under the hospital beds' hype of US insurers and big pharma who realise that an integrated and coordinated health service impacts their ability to gouge profits.
mph1977 said:
the NHS FS scheme is 1/80th
a 1/80th scheme even with a lump sum can not be equivalent to a 1/60th scheme regardless of lump sums
a 1/80th scheme requires 40 years service -
a 1/60 scheme requires 30 years service -
mph1977 said:
no they weren't
the NHS FS scheme is 1/80th
So you provide one example of a public sector scheme that is a 1/80ths scheme as evidence that no other public sector schemes are / were 1/60ths schemes?the NHS FS scheme is 1/80th
The 1995 scheme is indeed a 1/80ths scheme, however the 2008 scheme is a 1/60ths scheme...
So again you are wrong.
mph1977 said:
a 1/80th scheme even with a lump sum can not be equivalent to a 1/60th scheme regardless of lump sums
a 1/80th scheme requires 40 years service -
a 1/60 scheme requires 30 years service -
The 1/80ths scheme comes with a 3/80ths lump sum attached, which (broadly) equates to the same overall benefit as a 1/60ths scheme.a 1/80th scheme requires 40 years service -
a 1/60 scheme requires 30 years service -
So you are wrong again.
mph1977 said:
the government took a decision to re use contributions in year rather than fund the schemes - some PS schemes are funded ...
the whole 'unfunded PS pensions liability timebomb' is chicken little journalism from the pets of the libertarian idiots who believe the 'reds under the hospital beds' hype of US insurers and big pharma who realise that an integrated and coordinated health service impacts their ability to gouge profits.
The fact is there are no assets and there is a huge liability - even you, having already made so many errors, surely cannot deny that.the whole 'unfunded PS pensions liability timebomb' is chicken little journalism from the pets of the libertarian idiots who believe the 'reds under the hospital beds' hype of US insurers and big pharma who realise that an integrated and coordinated health service impacts their ability to gouge profits.
Further, it is evident that, even if contributions had been invested, the assets would be a fraction of the required amount needed to fund the liability - contributions have been far too small for far too long, hence the massive taxpayer subsidy.
It is a fact that deferring the problem into the future is simply not sustainable and hence these schemes need to drastically revised. The current measures are a classic case of too little, too late...
The Ponzi scheme, funding current pensions from current contributions cannot go on for ever, given increasing life expectancy etc...
Edited by sidicks on Sunday 27th July 10:28
sidicks said:
The 1995 scheme is indeed a 1/80ths scheme, however the 2008 scheme is a 1/60ths scheme...
It's changing again in 2015. No wonder a lot of younger NHS staff aren't joining (or aren't able to join as NHS uses external companies more and more) both of which will accelerate the annual shortfall.
Sheepshanks said:
It's changing again in 2015.
No wonder a lot of younger NHS staff aren't joining (or aren't able to join as NHS uses external companies more and more) both of which will accelerate the annual shortfall.
If only they realised that they are stupid not to join, given the benefits relative to the contributions....No wonder a lot of younger NHS staff aren't joining (or aren't able to join as NHS uses external companies more and more) both of which will accelerate the annual shortfall.
Of course what they should offer is reduced accrual for reduced contributions to make these schemes more affordable for the taxpayer but to avoid the issue of staff claiming that the increased contributions are unaffordable.
PurpleMoonlight said:
mph1977 said:
the NHS FS scheme is 1/80th
a 1/80th scheme even with a lump sum can not be equivalent to a 1/60th scheme regardless of lump sums
a 1/80th scheme requires 40 years service -
a 1/60 scheme requires 30 years service -
sidicks said:
mph1977 said:
except, of course it requires 40 years service not 30 ...
No, after 40 years (which is the standard working lifetime assumption) they both produce a broadly equivalent 2/3rds salary pension....the police pension is 50 % of FS on 1/60 with something like 13% Officer contribution and has been for a good number of years ... perhaps the likes of derek could tell us when the enhanced accrual rates were stopped - along with housing allowance / spolice house / section houses etc )
mph1977 said:
the NHS FS pension is 50 % of final salary with 1/80th accrual on 7- 10 % employee contributions ( new entrants it;s a 50 % CARE but that is 1/60th)
the police pension is 50 % of FS on 1/60 with something like 13% Officer contribution and has been for a good number of years ... perhaps the likes of derek could tell us when the enhanced accrual rates were stopped - along with housing allowance / spolice house / section houses etc )
Why are you repeatedly ignoring the lump sum benefit...?the police pension is 50 % of FS on 1/60 with something like 13% Officer contribution and has been for a good number of years ... perhaps the likes of derek could tell us when the enhanced accrual rates were stopped - along with housing allowance / spolice house / section houses etc )
sidicks said:
mph1977 said:
the NHS FS pension is 50 % of final salary with 1/80th accrual on 7- 10 % employee contributions ( new entrants it;s a 50 % CARE but that is 1/60th)
the police pension is 50 % of FS on 1/60 with something like 13% Officer contribution and has been for a good number of years ... perhaps the likes of derek could tell us when the enhanced accrual rates were stopped - along with housing allowance / spolice house / section houses etc )
Why are you repeatedly ignoring the lump sum benefit...?the police pension is 50 % of FS on 1/60 with something like 13% Officer contribution and has been for a good number of years ... perhaps the likes of derek could tell us when the enhanced accrual rates were stopped - along with housing allowance / spolice house / section houses etc )
the 1995 and earlier NHS schemes provide a lump sum of 3 * PENSION on retirement , so it doesn;t take many years for that lump sum to have covered your assertion that becasue there is a lump sum the pension is 'worth' 33% more than the actual pension payable
the 2008 NHS CARE scheme has no mandatory lump sum so any lump sum taken will be on reduction of pensions
mph1977
Assume final pensionable salary is £20,000
The 80th scheme provides:
40/80 x 20,000 = 10,000 pension
120/80 x 20,000 = 30,000 lump sum
The 60th scheme provides:
40/60 x 20,000 = 13,333 pension
30,000/9 = 3,333 pension reduction for 30,000 lump sum
Both provide the same benefit.
Assume final pensionable salary is £20,000
The 80th scheme provides:
40/80 x 20,000 = 10,000 pension
120/80 x 20,000 = 30,000 lump sum
The 60th scheme provides:
40/60 x 20,000 = 13,333 pension
30,000/9 = 3,333 pension reduction for 30,000 lump sum
Both provide the same benefit.
Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Sunday 27th July 12:33
mph1977 said:
You continually mis represent that pensions schemes such as the NHS FS (1995 scheme and earlier) pensions scheme are 80ths based and require 40 years ervice not 60th based which require 30 years service.
Oh FFS!Look at the total benefits being provided...
mph1977 said:
the 1995 and earlier NHS schemes provide a lump sum of 3 * PENSION on retirement , so it doesn;t take many years for that lump sum to have covered your assertion that becasue there is a lump sum the pension is 'worth' 33% more than the actual pension payable
As has been demonstrated, you are continually wrong!mph1977 said:
the 2008 NHS CARE scheme has no mandatory lump sum so any lump sum taken will be on reduction of pensions
What is the accrual rate....??PurpleMoonlight said:
mph1977
Assume final pensionable salary is £20,000
The 80th scheme provides:
40/80 x 20,000 = 10,000 pension
120/80 x 20,000 = 30,000 lump sum
The 60th scheme provides:
40/60 x 20,000 = 13,333 pension
30,000/9 = 3,333 pension reduction for 30,000 lump sum
Both provide the same benefit.
the maximum pension accrual in current Public sector 60th schemes such as the current Police FS scheme and the 2008 CARE NHS scheme is 30/60 not 40/60 ... Assume final pensionable salary is £20,000
The 80th scheme provides:
40/80 x 20,000 = 10,000 pension
120/80 x 20,000 = 30,000 lump sum
The 60th scheme provides:
40/60 x 20,000 = 13,333 pension
30,000/9 = 3,333 pension reduction for 30,000 lump sum
Both provide the same benefit.
Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Sunday 27th July 12:33
for current scheme police officers that represents 50 % of final salary , for the CARE schemes it represents the CARE equivalent of half salary
the old 40/60 Police pension which resulted in a pension of 2/.3rd s of FS went years ago.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff