Private pension age going up from 55.....

[arp1]

Sheepshanks said:

sidicks said:

And they get pensions that are 10-15 times that of typical private sector workers.

You can't deny the fact that their pensions are hugely subsidised by taxpayers.

If the ratio is that large then the retired private sector workers are going to be heavily reliant on benefits - also provided by taxpayers.

So what goes around comes around

[arp1]

98elise said:

sidicks said:

XJ Flyer said:

So why not leave the age as it is and be honest by calling it what it actually is a tax relief cut in pension provision.Instead of dressing it up to make it look like something else.It is obvious that,for such a scam to work,the next step will be for the government to impose a higher element of compulsory pension payments taken from wages.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 22 July 20:38

If you want free access to your money then invest outside of a pension.

If you want the benefit of pension relief then you have to accept the restrictions the government imposes.

This is why I don't put any money into a pension. I'm employed via my own Ltd company. I can leave cash in the company (so not paying income tax on it) and I can draw from it whenever I want to.

I hate the concept of paying my hard earned into a pot that someone else has control over.

That's all fair and well then, but if that's the case, don't moan about any other pension scheme if that's what you do through choice...

Edited by arp1 on Wednesday 23 July 08:00

[GAjon]

The way I read the new access to pension pot rules is you will only be able to draw down on savings in excess of about £100k.
As you have to be able to provide yourself a pension of c£12k a year.
So state 1 is about £7k a year, so a top up of £5k is required.
To buy a £5k pension you will need about £100k.
So only if you have over that will you be able to take it as cash?

Am I reading that correctly?

[Andy Zarse]

98elise said:

This is why I don't put any money into a pension. I'm employed via my own Ltd company. I can leave cash in the company (so not paying income tax on it) and I can draw from it whenever I want to.

I hate the concept of paying my hard earned into a pot that someone else has control over.

From a taxation point of view, if nothing else, your tactic is bordering on lunacy.

[rotarymazda]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Although changing the age from 55 to 57 is bad for private pensions, it does reflect rising life expectancy.

I would argue that recent changes are good for private pensions e.g.

1. The 2015 changes allow you to do whatever you like with your pension at 55/57. No forced annuities, no £12K requirement for flexible drawdown.

2. Shift from income tax to national insurance makes salary sacrifice very attractive, especially if your employer gives you their NI saving.

For those in the child benefit removal band, effective marginal tax rates can be as high as 65%. Salary sacrifice can reduce this to 15%.

My age means I can pull the money out from 55 so recent changes are all good for me.

[XJ Flyer]

greygoose said:

XJ Flyer said:

As for life expectancy nothing has really changed in that in general the reality is most people will be ( very ) lucky to live for much more than 10-15 years after retirement at 65.While many others will be gone before that if not before 65.However just like the so called 'official' rate of inflation compared to incomes,the idea of increasing life expectancy is just a lie being put out by those who obviously stand to benefit by cutting the returns on pension contributions,to keep more for themselves.

I am not a fan of the pension industry as I think a lot of their products are designed to benefit the company rather than the policyholder, however it is difficult to support your view that increasing life expectancy is a lie.

BBC website said:

The number of people living in the UK aged 100 increased by 73% in the decade to 2012, said the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

In 2012 there were 13,350 centenarians living in Britain, from 7,740 in 2002.

The ONS also said life expectancy in Britain had "reached its highest level on record for both males and females".

A newborn boy could live 78.7 years, and a girl, 82.6 years, if mortality rates stayed the same for 2010 and 2012 in the UK, it said.

Meanwhile, a man aged 65 in the UK could expect to live for 18.2 years, a 40% increase in the 30 years to 2012, and a 65-year-old woman, for 20.7 years, a 25% increase.

That is a substantial increase in 30 years.

Link

Those figures seem to confirm what I've said.Life expectancy for a newborn boy is stated as being 78.7 which in itself seems optimistic.While they're then saying that translates as 18.2 years after 65.

The figures provided,no surprise,just being unsubstantiated propaganda by the banking industry for what is effectivly a 40% cut in pension payouts.While no surprise also calling for an increase in pension contributions.I'd prefer to trust my own view.Rather than that of the bankers who obviously have everything to gain by pushing the idea of ridiculous non existent increases in life expectancy.

[Camoradi]

Andy Zarse said:

98elise said:

This is why I don't put any money into a pension. I'm employed via my own Ltd company. I can leave cash in the company (so not paying income tax on it) and I can draw from it whenever I want to.

I hate the concept of paying my hard earned into a pot that someone else has control over.

From a taxation point of view, if nothing else, your tactic is bordering on lunacy.

I'm interested in why you say this. If he takes a salary up to his tax free allowance and dividend up to circa £30k (effectively zero taxed due to dividend tax credit) he can get circa £30k per annum with zero income tax, and continue to do so after he has ceased working, but continue to run his company until the cash is exhausted. Of course corporation tax is payable during the years when he trades and makes a profit.

Have I missed something?

[Sheepshanks]

XJ Flyer said:

Those figures seem to confirm what I've said.

I can't believe those figure are correct - it's either badly written or just wrong.

[sidicks]

XJ Flyer said:

Those figures seem to confirm what I've said.Life expectancy for a newborn boy is stated as being 78.7 which in itself seems optimistic.While they're then saying that translates as 18.2 years after 65.

The figures provided,no surprise,just being unsubstantiated propaganda by the banking industry for what is effectivly a 40% cut in pension payouts.While no surprise also calling for an increase in pension contributions.I'd prefer to trust my own view.Rather than that of the bankers who obviously have everything to gain by pushing the idea of ridiculous non existent increases in life expectancy.

On Pistonheads you quite frequently get people who haven't got a clue vociferously making claims that do not stack up, but you're taking it to a whole new level...

[XJ Flyer]

GAjon said:

To buy a £5k pension you will need about £100k.

That type of figure says it all.IE you'll need a guaranteed life expectancy of 85 years just to get back what you've paid in at the usual retirement age let alone all the interest accrued on the money.The fact is the pension providers aren't in it for the pension claimants' benefit and it's obvious that the next move will obviously be an increased element of compulsion as people get wise to the scam.

[XJ Flyer]

sidicks said:

XJ Flyer said:

Those figures seem to confirm what I've said.Life expectancy for a newborn boy is stated as being 78.7 which in itself seems optimistic.While they're then saying that translates as 18.2 years after 65.

The figures provided,no surprise,just being unsubstantiated propaganda by the banking industry for what is effectivly a 40% cut in pension payouts.While no surprise also calling for an increase in pension contributions.I'd prefer to trust my own view.Rather than that of the bankers who obviously have everything to gain by pushing the idea of ridiculous non existent increases in life expectancy.

On Pistonheads you quite frequently get people who haven't got a clue vociferously making claims that do not stack up, but you're taking it to a whole new level...

The banking industry at least would want to push that view.The fact is the figures,concerning 'actual' pension payouts,compared to premiums paid in,and the fact that the pension providers are even then calling for what are effectively cuts in pension payouts don't lie.No one would invest in pensions by choice at least if they've got any sense.Especially when that investment is made at the expense of prolonging mortgages in many cases.IE a lose lose situation that's all in the bankers' favour.

If they want to keep pushing the idea of so called 'life expectancy' increases fine.Just so long as they don't increase the level of compulsion on potential pension contributors to go along with the scam that is the pension system.

[sidicks]

XJ Flyer said:

That type of figure says it all.IE you'll need a guaranteed life expectancy of 85 years just to get back what you've paid in at the usual retirement age let alone all the interest accrued on the money.The fact is the pension providers aren't in it for the pension claimants' benefit and it's obvious that the next move will obviously be an increased element of compulsion as people get wise to the scam.

And the expectation of life at age 65 is much more than 20 years....

[XJ Flyer]

XJ Flyer said:

GAjon said:

To buy a £5k pension you will need about £100k.

That type of figure says it all.IE you'll need a guaranteed life expectancy of 85 years just to get back what you've paid in at the usual retirement age let alone all the interest accrued on the money.The fact is the pension providers aren't in it for the pension claimants' benefit and it's obvious that the next move will obviously be an increased element of compulsion as people get wise to the scam.

Years ago in the late 1980's I bought into all the hard sell put out by the private pensions industry at the time.Luckily for me they kept moving the goal posts very early on into the scheme/scam regards contributions which in no way matched the original figures provided at the time.So I just walked away.The ridiculous amount that I now get in pension on the cash I was stupid enough to give them before doing so proves to me what a good decision I made and what a total rip off pensions really are.

[XJ Flyer]

sidicks said:

XJ Flyer said:

That type of figure says it all.IE you'll need a guaranteed life expectancy of 85 years just to get back what you've paid in at the usual retirement age let alone all the interest accrued on the money.The fact is the pension providers aren't in it for the pension claimants' benefit and it's obvious that the next move will obviously be an increased element of compulsion as people get wise to the scam.

And the expectation of life at age 65 is much more than 20 years....

It's fair to say that's according to those who stand the most to gain by that idea.While in the real world nothing has changed from the pension claimant's point of view.As I said pension providers aren't in it for anyone's benefit but their own and it's obviously in their interests to keep pushing such a false idea of increased life expectancy and using that as an excuse to either cut pension payouts even more or increase contributions or a combination of both.Just so long as there's no change in the level of compulsion regarding pension contributions that's then just a matter of choice.As for me no thanks I had the sense to say I'm out decades ago.Luckily for my finances.

[sidicks]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

More importantly 'impaired and enhanced ' annuities are much more common which means that the longevity of those left, taking out annuities, is much better than the population average...

[sidicks]

XJ Flyer said:

It's fair to say that's according to those who stand the most to gain by that idea.While in the real world nothing has changed from the pension claimant's point of view.As I said pension providers aren't in it for anyone's benefit but their own and it's obviously in their interests to keep pushing such a false idea of increased life expectancy and using that as an excuse to either cut pension payouts even more or increase contributions or a combination of both.Just so long as there's no change in the level of compulsion regarding pension contributions that's then just a matter of choice.As for me no thanks I had the sense to say I'm out decades ago.Luckily for my finances.

Obviously be able to support your claims with evidence....

[XJ Flyer]

Guam said:

sidicks said:

And the expectation of life at age 65 is much more than 20 years....

Thats the kicker right there, the fact is when I was a Kid (60 in a month) the average guy never seemed to live to collect his pension (and if he did he didnt get far beyond 65).

The shortfall is in large part due to modern life expectancy levels. I am not sure there is an answer to that. If you are fit and healthy why should you not continue to work?

Or to put it another way why would I want to give you my hard earned money to put into a pension scheme under those terms.I'd prefer to use it to clear the expensive mortgage etc and then invest what's left where it's accessible and no one is going to dictate to me at what age I'm allowed to have it all returned to me with interest.IE it's all about getting back 'all' of my own cash with interest,not the choice as to wether to keep working or retire.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Wednesday 23 July 12:27

Edited by XJ Flyer on Wednesday 23 July 12:36

[XJ Flyer]

sidicks said:

XJ Flyer said:

It's fair to say that's according to those who stand the most to gain by that idea.While in the real world nothing has changed from the pension claimant's point of view.As I said pension providers aren't in it for anyone's benefit but their own and it's obviously in their interests to keep pushing such a false idea of increased life expectancy and using that as an excuse to either cut pension payouts even more or increase contributions or a combination of both.Just so long as there's no change in the level of compulsion regarding pension contributions that's then just a matter of choice.As for me no thanks I had the sense to say I'm out decades ago.Luckily for my finances.

Obviously be able to support your claims with evidence....

If you mean by that posting my pension details on here,to prove that I took the decision to walk away from a pension because they are nothing but a rip off set up to benefit the banking sector.You'll just have to trust me on that.Unfortunately the state pension is compulsory which won't allow the same thing in that case.As for private pensions I don't see an issue just so long as freedom of choice to walk away at the point of sale or at any point,for those who choose to,remains.For those who think it's a good deal that's their choice in that case.While as I've said expect to see changes in that regard to go with the propaganda of so called 'increased life expectancy' used as an excuse to cut pension payouts.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Wednesday 23 July 12:31

Edited by XJ Flyer on Wednesday 23 July 12:32

[IroningMan]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

...while BASE jumping as a hobby. When not engaged in a part-time, post-retirement job saturation diving in the North Sea.

[Cotty]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You had me worried until I saw that line. Already pissed off with the 50 - 55 rise.