Salary sacrifice into pension to keep child benefit.
Discussion
Brads67 said:
So whilst making more than 50k a year, you hide some of your wages so that the taxpayer can hand you 80 quid a month in benefits.
Classy.
It's not really hiding it is it? It is a government incentive to engineer people taking responsibility for finances in their old age. It's hardly hiding money offshore.Classy.
Jesus , some precious souls on here.
Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
But like i said, you know that , you`re simply fabricating, ( bit thick maybe,? you kinda sound it.)
I`ll leave you all to it.
Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
But like i said, you know that , you`re simply fabricating, ( bit thick maybe,? you kinda sound it.)
I`ll leave you all to it.
Brads67 said:
Jesus , some precious souls on here.
Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
Why were you asking about buying a property within a pension, rather than directly?Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
Brads67 said:
But like i said, you know that , you`re simply fabricating, ( bit thick maybe,? you kinda sound it.)
I`ll leave you all to it.
You definitely sound a bit thick if you don't understand the difference between the JC scheme and the approach to increase your pension contribution to minimise loss of child tax benefit. I`ll leave you all to it.
Just saying...
Brads67 said:
Jesus , some precious souls on here.
Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
But like i said, you know that , you`re simply fabricating, ( bit thick maybe,? you kinda sound it.)
I`ll leave you all to it.
Haha, your making a complete t*t of yourself. The only precious sole in here is you, still firing with no ammunition. Anyhoo crack on, but making out I asked about avoiding tax, when in fact I didn`t shows my opinion obviously bothers you.
You know I simply asked what was allowed (because I didn`t know) in terms of pension investment to maximise return on a pot, nothing to do with income tax because I`m not drawing the pension and it would be managed to add growth to a pension that is no longer paid into.
But like i said, you know that , you`re simply fabricating, ( bit thick maybe,? you kinda sound it.)
I`ll leave you all to it.
You tried to be smart with the OP but it has backfired on you. On your pension question, you were told the regulations but still questioned it.
Edited by tighnamara on Wednesday 21st February 22:48
tighnamara said:
On your pension question, you were told the regulations but still questioned it.
No I didn`t. Your a liar. You must have read the thread ( I assume) so you know that to be untrue. Simply trying to fabricate some double standard to justify yourself..Edited by tighnamara on Wednesday 21st February 22:48
And I never tried to be smart, I expressed my opinion. Nothing has backfired on me at all. I still hold the same opinion.
I`m sure that knowing I was a liar would feel like a backfire though.
Brads67 said:
No I didn`t. Your a liar. You must have read the thread ( I assume) so you know that to be untrue. Simply trying to fabricate some double standard to justify yourself..
And I never tried to be smart, I expressed my opinion. Nothing has backfired on me at all. I still hold the same opinion.
I`m sure that knowing I was a liar would feel like a backfire though.
The opinion that increasing pension contributions to protect child benefit is akin to undertaking a scheme like one Jimmy Carr was involved in? The one where HMRC have reclaimed the tax benefit achieved?And I never tried to be smart, I expressed my opinion. Nothing has backfired on me at all. I still hold the same opinion.
I`m sure that knowing I was a liar would feel like a backfire though.
If that is still your opinion, then you’re a bigger fool than it first appeared!
My opinion was about making your salary apparently look less in order to claim a benefit you would otherwise not be entitled to due to your high salary.
As you well know, saying it felt a bit too " Jimmy Carr" is a generalisation , alluding to hiding income from the Govt.
I know it wasn`t the same, or even in the same ballpark so stop being precious about the comment ( It wasn`t in inverted commas for nothing you know)
Clearer for you ?
As you well know, saying it felt a bit too " Jimmy Carr" is a generalisation , alluding to hiding income from the Govt.
I know it wasn`t the same, or even in the same ballpark so stop being precious about the comment ( It wasn`t in inverted commas for nothing you know)
Clearer for you ?
Brads67 said:
My opinion was about making your salary apparently look less in order to claim a benefit you would otherwise not be entitled to due to your high salary.
As you well know, saying it felt a bit too " Jimmy Carr" is a generalisation , alluding to hiding income from the Govt.
I know it wasn`t the same, or even in the same ballpark so stop being precious about the comment ( It wasn`t in inverted commas for nothing you know)
Clearer for you ?
Indeed, an extremely ignorant and inaccurate generalisation, as highlighted by a number of people.As you well know, saying it felt a bit too " Jimmy Carr" is a generalisation , alluding to hiding income from the Govt.
I know it wasn`t the same, or even in the same ballpark so stop being precious about the comment ( It wasn`t in inverted commas for nothing you know)
Clearer for you ?
Clear enough for you?
sidicks said:
The opinion that increasing pension contributions to protect child benefit is akin to undertaking a scheme like one Jimmy Carr was involved in? The one where HMRC have reclaimed the tax benefit achieved?
I thought Jimmy Carr repaid the tax saved by the scheme as soon as it came to light, thus avoiding any need for a reclaim? TwigtheWonderkid said:
sidicks said:
The opinion that increasing pension contributions to protect child benefit is akin to undertaking a scheme like one Jimmy Carr was involved in? The one where HMRC have reclaimed the tax benefit achieved?
I thought Jimmy Carr repaid the tax saved by the scheme as soon as it came to light, thus avoiding any need for a reclaim? If the OP really wanted to take this to the extreme they could legitimately salary sacrifice down to say £13.5k salary (to the NMW for 37.5hr/wk) then make a further personal pension contribution to bring their income down to £6k meaning they would get full WTC/CTC....
Obviously assuming they hadnt used their full £40k pension contributions for the last 2 years.
Obviously assuming they hadnt used their full £40k pension contributions for the last 2 years.
Brads67 said:
My opinion was about making your salary apparently look less in order to claim a benefit you would otherwise not be entitled to due to your high salary.
But the point is that if you salary sacrifice into a pension you are entitled to the child benefit. That has quite deliberately been designed to be that way to encourage people to do it.Brads67 said:
No I didn`t. Your a liar. You must have read the thread ( I assume) so you know that to be untrue. Simply trying to fabricate some double standard to justify yourself..
And I never tried to be smart, I expressed my opinion. Nothing has backfired on me at all. I still hold the same opinion.
I`m sure that knowing I was a liar would feel like a backfire though.
No fabrication, not made up. And I never tried to be smart, I expressed my opinion. Nothing has backfired on me at all. I still hold the same opinion.
I`m sure that knowing I was a liar would feel like a backfire though.
It’s written in black and white, you asked a question on having a rental flat in your pension. A very informative PH advised clearly that this is not possible to do as its not a commercial property.
You then asked, but why can’t it be commercial as I am renting it out via a business.
The point I am making is that the OP is doing nothing wrong and within all the rules, you were looking at doing something that is very wrong and not possible within the rules.
But you try to make him out to be someone not paying his taxes and claiming something he is not entitled to, which is total rubbish.
Edited by tighnamara on Saturday 24th February 13:48
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff