I would advocate the opposite,save more via Additional Voluntary Contributions when you have spare cash. The revenue will let you keep what whould otherwise be taxed a person eanring 60,000 pays 10,000 as an avc and keeps 4,00 that would go in tax. No other savings product gives an immeadiate return of 66%. Modern schemes are called salary sacrifice. Bigger firms let you keep their corporation tax that they save on top.This is the young you buying the old you a pint.
-
Existing user of old message board?
Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.
State Pension Forecast - A Warning
- Topic starter Badger11
- Start date
I was 18 when I started work and "opted out" so I didn't give it any thought. I still don't quite understand how they arrived at 38 years after telling me if was 35 years I'm sure I didn't make that up but I no longer have the paperwork.
Anyway it seems that if I pony up 3k I will get it back after 3.5 years so I start earning in my 70th year if I make it that far.
ASCPFC
Member
- Location
- Pro-Cathedral/caravan park
- Country
Ireland
You remind me of Derry and Donegal and the census figures neither government shows us. No one works as they just claim benefits on both sides of the border. The pubs still do well - being a decent indicator. They can afford it.
The village in Donegal with one street and a pub with 9000 residents according to the electoral register.
I didn’t know about my situation. I suppose being straight out of school I didn’t pay any attention to such matters. It was only a colleague that alerted me, prior to my retirement. I believe you work in the CS or have done, would well be worth checking
Similar to me, despite numerous conversations with HMRC I still don’t know how, having worked just short of 44 years I still had to pay another 3-4 years of contributions
PalazioVecchio
Member
- Location
- south pole
- Country
Netherlands
cryrst
Member
- Location
- The garden of England
- Country
England
cryrst
Member
- Location
- The garden of England
- Country
-
England
So reeves want to have a pop at private pensions now. Reduce the tax free to 20% not 25%. This lot are such greedy c****.
PalazioVecchio
Member
- Location
- south pole
- Country
-
Netherlands
Nobody has yet mentioned the Elephant in the Room.
Pensions worked, for the State, back in the 1950's when people had a ton of kids. People worked to age 65, retired, and then died one or two years later. Many didnt even make it to 65. Housing was cheap cos a) couples stayed together and she was a home-maker , not a career women and b) Social Welfare did not function to inflate house prices. On average, one pensioner was supported by 16 earners in employment and paying their taxes. People often inherited a home while young enough to start a family themselves. Many people commenced employment at age 16 and continued thereafter. A taxpaying employed man offered a much better prospect to women, for reproduction, than a long-term unemployed loser. The vast majority of kids were born to married women with a working father. The dole was seen as undesirable and best avoided. Thus a taxpaying-nation begot more of the same.
Today. The opposite to most of these. The West turning into a gigantic retirement-home...with many young people born into ghettos.....not financially nor economically sustainable. London (and Silicon Valley) is increasingly for the twenty-somethings who work but dont have kids - wealthy and barren. Like the Fall of Rome..........it plays out in the financial markets before it hits people on the streets.
the UK was the first country to Industrialise and may now be the first to experience a Post-Industrial collapse. Pensions and everything else all gone down the swanney.
Pensions worked, for the State, back in the 1950's when people had a ton of kids. People worked to age 65, retired, and then died one or two years later. Many didnt even make it to 65. Housing was cheap cos a) couples stayed together and she was a home-maker , not a career women and b) Social Welfare did not function to inflate house prices. On average, one pensioner was supported by 16 earners in employment and paying their taxes. People often inherited a home while young enough to start a family themselves. Many people commenced employment at age 16 and continued thereafter. A taxpaying employed man offered a much better prospect to women, for reproduction, than a long-term unemployed loser. The vast majority of kids were born to married women with a working father. The dole was seen as undesirable and best avoided. Thus a taxpaying-nation begot more of the same.
Today. The opposite to most of these. The West turning into a gigantic retirement-home...with many young people born into ghettos.....not financially nor economically sustainable. London (and Silicon Valley) is increasingly for the twenty-somethings who work but dont have kids - wealthy and barren. Like the Fall of Rome..........it plays out in the financial markets before it hits people on the streets.
the UK was the first country to Industrialise and may now be the first to experience a Post-Industrial collapse. Pensions and everything else all gone down the swanney.
Last edited:
PalazioVecchio
Member
- Location
- south pole
- Country
-
Netherlands
so, in theory ......... a minimum-wage fella who worked 20 years in the UK gets a better State pension than kevin de Bruyne ? because the latter didnt do as many years ? even if Kevin paid a squillion quid tax ?
seems a bit unfair ?
seems a bit unfair ?
eaglesdare
Member
- Country
-
England
By the time I'm ready to retire there most likely won't be a state pension anymore 😭 I'm only half way there.