USUAL RUBBISH

[Benjamin]

I'll add my best wishes for your campaign although I don't think I can sign the petition as I'm no longer a UK citizen?

Benjamin

[Logan]

Likewise and I agree holdheartedly with your posts.

The attitude of the UK Government, (and I mean G. Brown who in actuality is the real power), towards this issue is tempered by the means test on pensioner incomes. Brown sees no point in compensating pensioners robbed of their pension rights if in the end they will be kept from poverty by the means tested pension credit. They claim to have lifted pensioners out of poverty since coming to power. It's a flagship policy they trot out given any opportunity. What in reality they have done is shackle people to a rigid and unforgiving government hand out with so many attached strings personal choice and independence is removed. They refuse to increase the state pension to any meaningful level because it would involve higher personal taxes to pay for it. Yet private or company pension contributions are a tax on incomes in another form. It's perception, and a political con trick. We are content to pay for a pension but not higher income taxes.

Government pension schemes are ringed fenced by legislation. In otherwords protected under law. I admit this is unequal. Employment in the public sector has always been regarded as a safe option. We make choices in life. Be safe or take risks. Great when the risks work out but misery when they don't.

Private pension schemes be they individual or company are a risk. Like any investment, for that's what they are in actuality, it may or may not provide.

[Gastines]

Having read the BBC news yesterday about a Financial Advisor who defrauded his friends and clients of 2.25 million, I think it about sums up a great number of us  and what we think of investments/pensions etc. I think that over the last 10 years a few million people have had a pretty nasty shock, in some cases fatal. I don't see the financial institutions suffering much! Virtually every year when I visit our branch of  Halifax ,it has been completely re-fitted out with the latest shopfittings etc [pity they don't bring their  staff up to date ]

However , I digress, why is it that the returns are always LOWER than forecast? A friend kept an endowment [almost a swear word now ] after paying off her mortgage as a saving. Forecast a modest £8.500 after 25 years. Letter received saying, " Advising you of a shortfall of £3.500  - £4.500. You can remedy our errors by paying us so we can make some more interest at your expense!

I would like to build a house for the Director/Chairman and at the end of the the job say " Sorry there's no windows on the top floor and no toilets, I got my figures wrong but you can pay me to do the quoted work as an addition"My turn for a change.

Unfortunately I know no-one can predict the future but why is it at the working class end we have to pay up? Power to the people as Wilfy Smith said, but not in our time.

Regards.

[hastobe]

[quote user="KathyC"]

There's an enormous amount of misinformation about this issue, as represented by the above quote. If you are able to retire at 60 you will always get a lower pension than if you work for longer, whether you are in the private sector or the public. [/quote]

Not correct - my husband (who is a public sector employee) cannot get more than 40/80's of his final salary - he can also retire at 60 without any impact on his pension as he has completed his 40 years service.  If he works beyond 60 he is likely to be penalised as a result of the proposed changes to move to career average as opposed to end of career salary as he basis for calculating his pension.  As an aside he has paid the same percentage contributions as me over his working life.

Me - despite having made contributions over my working life I have diddly squat pension (other than the few years superannuation I accrued between ages 18 and 24).  The pension fund of the large private company I worked for has insufficient assets and is currently being taken to court by the pension trustees - directors managed to have numerous 'pension holidays' over the time I worked there. Further, I have had to change jobs (female, have children...) several times (and unlike my other half who saw no impact on his pension)  my current employer only offers a defined contribution scheme and my current transfer value after four years service is guess what ...diddly squat.  I have worked hard over my career (already have done 30 years service)  but I am not expecting much pension over and above the basic state pension.

Gordon Brown has a lot to answer for....and you can be assured his pension fund is very well endowed.

Kathie

[Anton Redman]

<< Many UK government pensions would not attract income tax if they could be paid gross of tax from UK in other EU states, particularly France. It's wrong and IS an injustice which needs to be corrected >>

To quote an example the many Fire Service pensions which are paid in France are funded from a mix of local and central government taxation ( they are not funded from past contributions) they idea of paying them gross from the UK would mean that we would pay rates and tax in the UK in order to pay income tax free to people in France.

If you want to get me angry about pensions the RAF/ Services pension in which if a services widow marries a retired officier she looses her entitlement to pension based on her first husbands contributions without gaining any pension based on her new husbands contributions. We have one friend who describes herself as an unkept woman, if they were married it would cost her about pounds 123 occasionaly she thinks it might be worth it but it normally wears off by Thursday night and she decides that at her time of life pounds 100 plus for being a floosy is pretty good money.

[KathyC]

[quote user="hastobe"]Not correct - my husband (who is a public sector employee) cannot get more than 40/80's of his final salary - he can also retire at 60 without any impact on his pension as he has completed his 40 years service.  If he works beyond 60 he is likely to be penalised as a result of the proposed changes to move to career average as opposed to end of career salary as he basis for calculating his pension.  As an aside he has paid the same percentage contributions as me over his working life.


[/quote]

Sorry, you're absolutely right in your example, I suppose in teaching I haven't come across anybody who's got forty years service in and it wouldn't really be possible to do so by theage of 60 anyway. I agree that pension provision in the private sector has been badly affected in recent years, but surely the answer is not for the public sector provision to worsen as well?

[hastobe]

Unless those funding the salaries and pension / pension contributions of those working in the public sector are the poor souls with no pension  who are getting diddly squat help from the Government who raided their pension fund....

Kathie

[KathyC]

I'm not sure how much we're disagreeing on this subject. Don't forget that public service employees also pay taxes,National Insurance and etc as well as their direct pension contributions.

Why don't we just gang up and attack the bad guys, rather than have workers in the different sectors turn against each other. That just plays into the hands of shareholders, governments etc. Divide and rule's a very useful tactic at times!

Best wishes, Kathy

[bixy]

Well, I hadn't expected my post to generate so much discussion  but it seems that this is a hot issue. Just to put Logan right regarding his response to my original post. The TV presenter was making the point that, since people on government pensions paid tax in the UK, shouldn't they be entitled to paid-for care when living abroad. It seemed to me a rubbish point. By analogy one might say that because one pays taxes in the UK, when living in France you should be entitled to drive for free on French motorways, because you could drive for free in the UK. As for the "injustice" of government pensions being UK taxed, surely this is again a matter of research - you need to know what you're getting into in advance. No-one makes us go and live in France.

Patrick

[powerdesal]

Bixy,

Just as a minor point your analogy is flawed, you dont drive for free

in UK, you pay an annual ''road tax'', you dont pay that in France.

[Logan]

[quote user="bixy"]Well, I hadn't expected my post to generate so much discussion  but it seems that this is a hot issue. Just to put Logan right regarding his response to my original post. The TV presenter was making the point that, since people on government pensions paid tax in the UK, shouldn't they be entitled to paid-for care when living abroad. It seemed to me a rubbish point. By analogy one might say that because one pays taxes in the UK, when living in France you should be entitled to drive for free on French motorways, because you could drive for free in the UK. As for the "injustice" of government pensions being UK taxed, surely this is again a matter of research - you need to know what you're getting into in advance. No-one makes us go and live in France.

Patrick
[/quote]

My point about government pensions being paid net of tax if one lives abroad is this.

The pensions are paid for in the first place from contributions taken from taxed income during a working lifetime. The pension entitlement belongs to the individual not the state. It's their asset to do with what they choose. The fact it's funded in part by local rates is a red herring, that fact is part of the original contract between employer and employee. The pensioner makes a personal choice to emigrate on retirement, ending ties to the UK. The pensioner is now part of another society and should pay his income tax to that society not to the UK. The pensioner now depends on the new society for his defence, roads, infrastructure et.al. Why then should he/she be deprived of financially contributing to it? Why should the income they have earned be taxed in another state where they no longer live or depend on? It's just wrong, stupid and I repeat an injustice. It's an injustice because the pensioner pays more tax on income than the adopted state would ask. Yet the pensioner has also to pay higher levels of VAT and social charges in addition from the UK taxed income.  

[SueM]

In the discussion about pensions, many of you are forgetting that tax relief was given on pension contributions. In the seventies, this could have been as much as 80%. Following the Tories reduction in higher rate taxes, many people would still have been receiving tax relief at 60%. In any event, all contributions into pension schemes, whether in the  state or private sectors, obtain tax relief. Now that relief is given at source, perhaps present day contributors don't notice  it.

It is because of the tax relief given in building up the pension pot in the first place  the income derived from that pot is taxed.

Most of you have complained about Gordon Brown but it is this government that have tried to make things more equitable by reducing tax relief on pension contributions to the basic rate. 

SueM

 

 

 

 

[hastobe]

...and wiped out the income of pension funds by removing the right to recover tax credits on dividend income - along with introducing numerous other taxes in the course of his tenure (oops sorry they're not called taxes are they, silly me, additional NI, IHT, SDLT, widening the scope of VAT etc etc...I could go on).

But then given that most of us have precious little pension anyway we won't need to worry too much about being taxed on it.  I shall just go away and console myself with the thought of all those higher earners who got tax relief at 80% and have happily crystallised their pension now...

Kathie

[bixy]

Powerdesal - my analogy does stand. Vehicle Excise Duty is not specifically earmarked for spending on roads, anymore than the tax on petrol is. It is just part of the general taxation pot. I can use the motorways in Britain for free whether I pay the duty or not - incidentally there are about a million vehicles in Britain on which the duty has not been paid.

Logan - as SueM points out, superannuation contributions are exempt from income tax. This is why the state insists that pension income is subject to taxation. It is as though the state is saying - you're not going to get away with this twice.

Patrick

[powerdesal]

Bixy,

Now there was I thinking we were talking about legal use of the roads  !!!!!!!!![;-)]

[SueM]

He didn't wipe out quite all the income.............

UK pension funds have suffered, to a large extent,  from ineffective or unscrupulous management. Many funds have taken pension holidays, so that no contributions were made, in some instances for several years. Company directors have syphoned money from pension funds to add capital to the parent company.

You mention IHT - what's so wrong with that? It is a tax upon the living not the dying  It is the benficiaries who suffer IHT. Would you rather that income taxes were increased in order that people who inherit their parents' house or other assets can do so free of taxes? I know that older people worry about being able to leave something to their children and often deprive themselves in order to to do that. All my firends (the post war baby boom generation) have a different attitude. They have educated their children to the best of their abilities, some have helped with housing, some have paid for weddings or supported their children financially inother ways. Leaving property to their children is the last thing on their minds.  Some of us have already inherited from parents. Our inheritances have been used to buy second homes in France or caravans, cars, boats etc etc etc. Because we didn't work for that money, most of us don't begrudge any IHT paid. That's not necessarily because we are altruistic but because it's money that has arrived in our bank accounts without us having to work for it. 

One of the reasons we are moving to France is to get away from the people who moan about taxes etc etc. Since we have to continue to work past the pension age, I have been researching French taxes. Overall, they seem to be higher than those suffered in the UK, which may be why there are thousands of French people living and working in London.

 

[YCCMB]

[quote user="Logan"]

The pensioner now depends on the new society for his defence, roads, infrastructure et.al. Why then should he/she be deprived of financially contributing to it? 

[/quote]

I am not arguing with your point per se, Logan, but how many people do you honestly know who are whining and moaning that, because they've decided to move to France and have a pension taxed at source, they're unable to pay their fair whack towards defence, roads and infrastructure? I've never met anyone that altruistic, and I'm sure you haven't either!![:D][:D]

 

[hastobe]

He didn't wipe out quite all the income.............

No only a third....and the companies are the only ones who have been forced (when they have the reserves) to make good pension fund assets.  I don't see any generous donations coming from Mr Brown's department.  In any case - I guess many people won't need to worry about IHT either - he's already nicked their main asset to pay for the care they need in their old age.  And as for it arrived in my bank account without out me doing anything - well my parents worked damn hard for what they have, and I remember the sacrifices they made.

IHT is a tax on the prudent at 40% while the spendthrifts are taxed at 17.5%.

Kathie

[Logan]

[quote user="Croixblanches"][quote user="Logan"]

The pensioner now depends on the new society for his defence, roads, infrastructure et.al. Why then should he/she be deprived of financially contributing to it? 

[/quote]

I am not arguing with your point per se, Logan, but how many people do you honestly know who are whining and moaning that, because they've decided to move to France and have a pension taxed at source, they're unable to pay their fair whack towards defence, roads and infrastructure? I've never met anyone that altruistic, and I'm sure you haven't either!![:D][:D]

 

[/quote]

Of course that was an unrealistic suggestion. I simply used that point to try and illustrate, as an example, how personal choice is constantly eroded in modern life. If you have aspirations to integrate abroad, try as far as possible to become French, leave the past behind like a bad hangover. It's not possible. The UK taxman follows you to the grave. There is no escape.

It's not just the UK it's a general law across the EU. Government pensions are taxed at source. I have Danish friends who pay 68% tax on their government pensions and live in Spain!! Never set foot in Denmark, are Spanish in all but name. I ask the question how can this be right?

The original pension contributions, (superannuation) paid during a working lifetime are taken from gross income. I accept that. However income tax is still calculated on overall income before deductions so how may I ask are contributions tax free? 

[Gastines]

You didn't, or don't still, all work for the UK Inl. Rev. do you? Going by the anwers it tallies with the different responses I get from Longbenton/Newcastle/Bootle/Liverpool/Bristol/ Bournemouth/ Cumbernauld/Glasgow/ and now Nottingham?, to name but a few.

The paperwork sent to me +postage and time spent replying[ a reply normally takes 2 months ] I think they must be  making a loss on my account.

Regards. Almost Retired. St.Malo.very near.

[hastobe]

The preferential right to tax government pension income in the country of the payer isn't an EU wide policy so much as worldwide - unless the DTT provides for different treatment - e.g. the UK tax treaties with both Sweden and Zimbabwe. 

However, with regard to EU member states only, it will be interesting to see if this practice is allowed to continue - in the light of recent cases that have gone before the ECJ using the MFN to challenge the validity of the current EU DTT's.

Kathie

[Logan]

Perhaps at last this iniquity may be changed. I will not hold my breath. Why does it constantly take challenges by legal process to make governments behave fairly.

I remember once, some years ago seeing some graffiti on a wall in London during an election campaign. It read "If voting ever changed anything they would make it illegal". Never forgotten that.

[Dick Smith]

Good points, Kathy. For the others:

I would add - do you want 65-year-old police officers wheezing on the beat? 65-year-old teachers?

Actuarial figures show that teachers who continue to work until 65 live, on average, 2 years after retirement. Retirement at 60, about 10 years. Which would you choose?

One of the reasons I studied and trained to enter this profession was the good pension scheme. I could have done a lot less work and got a job in the private sector and accepted a worse pension. I think you are missing that profession/pension connection.

[Russethouse]

Just out of interest Dick, what would you have done if you hadn't been a teacher ?

Did you really consider your pension when you were thinking about your career ?

[Dick Smith]

Yes, but then it wasn't my first career (failed estate agent, I am afraid). My mother was very strong on the subject, indoor work, no heavy lifting, good pension. Oh, and the holidays.

My first choice would have been journalism, but with what I know now of that profession I'm glad it came to nothing.