We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

MSE News: Only 45% of those retiring to get full 'single-tier' state pension

Options
Former_MSE_Joanne
Former_MSE_Joanne Posts: 113 Forumite
in Pensions, annuities & retirement planning
"Less than half of those reaching state pension age between 2016 and 2020 will be entitled to a full new state pension, it has been revealed..."
Read the full story:

Only 45% of those retiring to get full 'single-tier' state pension

OfficialStamp.gif


Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
«1345

Comments

  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Other forum discussion this morning:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5151036
  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    If this becomes more widely known, maybe the government just blew the election
  • hugheskevi
    hugheskevi Posts: 4,499 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 12 January 2015 at 1:56PM
    Less than half of those reaching state pension age between 2016 and 2020 will be entitled to a full new state pension, it has been revealed.

    Revealed in January 2013, to be precise.
    The current means-tested state pension,

    It is not means-tested.
    But a freedom of information request submitted by Hargreaves Lansdown has revealed that just 45% of those retiring between 2016 and 2020 are set to receive the full state pension amount.

    A Government White Paper in January 2013 showed this.
    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) insists that no one would lose out as a result of the changes and many people would be better off.

    Not a very good description. No-one will lose out in the short run compared to what they would have received, but many will lose in comparison to the current system, potentially significantly, in the longer-run.
    "The new state pension will tackle inequalities of the past, with women, carers, lower earners and the self-employed set to benefit the most."

    A bit too simplistic, the groups mentioned are too large. It is a shame there is a continuing insistence on presenting this as higher pension, rather than the actuality which is as a pension cut (albeit with winners and losers) with the amount of pension paid out in total significantly reduced in the long-run.

    Given this, I find it quite amusing that some are irritated that soon-to-be-pensioners are not going to benefit from a windfall gain (ie getting a lot more pension than they ever expected) whilst nothing is said about young workers who are the big losers from the reform.
  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    It's impossible to edit at the moment.

    This is for my post above

    If this becomes more widely known, maybe the government just blew the election

    Pensions minister Steve Webb last June:

    “I have no interest in people not getting what they expect. When I’ve spoken about
    new state pension before, I’ve focused on the longer-term, as eventually everyone
    will get the full single-tier if they have 35 years of national insurance contributions.
    For example, my son starts work in a few years time and he will get the flat-rate,
    that’s it.

    “In the meantime, some people will get more and others less than the full single-
    tier amount.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/10896342/One-million-pre-retirees-to-receive-less-than-155-flat-rate-state-pension.html
  • jamesd
    jamesd Posts: 26,103 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    redux wrote: »
    If this becomes more widely known, maybe the government just blew the election
    A substantial number also don't get the current full basic state pension, for the same sorts of reasons. It's not a big deal, it's what was expected when it was introduced.
  • atush
    atush Posts: 18,731 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    AND no mention here or elsewhere that many who WONT get the full new SP were contracted out and either have separate DC pots in reflection of this, or in DB schemes getting a stonking retirement (that they deserve of course- no public sector bashing here).
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 119,687 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    This is stating the obvious and was known about years ago.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 12 January 2015 at 2:58PM
    atush wrote: »
    AND no mention here or elsewhere that many who WONT get the full new SP were contracted out and either have separate DC pots in reflection of this, or in DB schemes getting a stonking retirement (that they deserve of course- no public sector bashing here).

    Fine for employed people but ...

    I'm considering an example of someone a few years older than me.

    What happens for someone aged 60 in April 16, self-employed since age 16 so 44 years contributions? Do they transfer to the new scheme with a starting value of currently £113.10, and add £4.24 a week per year of contributions for the next 6 or 7 years, or do they already have the full new £148 pension built in?
  • atush
    atush Posts: 18,731 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Self employment is a choice in the main. And private pension savings should be part of it?

    Anyway, age 62 is too young to retire so Nics will continue, earning them closer to the flat rate for each year worked after 2016. they can also buy extra SP, although the details aren't completely set yet?
  • greenglide
    greenglide Posts: 3,301 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker Hung up my suit!
    redux wrote: »
    Fine for employed people but ...

    I'm considering an example of someone a few years older than me.

    What happens for someone now aged 60, self-employed since age 16 so 44 years contributions? Do they transfer to the new scheme with a starting value of currently £113.10, and add £4.24 a week per year of contributions for the next 6 or 7 years, or do they already have the full new £148 pension built in?
    Someone self employed who has never contracted out who has 35 years contributions will get the full rate of nSP.

    This is true of anyone who has never contracted out and has 35 years - they will get at least the full nSP rate.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.3K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture