£140 a week!

thefenman

Has anyone worked out precisely what the Government is talking about regarding this mooted £140 State Retirement Pension?

They say it is to be brought in before the end of this coalition (assuming it isn't brought down by dissension from its own back benches) - ie by 2015.

What is this figure based on, current prices and so will be indexed (and don't ask me how pensions increases are to be calculated in the future, total confusion), or is it what will be paid when it is brought in? And is it based on the present retirement age of 65 or on the targeted 67 (I am well beyond that)?

What is iniquitous about this proposal is that SERPS and Graduated Pension elements will be bundled in with the £140 - I for one will therefore have a DROP in pension! How dare they? I paid for those increments over a lifetime. They are mine by right, surely. See a news article in The Independent http://goo.gl/RNZR,

I know the economy is in a dreadful state but I do wish politicians would get their brain in gear before making these muddled announcements.

Pigs might fly!

Linton

thefenman wrote: »

Has anyone worked out precisely what the Government is talking about regarding this mooted £140 State Retirement Pension?

They say it is to be brought in before the end of this coalition (assuming it isn't brought down by dissension from its own back benches) - ie by 2015.

What is this figure based on, current prices and so will be indexed (and don't ask me how pensions increases are to be calculated in the future, total confusion), or is it what will be paid when it is brought in? And is it based on the present retirement age of 65 or on the targeted 67 (I am well beyond that)?

What is iniquitous about this proposal is that SERPS and Graduated Pension elements will be bundled in with the £140 - I for one will therefore have a DROP in pension! How dare they? I paid for those increments over a lifetime. They are mine by right, surely. See a news article in The Independent http://goo.gl/RNZR,

I know the economy is in a dreadful state but I do wish politicians would get their brain in gear before making these muddled announcements.

Pigs might fly!

The article doesnt say that existing SERPS elements will be included in the £140. It says that the details of the scheme havent been announced yet.

Why not wait and see rather than get into strop.

thefenman

The article appears to have been edited but this is still in . . .

But personal finance experts last night warned that not enough details of the scheme have been announced to guarantee that no-one will lose out – particularly those pensioners who have paid to get the "additional state pension" which will be rolled into the new payment.

bilbo51

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2815306

thefenman

bilbo51 wrote: »

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2815306

Thanks, missed that.

dunstonh

Has anyone worked out precisely what the Government is talking about regarding this mooted £140 State Retirement Pension?

No. Because the Govt hasnt either. Its only at green paper stage and has a few years of consultation, adjustment and loophole finding to do first.

What is iniquitous about this proposal is that SERPS and Graduated Pension elements will be bundled in with the £140 - I for one will therefore have a DROP in pension! How dare they? I paid for those increments over a lifetime. They are mine by right, surely. See a news article in The Independent http://goo.gl/RNZR,

How dare they what? The pension is not yours by right. Its yours by legislation that is subject to change. SERPS has been reduced 4 times (for men) retrospectively in the past. The additional pension has been played around with very often. Whilst a single state pension is the objective, those with pots of graduated, serps and S2P that are greater than the new limit are expected to retain their benefits. However, nothing is confirmed.

I know the economy is in a dreadful state but I do wish politicians would get their brain in gear before making these muddled announcements.

Your anger should not be vented at the politicians as they have done no wrong here. You cant expect much else in detail at green paper stage. You should vent your anger at the media for the way they have presented it to you.

thefenman

I am so, SO sorry if I am just a tiny bit concerned about my future income!

seven-day-weekend

AFAIK it will not apply to existing Pensioners. I will keep my £104 a week. If you are a Pensioner now, then your pension will also stay the same.

dunstonh

thefenman wrote: »

I am so, SO sorry if I am just a tiny bit concerned about my future income!

Best option is not to plan to be reliant on it.

Personally, I am classed as self employed. So, the changes, based on the little info known so far, put me down as a winner. So sod the lot of you. I love these changes

Seriously though, there is no point fine tuning to the level of £10 or so a week if you are more than say a couple of years away from retirement. You may as well plan to the lower of what you have currently or the proposal and anything extra you get is bonus.

Anything with legislative risk is always going to be subject to change and with change you get winners and losers.

Personally, I believe that the proposals have less to do with removing the means test because its intrusive and embarrassing to pensioners than the fact that large chunks of those retiring in the next two decades will have lower retirement planning, partly as the current system doesnt really encourage you to finance your retirement unless you pay a decent amount in.

wotsthat

I am so, SO sorry if I am just a tiny bit concerned about my future income!

Dunstonh is completely correct - no pension payments are an absolute right. Where I do disagree is that we should blame the media - I think the Government intentionally use the media to test the water first. If there are riots on the street then they can say that this was only a proposal etc. etc (and blame the media).

There's been a principle developed by ALL governments since 1979 as far as retirement planning is concerned. That is, if your retirement saving plans rely upon a government handout to fund retirement then you either haven't saved enough or are happy (or couldn't or wouldn't save) to let the government of the day decide your lifestyle.

(you is meant generally)

What should now be abundantly clear is that saving is something that happens privately. Paying extra tax for a government promise isn't saving - it's just paying extra tax.

Venturian

The problem is that the system seems to continually punish those who plan for their future.

I gave up working at 50 (I am now 63). At the time I needed 44 years for a full pension (actually 39 by the age of 60) and so for six years, I made Class 3 contributions. Then just as I had got my 39 years , they lowered the requirement to 30 year meaning that all the contributions I had made out of my saving for six years had actually purchased nothing.

Now, if this goes through as indicated, from 2015 they will be denying me any additional benefit from the contributions my employer made to SERPS when I was a young man over and above people whose employer made no contribution to SERPS.

All in all, this hardly encourages one to pay in more into the State scheme than the absolute minimum amount if those payments are not going to make one jot of difference to your State Pension.