We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Teachers 'Additional Pension'

13»

Comments

  • kidmugsy
    kidmugsy Posts: 12,709 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    jem16 wrote: »
    It's still basic rate tax though, no matter what the rate is.
    .

    That misses the point. Contributing to a pension when you avoid 35% tax is better than avoiding 20% tax: the labels aren't important, the tax rates are.
    Free the dunston one next time too.
  • jem16
    jem16 Posts: 19,831 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 30 December 2013 at 11:04PM
    kidmugsy wrote: »
    That misses the point.

    Of course it doesn't but then you know that anyway. ;)
    Contributing to a pension when you avoid 35% tax is better than avoiding 20% tax: the labels aren't important, the tax rates are.

    The whole point of pension planning is to pay a lower rate in retirement to what you gained in tax relief when you were contributing.

    Unfortunately as you can't possibly know what tax rates are going to be around in your retirement, basing your decision on what the current tax rate is, isn't going to help. You can only base your decision on basic and higher rates of tax.

    You mostly cannot avoid the basic rate of tax, whatever it is, unless you are a very low earner. You can, however, try to avoid paying a higher rate of tax than basic rate and that is the whole point of planning.

    I'm quite sure that if MSE forums were around in 1976 you would not have been telling me to make additional payments into my pension just because the basic rate of tax was 35%. You would, just as you always say, tell me to wait until I was paying higher rate tax and meanwhile to use something else that gave me flexibility.

    Of course, as it turns out, that would have been the wrong choice as I would have got 35% tax relief then and would only be paying 20% tax on it. Pity I didn't have a crystal ball back then. ;)
  • kidmugsy
    kidmugsy Posts: 12,709 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    jem16 wrote: »
    Of course, as it turns out, that would have been the wrong choice as I would have got 35% tax relief then and would only be paying 20% tax on it. Pity I didn't have a crystal ball back then. ;)

    A little bit later than '76, but my crystal ball - as I call my fluke-ometer - had me buy a Retirement Annuity Policy that did get a tax rebate in the 30s%. Yahoo. So all Viola has to do is to ask herself whether it's likely that successive governments, which will struggle to escape the curse of Broon for a couple of decades or longer, are more likely to reduce her income tax rate, or increase it. Are you feelin' lucky, non-punk?
    Free the dunston one next time too.
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
  • 353.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.2K Life & Family
  • 260.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K 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.