New pension allowances , autumn statement

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

my prediction is they'll do absolutely nothing, and these rumours were started by pension companies in an attempt to drum up some extra business.

(i have no inside knowledge.)

Hargreaves Landsdown do it every year. A scare mongering article followed by 'advice' to put a stash of money into the pension to beat the changes, 'just in case'.

The facts are that the government want more people, not less to pay into pensions. I can easily imagine state pensions becoming means-tested and so encouraging higher rate taxpayers to arrange their own pensions would save a lot of money, far more than they would gain by taxing them now.

zagfles

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

my prediction is they'll do absolutely nothing, and these rumours were started by pension companies in an attempt to drum up some extra business.

(i have no inside knowledge.)

Yes. But this time it's all over the papers. Osbourne was quite clear that "the rich will pay more". Raising taxes doesn't seem likely. Mansion tax is ruled out. Stamp duty rises are possible but that won't be enough.

2 days till we'll know!

zagfles

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

Hargreaves Landsdown do it every year. A scare mongering article followed by 'advice' to put a stash of money into the pension to beat the changes, 'just in case'.

The facts are that the government want more people, not less to pay into pensions. I can easily imagine state pensions becoming means-tested and so encouraging higher rate taxpayers to arrange their own pensions would save a lot of money, far more than they would gain by taxing them now.

Means testing the state pension would discourage people from saving in a pension, not encourage it! It's not going to happen, nobody credible in any political party would dare suggest it and no credible think tank is proposing it. They are going the opposite way - current plan is to incorporate the means tested pension credit into the basic state pension.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

zagfles wrote: »

Means testing the state pension would discourage people from saving in a pension, not encourage it! It's not going to happen, nobody credible in any political party would dare suggest it and no credible think tank is proposing it. They are going the opposite way - current plan is to incorporate the means tested pension credit into the basic state pension.

Yeah, pensions credit wasn't means tested either, neither was child benefit - that was a sacred cow and totally ringfenced...

Deary me.

zagfles

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

Yeah, pensions credit wasn't means tested either, neither was child benefit - that was a sacred cow and totally ringfenced...

Deary me.

What are you on about? Pension credit has always been means tested since its introduction. The basic state pension is a benefit people earn, child benefit isn't. Means testing child benefit doesn't discourage people from saving, it fact it encourages it as pension contributions lowers adjusted net income which is used for the CHB tax calculation.

If you really believe there is any prospect of the state pension being means tested then find anybody credible is any major political party or think tank that is suggesting it.

The are going the OPPOSITE way. They are reducing means testing in the state pension. Not increasing it.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

zagfles wrote: »

What are you on about? Pension credit has always been means tested since its introduction. The basic state pension is a benefit people earn, child benefit isn't. Means testing child benefit doesn't discourage people from saving, it fact it encourages it as pension contributions lowers adjusted net income which is used for the CHB tax calculation.

If you really believe there is any prospect of the state pension being means tested then find anybody credible is any major political party or think tank that is suggesting it.

The are going the OPPOSITE way. They are reducing means testing in the state pension. Not increasing it.

Good luck with that.

grey_gym_sock

zagfles wrote: »

Osbourne was quite clear that "the rich will pay more".

and you believe him?

zagfles

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

and you believe him?

He's not going to announce on telly 3 days before the autumn statement that the rich will pay more unless there is some significant budget measure planned that targets the "rich".

It could be something else, but they seem to have ruled out housing, tax rises would be a bit of a u-turn. Perhaps NI, eg increasing the higher (above UEL) rate (possible) or removing the UEL (unlikely).

Pensions are an obvious target and they've done it once. Encouraging pension savings is one thing but they really don't need to encourage people to save more than £30k pa.

This year I'm with HL! Although I can't see any urgency to contribute now - I doubt any change would take effect till the end of the tax year earliest.

gadgetmind

Do they actually have a definition of "the rich"?

grey_gym_sock

there may well be something in the budget that can be spun as making the rich pay more (however you define "the rich" - it can mean lots of things, indeed). there are usually plenty that could be spun that way, because there are many different measures in every budget. for most ppl, you win on some, and lose on others.

the supposedly anti-rich measure could be almost anything. they have nowhere near ruled out everything except pensions contributions.