Flat Rate Pension one year earlier - April 2016

bigfreddiel

Mr Osborne has announced that the Government will bring forward the single-tier pension of around £144 to 2016 in a bid to end the injustice of working mothers being penalised for taking a break to raise children.

great news - especially for me

cheers

fj

Hungerdunger

And for me - instead of missing the new scheme by 6 months, I'll qualify with six months to spare. But I still think it's very unfair to have a system where a person born on 5th April gets the old basic pension, while someone born on 6th April gets the new £144 pension. I know it would result in more bureaucracy, but couldn't there be some sort of sliding scale? For example, if a person was within six months of the new scheme could they not get 50% of the difference between the old and new pensions?

jamesd

The change to one year earlier is yet another unfair treatment of those working and saving for retirement who are fairly close to retirement age, because they will lose yet another year of additional state pension accrual and have that taken from them to pay for those who haven't done so much to prepare for retirement.

Working mothers aren't penalised for taking a break to raise children. They are as free as anyone else to make contributions to pensions and even get automatic basic state pension credits while paying nothing into the system.

wakeupalarm

jamesd wrote: »

Working mothers aren't penalised for taking a break to raise children. They are as free as anyone else to make contributions to pensions and even get automatic basic state pension credits while paying nothing into the system.

The new flat rate pension is promoted as helping mothers who took time off to raise children, but mothers have received NI credits since 1978 when HRP came in. Assuming first child at the young age of 15 would mean no mother under the age of 50 has been penalised and would have the 30 years needed to receive the basic state pension, and a higher amount if they also worked after raising the children.

I guess the average age of having a first child is higher than 20? So that moves those that have missed out up to those over 55. There is still another 3 years to go, so that age will move up to 58. So basically only those Mothers between the age of 58-65 and those who haven't worked after raising their children are affected.

retiredandskint

There's always winners and losers. I lost out on having my children before 1978 and also needed 39 years of paid NI contributions but retired at 60 with only 35 years so don't get the full pension.. Had I been born 6 months later I'd have only needed 30 years worth and had to wait just a couple of months more.

kidmugsy

jamesd wrote: »

... yet another unfair treatment of those working and saving for retirement ... taken from them to pay for those who haven't done so much to prepare for retirement.

That is the whole point of the British welfare state - to be unfair. It's possible to conceive of a welfare state that isn't - that would expropriate my money only to help out those who through no fault of their own are in need of it. But that ain't the welfare state that we have, nor will it ever be.

jamesd

Yes, it's a welfare state but it's still good for those who want this to start earlier to know that in asking for that they are asking for state pension money to be taken from other people to pay for them to get this earlier. This isn't free money, it's coming from other state pensioners.

Dunroamin

jamesd wrote: »

Yes, it's a welfare state but it's still good for those who want this to start earlier to know that in asking for that they are asking for state pension money to be taken from other people to pay for them to get this earlier. This isn't free money, it's coming from other state pensioners.

State pension money comes from tax payers, who may or may not be pensioners.

jamesd

Advancing the start date of the new proposal by one year reduces the accrual time for those working by that same one year. That reduces the pension they get for the rest of their lives.

It's taking money from those losing that year of S2P accrual to give it to the ones who benefit from the earlier start.

There may be additional tax costs as well but the basic part is taking money from one group of state pensioners to give it to another group.

jem16

bigfreddiel wrote: »

great news - especially for me

Just wondering why you think it's great news for you - presumably as it brings you in under the new rules?

How do you think the new rules will benefit you?

bigfreddiel

jem16 wrote: »

Just wondering why you think it's great news for you - presumably as it brings you in under the new rules?

How do you think the new rules will benefit you?

its just a combination of ironic, facetious, condescending humour or didn't you get it?

of course it's all a great big con trick - the gov doesn't give you something for nothing - at the end of the day we're all losers

cheers

fj