can future gov destroy your plan

atush

dunstonh wrote: »

Annuities have not been compulsory for many years. The recent changes improve flexibility but did not remove annuity compulsion. That was removed by the Labour Govt. So, both the two main parties have acted to reduce the likelihood of buying an annuity.

Whilst the media has focused on drawdown, it seems to have ignored the changes to annuities that will be allowed from next year. So, dont expect annuities to go away. They are still considered the most suitable option for most people. They will just have new features and options that they couldnt have under the old rules.

Yet last night on the news the BBC reporter said just that- the govt 'recently' passed new rules that mean an annuity need not be taken out.

P'ed me off no end. Dont reporters have to do ANY research anymore?

greenglide

Dont reporters have to do ANY research anymore?

Well if the Government doesnt (or chooses to deliberately ignore it) the why should the press bother?

gadgetmind

stu12345 wrote: »

what if say a few weeks before i retire a future chancellor or gov says sorry folks, its back to annuities for you

They have brought in new rules (usually without any consultation or notice) many times before and will do it many times in the future. There is no guarantee of tax relief, no guarantee of tax free lump sum, no guarantee that you'll be able to drawdown at a rate that suits your needs, and no guarantee that you'll be able to contribute as much as you like when you like.

Unless such guarantees are cast in stone, perhaps via a "pension constitution", then it will always be difficult to plan for the future.

greenglide

perhaps via a "pension constitution"

But we don't do written constitutions do we!

And look how many times the US constitution has changed (mostly for the better!).

A constitution is no guarantee that things will not change.

gadgetmind

No, it's not a guarantee, but it's a very clear cross-party statement of intent, which is far better than the knee-jerk politically-motivated meddling coupled with "threats and rumours" system we have now.