Transfer out of Armed Forces Pension

Good_bad_and_ugly

atush wrote: »

What a load of rubbish you do spout.

The OP is not in a DB scheme that we know of, so can't transfer their pension- period. So all your shouting and arguing mean nothing.

In any case, they want to transfer to a DC scheme not another DB one, and they cannot.

End of argument.

H's suggestion of quitting their job and getting one somewhere in the funded pension public sector was the only one that would work. And could be financial/career suicide to quit someones current employment just to transfer a pension.

Correct, and the issue that I mentioned was more about the comments telling him he was "foolish". Objectively, he can't.

Could it be financial suicide if he could? Of course it could. Would it be? Who knows? Would it have been suitable to say it was? No, of course not. I can think of many instances where transferring out was good advice. It would be great advice in fact. To rely on, as many have done, the price of something over the value of it is poor practice. As I suggested, dogmatic and prescriptive. I'll now add to that, 'crass'.

Could he lawfully get better and early access to that money? Yes. Read the Transfer Club guidance, regs and list..

jem16

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

'If'. Well done, you're at last getting the hang of it. But what if surviving spouse had LTA issues and wanted to pass that bequeathed pot onto the children within two years? You get my point? Come on, you don't know enough facts to start offering advice. You shouldn't do it.

Oh dear! First of all there is no bequeathed pot in the case of a DB dependent's pension and secondly it doesn't count towards the recipient's LTA. Best to check out your facts before accusing others.

Is it possible to transfer out of DB? Yes, I gave the circumstance. Would it be beneficial in some circumstances? Yes, of course it would!!! How many scenarios do you need?

Just one that actually works will do. Despite all your waffling you haven't done that.

I'm quite familiar with the process of transferring into CARE from DB via Transfer Club.

No you're not.

However the whole point is not the transfer in but how the OP would then get to transfer out.

Good_bad_and_ugly

jem16 wrote: »

Oh dear! First of all there is no bequeathed pot in the case of a DB dependent's pension and secondly it doesn't count towards the recipient's LTA. Best to check out your facts before accusing others.



Just one that actually works will do. Despite all your waffling you haven't done that.



No you're not.

However the whole point is not the transfer in but how the OP would then get to transfer out.

If you read back, I was referring to a bequeathed transferred out DC pot. If the 'spouse of', was at LTA apogee, why wouldn't she decline the will for many tax reasons? You talk about LTA, what if she encashed - might there be an IHT issue? Think big picture. I could also have suggested that the spouse might be in ill health of course.

If recipient was the subject of a survivors pension and she died 'x' months later when kids were indeprendent, the benefit is lost. Come on, shouldI be having to tell you this? Start trying to investigate the client's specific needs and offer someone a service they deserve, and stop copying and pasting dogmatic rot.

Do you really want me to point out an example? Ok, first.. do some homework. At what rate did a deferred public sector pension increase on April 1 this year, in relation to the figure of last September? Finally, in the event if needing early access to a deferred public sector db scheme, is early access available, and if do (yes, trick question), what is the actuarial reduction..?

Get back to me with those answers and I'll talk you through a theoretical process which involves (frankly) a line if thought slightly more intricate to that which you seem to have. Think back, carefully, and remember - I asked Pete where he lived and what his occupation was.

Daniel54

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

If you read back, I was referring to a bequeathed transferred out DC pot. If the 'spouse of', was at LTA apogee, why wouldn't she decline the will for many tax reasons?
.

For the avoidance of doubt,in respect of either a DB or DC pension :

1)Inheritance of a pension by a spouse is not a Benefit Crystallisation Event ( BCE ) and therfore has no implications for the inheriting spouse's LTA

2)Financial hardship,severe or not, is not a permissible reason to access a pension before the minimum legal age ( curently 55).Terminal illness can be

Good_bad_and_ugly

Daniel54 wrote: »

For the avoidance of doubt,in respect of either a DB or DC pension :

1)Inheritance of a pension by a spouse is not a Benefit Crystallisation Event ( BCE ) and therfore has no implications for the inheriting spouse's LTA

2)Financial hardship,severe or not, is not a permissible reason to access a pension before the minimum legal age ( curently 55).Terminal illness can be

I'm not used to dealing with messageboard experts, apologies.

Once again, read back. I suggested "If the 'spouse of', was at LTA apogee, why wouldn't she decline the will for many tax reasons?" The LTA apogee would be indicative of what you missed off, the part about IHT and the part you didn't, the tax.

The financial distress part related to justifying and accessing a DC fund partly or in full, post aged 50/55. Who mentioned accessing before then? Passing it onto kids for their use is a lawful use of legislation to minimise tax (if done within 2 years).

Many advisers probably would not endorse an action unless there was sufficient justification. Financial distress is.

mgdavid

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

........Get back to me with those answers and I'll talk you through a theoretical process .......

nobody wants any 'theoretical process' - the OP wants relevant achievable practical suggestions.
Just sticking to relevant to the OP would be a good start for you.
The rest is a complete waste of your time writing and anyone else's reading it ( I stopped a while back).

Another for the ignore list.
Brilliant.

Daniel54

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

I'm not used to dealing with messageboard experts, apologies.

Once again, read back. I suggested "If the 'spouse of', was at LTA apogee, why wouldn't she decline the will for many tax reasons?" The LTA apogee would be indicative of what you missed off, the part about IHT and the part you didn't, the tax.

.

No expert me ,just an amateur correcting your misunderstanding in case anyone else,including the OP,reads this

From http://www.pruadviser.co.uk/content/knowledge/technical-centre/lifetime_allowance/#4

"Where the member has died, any crystallisation events occurring under BCE7 (relevant lump sum death benefit) are treated as occurring immediately before the death of the member.........

Any death payment to a beneficiary doesn't count towards the beneficiary's LTA.
Lump Sums from crystallised funds e.g. value protection or drawdown lump sum death benefits are not BCEs as they come from funds that have already been tested against the LTA."

A deed of variation would therefore have no effect on the deceased spouse's LTA calculation.

IHT is a separate issue independent of whether the inherited pension is DB or DC.

jem16

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

If you read back, I was referring to a bequeathed transferred out DC pot. If the 'spouse of', was at LTA apogee, why wouldn't she decline the will for many tax reasons? You talk about LTA, what if she encashed - might there be an IHT issue? Think big picture. I could also have suggested that the spouse might be in ill health of course.

First of all, as has been pointed out to you, LTA doesn't enter into it as far as the recipient is concerned. So let's forget about that - I have no idea why you brought that up other than lack of knowledge.

As to IHT issues there are ways around that too and one of them is to set up a spousal bypass trust.

If recipient was the subject of a survivors pension and she died 'x' months later when kids were indeprendent, the benefit is lost. Come on, shouldI be having to tell you this?

Well if you could tell us the date of death of the hypothetical spouse I'm sure we could decide which option to choose?

Start trying to investigate the client's specific needs and offer someone a service they deserve,

Why would I be offering a service to a client?

and stop copying and pasting dogmatic rot.

That seems to be what you're doing with your Google searches.

Do you really want me to point out an example?

Yes I do but you seem to be incapable of this.

Ok, first.. do some homework. At what rate did a deferred public sector pension increase on April 1 this year, in relation to the figure of last September?

1.2% as based on September's figure for CPI which is what is used as the Pensions Increase figure for all Public Sector schemes.

Finally, in the event if needing early access to a deferred public sector db scheme, is early access available, and if do (yes, trick question), what is the actuarial reduction..?

Access is available according to the scheme's rules which for many, but not all, is age 55. Actuarial reduction is approximately 5%pa.

Get back to me with those answers and I'll talk you through a theoretical process which involves (frankly) a line if thought slightly more intricate to that which you seem to have.

Instead of putting down everybody's answers when your own knowledge appears to be sadly lacking, something that would actually benefit the OP would be of more use than a theoretical process. However despite repeated requests to do this, you either can't or won't so I don't see any point in wasting any more time on you or your rants.

Think back, carefully, and remember - I asked Pete where he lived and what his occupation was.

I think we can be sure that his current job does not have a DB pension or his request to transfer would not have been denied so whatever his occupation is will still require a change of job to facilitate this transfer.

hyubh

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

I chose it because it's in the Transfer Club..

Not especially significant - the LGA's agitating to pull the LGPS out, or partly out, yet if that came to pass it would have zero impact to the DB status of the armed forces scheme (or indeed the LGPS itself).

I didn't say the DB bit was being abolished.

Maybe not, but I think it a reasonable interpretation of your claim that the 'USS is going from DB to DC'. Also, it's all DB at present (ignoring money purchase AVCs) - the cap on DB accrual I mentioned is currently just a proposal.

Which is why, I suppose, you have 1000 posts in a few years.. and I don't?

According to the site you registered less than a year ago, however even so, presumably a key reason behind your failure to post matches why I rarely post in DC threads, or indeed other MSE forums beyond this one - lack of expertise.

jem16

Good_bad_and_ugly wrote: »

I have no interest in explaining or justifying anymore to you

Roughly translated to - I haven't a clue what I'm on about.

Pete - ignore these chumps, go and see a real world financial adviser, not these blowhard chumps.

It shouldn't cost you a thing for a first meeting.. go to unbiased.co.uk for a local practitioner.

If the Op wishes to spend a lot of money on an IFA to hear that he can't do what he wants without changing jobs and finding himself an employer with a DB pension, then great.