NI after 35 years

aldershot

I have 35 (soon to be 36 good years) of NI contributions and my state pension forecast is a healthy £173 (including a few years of additional state pension when I presumably was not contracted out). I intend to stop working next year (at age 53 1/2) and live off of a mixture of savings and SIPP until a defined benefit pension kicks in at 62 and state pension joins in at 67. Having reached the magic 35 years, is it correct to assume that I no longer have any obligation or will derive any further benefit from paying any further NI (voluntarily)?

Linton

You wouldnt gain any benefit by voluntary contributions. You would only get a benefit if your state pension is less than the standard rate under the new rules which in your case it isnt.

aldershot

Thank you. That's what I thought but I just wanted to check.

bigfreddiel

But when they change rules in 12 years time and up the required number of years to 40, you won't have any time left to make up those five years, so you could get a reduced pension. Be careful fj

aldershot

bigfreddiel wrote: »

But when they change rules in 12 years time and up the required number of years to 40, you won't have any time left to make up those five years, so you could get a reduced pension. Be careful fj

I had thought of that but should that happen (and it might) i am assuming that one could make up those contributions for the missing 5 years as you can today and you wouldn't get shut out (which would be a a touch unfair) so one loses nothing by holding off to see if there is a future change.

Snakey

bigfreddiel wrote: »

But when they change rules in 12 years time and up the required number of years to 40, you won't have any time left to make up those five years, so you could get a reduced pension. Be careful fj

Is that right? I thought the amount at 6/4/16 was protected - and index-linked. So even if they did change the rules in the future to say that everybody has to do forty years, it wouldn't impact people who had contribution records at 6th April 2016 unless they had a shortfall and were relying on future contributions to make it up.

Although I'm a few years younger, my plan is to do the same as the OP. I should max out my SP entitlement by about his/her age, but I am at the mercy of future rule changes because my starting amount is not the full whack.

Happy to be corrected - I pay a lot less attention to reading the bumf when it's not an area that impacts me personally.

bigfreddiel

Snakey wrote: »

Is that right? I thought the amount at 6/4/16 was protected - and index-linked. So even if they did change the rules in the future to say that everybody has to do forty years, it wouldn't impact people who had contribution records at 6th April 2016 unless they had a shortfall and were relying on future contributions to make it up.

Although I'm a few years younger, my plan is to do the same as the OP. I should max out my SP entitlement by about his/her age, but I am at the mercy of future rule changes because my starting amount is not the full whack.

Happy to be corrected - I pay a lot less attention to reading the bumf when it's not an area that impacts me personally.

You have to be kidding! Has the gov never gone back on their word. Just changed things because times are hard or whtever.

No such things as protected, the gov waits till we've all forgotten what the deal was and then go and change it.

It may be unlikely but you never know what may happen.

Cheers fj

bigfreddiel

aldershot wrote: »

I had thought of that but should that happen (and it might) i am assuming that one could make up those contributions for the missing 5 years as you can today and you wouldn't get shut out (which would be a a touch unfair) so one loses nothing by holding off to see if there is a future change.

Well maybe, but you'll have spent all your dosh by then, you won't have time to work to make it up and you'll only be able to buy one years worth.

Well it may not be like that, they could reduce qualifying years back down to only 30 years, people are actually getting obese now, and their life expectancy is going down, so it could all turn around again. Who knows, bit like the BREXIT campaign, no one knows, it's all this could happen or something els could happen, no one says this will happen because they don't know, not even Dave.

So I recommend OUT, other options of course are available.

fj

colsten

Keep your eye on any changes to state pension rules. Like everything else, they can change with just about every budget, and even in between budgets.

warwicktiger

I've done the same, sold house when I was 56, living off equity because houses here in rural France are so much cheaper, full state pension to come at age 66.

Its a hard life!

colsten

warwicktiger wrote: »

I've done the same, sold house when I was 56, living off equity because houses here in rural France are so much cheaper, full state pension to come at age 66.

Its a hard life!

If you are reliant on UK State Pension, which you are probably not, you can but hope that any Brexit vote won't lead to stagnating or even decimating your UK state pension.

Outside the EU/EEA, the value of your UK state pension may well diminish to next to nothing as there's no guarantee for increases.

Mind you, there's no guarantee to increases to the UK state pension for anyone beyond 2020, and there's a distinct possibility that future governments might be unable to offer any state pensions at all,on the grounds that there simply isn't enough money in the State coffers for state pensions.