Protecting pensions from politicians - or preparing for a Labour coalition

atush

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

If Labour win, I will ask my financial advisor to organise my assets into an account on the Isle of Man.

I'm already drawing Pensions - State and LGPS.

Wont help. The IOM govt give all the info on your accounts to HMRC. Would work if you moved there

seven-day-weekend

atush wrote: »

Wont help. The IOM govt give all the info on your accounts to HMRC. Would work if you moved there

Ah. Thought there might be a flaw somewhere. Just thought it would get round having it taken off me by J Corbyn

I know someone who has accounts in the IoM, she said it is to reduce inheritance tax (that would not be why I did it). Her husband did this many years ago on the advice of his accountant. Is this not the case?

molerat

michaels wrote: »

So what is the answer - stuff isas now? Bitcoin and physical gold?!

Handbags apparently !
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/28/money-handbags-survey-reveals-high-end-bags-great-investment/

hyubh

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I know where it comes from. I am well aware that all my income, and my husband's (State Pension and Teachers' Pension) comes from State Coffers - and indirectly from the British taxpayer.

Excellent, and good to hear the household is reeling it in even more than you originally made clear. (Not sure how the state and TPS pensions are only 'indirectly' from taxation though...?)

(which we both are, on income)

The larger part of your household's income comes from the taxpayer in the first place...?

seven-day-weekend

hyubh wrote: »

Excellent, and good to hear the household is reeling it in even more than you originally made clear. (Not sure how the state and TPS pensions are only 'indirectly' from taxation though...?)



The larger part of your household's income comes from the taxpayer in the first place...?

Yes it does, not a lot I can do about that is there. Just pointing out that we do contribute as well. We also both paid into our occupational pensions, they were contributory, not just given to us like some public pensions are.

I do know we are very privileged to have them, but what do you suggest we do, give them up?

ETA : Just to say my husband's Teachers' Pension is actuarily reduced because he took it early due to his health, and I only paid into my Local Government penssion for ten years so it is not a huge amount).

Keep_pedalling

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Ah. Thought there might be a flaw somewhere. Just thought it would get round having it taken off me by J Corbyn

I know someone who has accounts in the IoM, she said it is to reduce inheritance tax (that would not be why I did it). Her husband did this many years ago on the advice of his accountant. Is this not the case?

Best to stop reading the daily fail, and assets held on the IoM, or anywhere else, are still subject to IHT

stoozie1

I thought it was only those on an £80k salary, with children in private school who would be considerably worse off under the labour proposals?

dunstonh

alewin wrote: »

At the moment you can only keep £23,250 of your savings to pass on if you are in a Care Home.
If the Conservatives win again it will rise to £100K, so hopefully I will be laughing.

This highlights how poor the Conservatives have been at presenting their plans. You have many people who think that being able to keep £100k is worse than the current position but they do not know that the current position, for savings, is worse.

Under the current system, older people who have assets worth more than £23,250, including the value of their property, must part-fund the cost of the care they receive.

Even the independent said:
The average UK house is worth £215,847 - so while the Conservative care package is actually a better deal for poorer pensioners, the vast majority of homeowners who require care are going to be worse off.

However, the independent also blew it by saying:
The Conservative manifesto pledged to raise the means-tested floor at which older people will start paying for their care to £100,000 - but, crucially, under their proposal, people would be forced to sell their homes to pay for domiciliary as well as residential care.

No-one will be forced to sell their homes. It can be deducted from the estate.

So, a combination of misreporting by the media and bad presentation and incomplete information by the Conservatives along with people not actually comparing the current system with proposals has led to a lot of opinions based on incorrect information.

Then you have to add on that we seem to have a large proportion of the UK that has a sense of entitlement but don't want to pay for it. They want more money for the NHS. They know there is a crisis of funding in many areas. However, ask them to pay a little more for it, and there is uproar. This is probably why Corbyn has become more popular as his proposals tick the spending boxes but gloss over the realistic tax sources. I doubt many plumbers/builders (or anyone with a limited company) earning around £25k a year realise that the Labour proposals will see them immediately worse off by around £1400 a year in increased taxation. If you earn to the £45k basic rate tax band as a company director, you would be around £3,300 worse off a year. Remember just a few months back when the Conservatives had to backtrack on the NI increase on self employed that would have averaged 60p a week because of the outrage. Where is that outrage when Labour are proposing thousands?

oh btw, investing with the Isle of Man as your investments domicile will actually result in more tax in the long run for most people. Those days have gone.

michaels

So apart form the IOM which seems like a no-no there doesn't seem to be much people are suggesting.

I am already using up my 40k this year through sal sac so can't stuff any more into my pension immediately without losing the sal sac benefits (perhaps this would be worth doing?) but I suspect for those who aren't prior to any immediate budget at the start of July would be the sensible time to move any free savings into a pension.

Loosing the ability to sal sac and higher rate pension relief would be a double whammy as it would also mean I might not be able to reduce my income enough to hold on to child benefit.

I suspect changes to the TFLS would take longer to come through being delayed until the deficit starts spiralling later in the parliament once high earners and companies rearrange their affairs to avoid income and corporation tax and the cost of the increases to benefits and public sector wages (don't forget it will be a much larger public sector) really kick in. Normal strategy is to 'phase the abolition' - 10% for withdrawals immediately following the announcement ramping up to fully taxable the following year producing a massive one off tax boost as everyone rushes to take advantage of the 10% rate and flattering the public finances for a year helping to pay for election give-aways.

Linton

Of course the same could happen under a Conservative government. They have been cutting back on pension limits for some time and Salary Sacrifice is an obvious loophole I am sure HMRC would like to see plugged.