Is a Pension Worth Having?

lisyloo

BookerTee wrote: »

Most people have managed pensions, most if not all are charging 2-2.5% including hidden charges.

Evidence for this statement please.

property is typically a problem

There are many property funds available - Aberdeen, legal & general, standard life etc.

BookerTee

lisyloo wrote: »

I certainly do not pay 2.5% extra in my SIPP compared to my ISA.
Sounds like you’re getting a raw deal with no salary sacrifice.

I dont think you are getting the concept of HIDDEN charges!!

Nobody knowns they are paying 2.5%, its HIDDEN.

Just because you have a modern self managed SIPP with more transparent costs has NO relevance to the vast majority we are talking about or me!

lisyloo

BookerTee wrote: »

I dont think you are getting the concept of HIDDEN charges!!

Nobody knowns they are paying 2.5%, its HIDDEN.

Just because you have a modern self managed SIPP with more transparent costs has NO relevance to the vast majority we are talking about or me!

Please provide evidence of your claim about the vast majority.
Where does this come from.
No one believes you just because you say so.

justme111

BookerTee wrote: »

I also never said pensions are not worth having.


l!

then there is not much to argue about. I suppose some specific providers/ funds indeed charge those 2.5% you mentioned but those pensions would have been arranged by employers who add their contributions matching employees and it would result in an immediate 100% increase making those 2.5% insignificant.

coyrls

BookerTee wrote: »

I also never said pensions are not worth having.

So what is your answer to the question you posed: "Is a pension worth having?"

PeacefulWaters

Most people have managed pensions, most if not all are charging 2-2.5% including hidden charges

Cut the crap and prove this point please.

Triumph13

BookerTee wrote: »

Its difficult to give an accurate answer without seeing the actual figures quoted. I suspect that only the 'quoted' charges come out first.

You suspect wrongly. The returns quoted are on the movement in the price of the units over the period (plus any distributions for an inc fund). By definition there is nowhere to 'hide' charges.
When a large number of people, who are vastly more knowledgeable about something than you are, all disagree with you it is probably time to entertain the concept that you might be wrong, not assume they've all been brainwashed.
If you changed the title of the thread to 'Are high management charges worth paying?' then most people on here would say no. And that's why they usually don't pay them, unless they think it's worthwhile to pay for the manager's expert knowledge in certain specific markets / sectors.
You seem to be completely fixated by the idea that there are hidden charges that we don't know about. Most funds do not have high hidden transaction costs for the simple reason that most funds are taking long term positions not trading constantly. For most investors, one of the big attractions of using funds is that you end up paying LESS transaction costs than if you were trying to maintain a diversified portfolio by buying individual shares yourself.
It's clear that you are absolutely convinced that you are the only one who's taken the red pill and no-one is going to persuade you otherwise. Hopefully anyone new happening on this thread will be able to draw more sensible conclusions so I too am signing off. As others have said, thank you for paying extra tax. Hopefully you are employed by a listed company and so throwing your employer's contributions is also adding to the dividends flowing into our pensions so thank you for that too.

ewaste

The OP is either financially illiterate (incompetent) or just plain trolling so why keep feeding?

cjking

Using salary sacrifice, and getting what would have been employers NI added to my pension contribution, the total tax relief was something like 38% (of what the employer paid out) on what would have been basic rate salary, and 47% on what would otherwise have been higher-rate salary. I have calculated how much tax I will pay on my pension, taking into account 25% lump sum and personal allowance not consumed by state pension, and it amounts to about 12% of my pot being earmarked for HMRC. (Retirement at 55 means 12 years of full personal allowance tax-free.)

I can't be bothered to engage with the nonsense about charges. I have exactly the same investments in my pension as I have in my ISA. The only extra charge is flat charge for pension admin, which in my case amounts to 0.02% a year. (Which will go up to 0.03% when I withdraw.)

PuzzledDave

In answer to the threads question, will echo depends on circumstances but probably yes in most cases. Here I think is an awesome case:

Person with good career goes contractor aged 50 in their industry, starts up limited company. Employs spouse as secretary.

Starts up own company pension scheme, puts £20k of companies earnings into their own and another £20k into their spouses pensions. 5 years later combined fund is at £200k + fund growth. Both draw £12k from fund (or whatever is their tax free allowance) per year until state pension age.

£200k + fund growth all totally tax free, not even corp tax or income tax to pay going in or out, just a very small bit of NI.