Private pension increase from 55 in 2028?

Malthusian

But speculation with very strong grounds as the Government has not said that it has changed its mind and no political party has campaigned on a platform to keep it at 55.

There is little anyone can do at the moment except ensure they have some money in stocks & shares ISAs / unwrapped investments if they plan to retire in their mid-50s, which will still be a good idea even if the minimum access age stays at 55. (Assuming they are not forfeiting the benefits of pension tax relief and employer contributions to have money in their own hands.) If markets are benevolent in their early 50s or circumstances change they might find they want to retire at 53.

Ceme3000

I would like to think that any legislation changes would give 10 years notice, but I'm not holding my breath.

MoneyGeoff

The Government may end up arguing that a footnote in a document in 2014 constitutes 10 years notice so there will be court cases over it probably.

zagfles

MoneyGeoff wrote: »

The Government may end up arguing that a footnote in a document in 2014 constitutes 10 years notice so there will be court cases over it probably.

Why would there be court cases? There's no law saying the govt have to give 10 years notice.

ffacoffipawb

zagfles wrote: »

Why would there be court cases? There's no law saying the govt have to give 10 years notice.

Indeed. The sharp jump from 50 to 55 on 6 April 2010 was announced in the Finance Act 2004 which received Royal Assent in July 2004 - so less than 6 years notice of a sharp overnight hike in the pension access age with no phasing in at all.

Anonymous101

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

Indeed. The sharp jump from 50 to 55 on 6 April 2010 was announced in the Finance Act 2004 which received Royal Assent in July 2004 - so less than 6 years notice of a sharp overnight hike in the pension access age with no phasing in at all.

Would someone be able to refresh my memory as to how the 2010 increase worked?


Was it simply a hard date so for example if you were 50 on 6 April and hadn't began to receive your pension then you woke up the next day and couldn't claim a pension until you were 55?


6 years notice strikes me as about the minimum required to make a switch of tactics between saving into a pension or saving into an ISA to make up a 5 year bridge. Of course if your savings rate is not so high then one would need longer to make up the gap.

Anonymous101

username12345678 wrote: »

I turn 55 in August 2027 so I await confirmation of any tapering plans with interest (horror).

You'd be wise, as anyone would be, to spread your bets in this case and begin saving heavily into an ISA if you're not already.


The proposed increase is only 2 years at this stage so if you're set on retiring when you're 55 then putting together 2 years expenses in the next 7 years shouldn't be too much of a problem.

fred246

Won't the government gain by doing nothing? The legislation will only ever effect those desperately squirrelling every penny to retire early. If the indecision results in them putting money into ISAs instead of pensions the government will gain (I think).

veryintrigued

Its.interesting, to me at least, that this thread I started in 2018 is now getting a lot of interest in this topic now that we're in the same 20s decade.

Snakey

What is interesting is the way that article is phrased - as if the current rules are already based on SP age minus ten years and it is only because of this that people think it must be 55. I'm pretty sure the current law says "age 55" with no reference to any such formula or expectation. It's not as if the previous age of 50 bore any relation to the male SP age after all.

A good way to "manage expectations" I suppose - say it enough times and by the time the new law is finalised, the results of an internet search will make it look as if it's always been the case (1984-style)! [/conspiracy theory]