We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Which option is best?

Hi, i'm about to sign for my redundency package and I need to make a choice between two options. What are the pro's and con's to each option that I need to know?
Option 1: a pension of £19,500 pa with a tfls of £130,000 This is front loaded and will drop at age 67 (55yrs,8 months now) by the same amount as state pension to £10.500
Option 2: a pension of £16,500 pa with a tfls of £110.00 The state pension will then be extra when i reach 67 
My pension forcast is £160 per week and I need to pay ni contributions for another 4 yrs to obtain the max £175 pw
With both options my wife would get £12,000 pa so the risk is if I fall off the perch the £20,000 would be lost plus the £3,000 I would have given up every year.
We are mortgage free with very little debt, Hope that someone can point me in the right direction but I understand if it's just a personal choice that I have to make myself.
I am in good health at the moment 
Thanks all.

«1

Comments

  • Linton
    Linton Posts: 18,289 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Hung up my suit!
    Is the £110 correct or a typo? It seems a silly amount.
    Have you any need for a lump sum of £130K?  What would you do with it?
    How much total income do you need to meet your normal living expenses at your desired standard of living?
  • aphill24
    aphill24 Posts: 143 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    Linton said:
    Is the £110 correct or a typo? It seems a silly amount.
    Have you any need for a lump sum of £130K?  What would you do with it?
    How much total income do you need to meet your normal living expenses at your desired standard of living?
    It's typo sorry should be £110,000
    The lump sum question is very difficult to answer. We have only 5k in savings and will never have another chance to have such a sum of money that would enable us to buy things in future without paying interest such as cars and it is also planned to be used for holidays without the need to save. 
  • Brynsam
    Brynsam Posts: 3,643 Forumite
    Fifth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    aphill24 said:
    Linton said:
    Is the £110 correct or a typo? It seems a silly amount.
    Have you any need for a lump sum of £130K?  What would you do with it?
    How much total income do you need to meet your normal living expenses at your desired standard of living?
    It's typo sorry should be £110,000
    The lump sum question is very difficult to answer. We have only 5k in savings and will never have another chance to have such a sum of money that would enable us to buy things in future without paying interest such as cars and it is also planned to be used for holidays without the need to save. 
    Are you getting a redundancy payment as such (i.e. cash)? 

    Have you asked if there is a third option, which gives you a bigger pension/smaller lump sum than either of the options shown? There is usually some flexibility, so you could still have a decent tax free lump pension lump sum but also a bigger pension (and remember that any spouse's pension is normally calculated as if you had taken NO tax free cash - but do check that's the case here).
  • Linton
    Linton Posts: 18,289 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Hung up my suit!
    Looking at things very crudely.......
    Suppose you live to 90:
    Option1
    11.3 years at £19500=£220350
    23 years at £10500=£241500
    Lump sum=£130000
    Total: £591850
    Option 2
    34.3 years at £16500=£565950
    Lump sum=£110000
    Total: £675950
    So Option 2 looks a better deal and £110000 is still more than enough for cars and a few goood holidays.
    BUT
    Do you have any other income?  If not, can you live for the first 11.3 years on £16500/year?  Take a part time job perhaps? Normally one would use the lump sum to make up the shortfall from not having the SP.  But if you took all the £9K/year that would use almost all of your lump sum.
  • aphill24
    aphill24 Posts: 143 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    Brynsam said:
    aphill24 said:
    Linton said:
    Is the £110 correct or a typo? It seems a silly amount.
    Have you any need for a lump sum of £130K?  What would you do with it?
    How much total income do you need to meet your normal living expenses at your desired standard of living?
    It's typo sorry should be £110,000
    The lump sum question is very difficult to answer. We have only 5k in savings and will never have another chance to have such a sum of money that would enable us to buy things in future without paying interest such as cars and it is also planned to be used for holidays without the need to save. 
    Are you getting a redundancy payment as such (i.e. cash)? 

    Have you asked if there is a third option, which gives you a bigger pension/smaller lump sum than either of the options shown? There is usually some flexibility, so you could still have a decent tax free lump pension lump sum but also a bigger pension (and remember that any spouse's pension is normally calculated as if you had taken NO tax free cash - but do check that's the case here).
    Hi, Yes I am getting a redundancy payment also and the tfls is allowed to be changed to allow for a bigger pension. I was more concerned whether I should make use of the tax free money whole it's offered. 
    I kind of think it's too personnel a question tobe asked as everyone has different circumstances.
  • Just my opinion: the tax free lump sum seems very large. How many people do you think could say "I earn 19500 a year, but I've got 130k in the bank"? Why not look at it from a different angle. Figure out how much you need each year to be comfortable. Set the annual pension to provide that amount, then take whatever lump sum that leaves. Remember your pension is taxed, so if you need 20k/year, then you want a 23k annual pension.
    It is generally thought that your annual spend goes down as you get older (less likely to take a world tour, or bail out the offspring at 75 than at 65), so the option for a larger pension up front, decreasing when state pension kicks in, has some merit.
  • badmemory
    badmemory Posts: 9,900 Forumite
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    It is generally thought that your annual spend goes down as you get older (less likely to take a world tour, or bail out the offspring at 75 than at 65), so the option for a larger pension up front, decreasing when state pension kicks in, has some merit.
    I have always wondered about this.  Unless your working expenses are great, like a very expensive commute, I think this is debatable.  It will be truer for 2 than it is for 1 as if you are 2 the other can often continue to do what one can no longer.  But bad back = need a gardener, can no longer climb a ladder without being likely to fall = need a decorator.  If you are very lucky of course these things never happen to you, but it is better to be prepared in case they do than have to do stuff which you would really be better not doing.  Unless you do everything together please don't bank on going down to a 1 car household.  The one thing my mother really liked about my father popping his clogs was that she no longer had to consult anyone before she used the car after having had her own for a very long time.

  • badmemory said:
    It is generally thought that your annual spend goes down as you get older (less likely to take a world tour, or bail out the offspring at 75 than at 65), so the option for a larger pension up front, decreasing when state pension kicks in, has some merit.
    I have always wondered about this.  Unless your working expenses are great, like a very expensive commute, I think this is debatable.  It will be truer for 2 than it is for 1 as if you are 2 the other can often continue to do what one can no longer.  But bad back = need a gardener, can no longer climb a ladder without being likely to fall = need a decorator.  If you are very lucky of course these things never happen to you, but it is better to be prepared in case they do than have to do stuff which you would really be better not doing.  Unless you do everything together please don't bank on going down to a 1 car household.  The one thing my mother really liked about my father popping his clogs was that she no longer had to consult anyone before she used the car after having had her own for a very long time.

    Not sure if you've read this (figures 3 and 4 are worth a look)

    https://ilcuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Understanding-Retirement-Journeys.pdf

  • aphill24
    aphill24 Posts: 143 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    Linton said:
    Looking at things very crudely.......
    Suppose you live to 90:
    Option1
    11.3 years at £19500=£220350
    23 years at £10500=£241500
    Lump sum=£130000
    Total: £591850
    Option 2
    34.3 years at £16500=£565950
    Lump sum=£110000
    Total: £675950
    So Option 2 looks a better deal and £110000 is still more than enough for cars and a few goood holidays.
    BUT
    Do you have any other income?  If not, can you live for the first 11.3 years on £16500/year?  Take a part time job perhaps? Normally one would use the lump sum to make up the shortfall from not having the SP.  But if you took all the £9K/year that would use almost all of your lump sum.
    Thanks Linton.There is the state pension to take into account also.
    Option 1 
    11.3 yrs at £19,500 = £220,350
    23 years at £10,400 (DB pension) + £9,100 (state pension) = £450,800
    Lump sum £130,000
    Total: £801,150
    Option 2 
    34.3 yrs at £16,500 = £565,950
    23 yrs at £9,100 (state pension) = £209,300 (From age 67 to 90)
    Lump sum £110,000
    Total £885,250
    So £84,100 more 
  • badmemory said:
    It is generally thought that your annual spend goes down as you get older (less likely to take a world tour, or bail out the offspring at 75 than at 65), so the option for a larger pension up front, decreasing when state pension kicks in, has some merit.
    I have always wondered about this.  Unless your working expenses are great, like a very expensive commute, I think this is debatable.  It will be truer for 2 than it is for 1 as if you are 2 the other can often continue to do what one can no longer.  But bad back = need a gardener, can no longer climb a ladder without being likely to fall = need a decorator.  If you are very lucky of course these things never happen to you, but it is better to be prepared in case they do than have to do stuff which you would really be better not doing.  Unless you do everything together please don't bank on going down to a 1 car household.  The one thing my mother really liked about my father popping his clogs was that she no longer had to consult anyone before she used the car after having had her own for a very long time.

    Not sure if you've read this (figures 3 and 4 are worth a look)

    https://ilcuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Understanding-Retirement-Journeys.pdf

    Thanks for this link : I’ve been looking for something like this for a long time.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.