NOW OPEN: the MSE Forum 'Ask An Expert' event. This time we'd like your questions on TRAVEL & HOLIDAY DEALS. Post by Wed and deals expert MSE Oli will answer as many as he can.
e.g. my NSP is the full amount despite I was contracted out for 17 years, but my DB pension prediction doesn't appear to have gone correspondingly down.
Why would you expect your DB pension to have gone down?
That said ( and I have an awful feeling that I'll be opening another can of worms in saying this) there are certain schemes that impose a deduction on scheme pension at SPA but this has nothing to so with the introduction of NSP.
e.g. my NSP is the full amount despite I was contracted out for 17 years, but my DB pension prediction doesn't appear to have gone correspondingly down.
Why would you expect your DB pension to have gone down?
That said ( and I have an awful feeling that I'll be opening another can of worms in saying this) there are certain schemes that impose a deduction on scheme pension at SPA but this has nothing to so with the introduction of NSP.
HSBC has become notorious for this but it does happen elsewhere.....
I'm not really expecting it to go down - I think that is only in some very special cases where pensions attempted in their rules to reduce their benefits at state pension age and I think/hope I'd already be aware of that - there is nothing about it in my DB pension factsheet.
It was more just to support my contention that someone who was maybe in their early 50s at the conversion to NSP, was potentially at an advantage compared to someone in their 60s. They would per default end up with a full NSP just by carrying on working for more years, which they were probably planning to do anyway, whereas someone in their 60s just before retirement wouldn't have the same, at least not without paying top up fees.
Edit: IN fact in my DB pension factsheet is says "Bridging basis : none" which I am guessing means it has no such rules.
Many schemes abolished clawback but some didn't - as I said above, HSBC has become notorious for applying it particularly as it has a disproportionately deleterious effect on the income of the lowest paid pensioners.
Says I need to contribute 14 more years. That would equal 35 years but doesn't take into account the pre 16 contracted out years.
This is the one on the hmrc app. Not one where you apply for a forecast. Am I mistaken?
Forget 35 years. That only applies to those who started work after April 2016.
You, me and many others on these boards are under transitional arrangements, each with our own unique calculations. In my case, I needed 48 years of NI conts (44 from working, 4 from paying voluntary Class 3s) to qualify for the nsp.
One of the long term aims of the new pension is to greatly simplify the State pension scheme - but that won't be happening for some years yet!
Would I be right in thinking that if an employee has 35 years of “full” qualifying NI years on their record, between 1988 and 2022, then per definition they must be entitled to the full new state pension whether they were contracted out or not?
And in each year they just had to cross a certain minimum threshold during that year to get a full year?
Of is it not that simple?
I depends on things like whether you were "contracted out" or not. The thing to do is to ask for a pension forecast. In my case I had a mix of contributions from my time at Sixth Form College in the 1970's, some summer work which did not get me a full year of NI and voluntary Class 3 and Class 2 NI. I was never contracted out so my 35 full years of NI will get me full state pension and under current legislation I cannot get any more with more contributions.
“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
Replies
Why would you expect your DB pension to have gone down?
That said ( and I have an awful feeling that I'll be opening another can of worms in saying this) there are certain schemes that impose a deduction on scheme pension at SPA but this has nothing to so with the introduction of NSP.
If you are interested
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01121/
HSBC has become notorious for this but it does happen elsewhere.....
It was more just to support my contention that someone who was maybe in their early 50s at the conversion to NSP, was potentially at an advantage compared to someone in their 60s. They would per default end up with a full NSP just by carrying on working for more years, which they were probably planning to do anyway, whereas someone in their 60s just before retirement wouldn't have the same, at least not without paying top up fees.
Edit: IN fact in my DB pension factsheet is says "Bridging basis : none" which I am guessing means it has no such rules.
There can be a difference between bridging pension and integration/clawback.
Some schemes offer the bridging option ( a higher pension between scheme retirement age and SPA but "integration" or "clawback" is compulsory.
http://www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/archive/saga/2000_and_before/990202.htm
Many schemes abolished clawback but some didn't - as I said above, HSBC has become notorious for applying it particularly as it has a disproportionately deleterious effect on the income of the lowest paid pensioners.
https://www.pensions-expert.com/DB-Derisking/HSBC-pensions-clawback-resolution-defeated-at-AGM?ct=true
*edit. Seems I spoke too soon !
You, me and many others on these boards are under transitional arrangements, each with our own unique calculations. In my case, I needed 48 years of NI conts (44 from working, 4 from paying voluntary Class 3s) to qualify for the nsp.
One of the long term aims of the new pension is to greatly simplify the State pension scheme - but that won't be happening for some years yet!
https://www.gov.uk/check-state-pension
What exactly does it say?