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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Pension Help

13»

Comments

  • jamesd
    jamesd Posts: 26,103 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    So far it's a few isolated cases, not mass action. Just don't count on it staying that way. The reasoning will go "this is withholding income, why should the taxpayers pay just because someone refuses to take their personal pension". Cue outraged looks from whichever politician is announcing the policy initiative.
  • EdInvestor
    EdInvestor Posts: 15,749 Forumite
    jamesd wrote: »
    . The reasoning will go "this is witholding income, why shoould the taxpayers pay just because someone refuses to take their personal pension".

    Quite right.Surely the reason you can take a PP at 50/55 is to cover this very eventuality - an enforced need to retire early?

    Ageism is unfortunately a reality - but you can't really blame the younger generation for getting antsy if oldies demand to sit in the top jobs until they are 65.That's what early retirement/redundancy/pensions at 50/55 are all about.It suits many people very well.

    Why should the taxpayer fund people who have access to an income stream? With drawdown, taking the pension early does not mean you will lose out.
    Trying to keep it simple...;)
  • exil
    exil Posts: 1,194 Forumite
    http://www.dwp.gov.uk/housingbenefit/manuals/hbgm/parts/ptbw_01b.asp#b_w170

    Capital assets disregarded in full
    1. the value of the right to receive an occupational or personal pension
    HB Sch 6 Para 31; CTB Sch 5 Para 31
  • jamesd
    jamesd Posts: 26,103 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    exil, those are the capital rules. You may find the notional income rules less pleasing:

    W2.685 If a claimant who is aged 60 or over
    • is entitled to money purchase benefits as defined in Section 181 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993, under an occupational pension scheme, or
    • has personal pension scheme, or
    • is a party to, or a person deriving entitlement to a pension under, a retirement annuity contract, and fails to purchase an annuity with the funds available in that scheme where
      • they defer (in whole or in part) the payment of any income which would have been payable to them by their pension fund holder
      • they fail to take any necessary action to secure that the whole of any income which would be payable to them by their pension fund holder upon their applying for it, is so paid, or
      • income withdrawal is not available to them under that scheme, or
      in the case of a retirement annuity contract, they fail to purchase an annuity with the funds available under that contract
    treat the amount of any income foregone as possessed by them, but only from the date on which it could be expected to be acquired were an application for it to be made.
This discussion has been closed.
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
  • 353.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.2K Life & Family
  • 261K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K 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.