Pension overhaul - women no longer able to claim based on partners contributions

(44 Posts)
Portofino Mon 06-May-13 18:25:34

link

This one leapt out at me because it mentions women aboard, the ones who have have never lived in UK and the "closing a loophole" phrase was used. That on the surface, seemed fair enough, but after further reading it appears this will affect all women in the UK , (and presumably men) who have never made any personal NI contributions.

It seems like more deflection, blame the foreigners so we ignore what the Govt are actually doing kinda stuff. Or did I misunderstand.

gettingaway Mon 06-May-13 18:33:31

So what happens to the pension someone has been contributing to if they die? Is it kept by the govt?

This is coming in in 2016 I believe? So there will be couples out there who have assumed the wife would be entitled to a pension and now (only three years from retirement) do thy discover that won't be the case. Yup - another cracking Tory policy.

Makes it all the more important that women sahming claim child benefit or at least register so their NI contributions are protected. If you are unemployed at any point you need to sign on for the same reason.

Wuldric Mon 06-May-13 18:34:14

I do agree with you that on pensions (as on tax) there is a whole lot of spin and concealment of the facts.

Hopefully this will have a limited impact as the whole system is being overhauled from 2016.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 18:35:49

I am not sure to be honest.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 18:38:34

I have always worked so admit to being a bit clueless as to what happens re. Pension provision if you stay at home/are disabled/never work...

pointythings Mon 06-May-13 18:42:17

I think this is going to be another policy disaster like the child benefits withdrawal, to be honest. It will disproportionately hit women who have chosen to be SAHM. And it's easy for the government to say that these women would have had the opportunity to work and contribute after their DCs had left home, but it isn't easy to get into the workplace with zero experience or qualifications.

Cigarette packet, back of, anyone?

(Disclaimer: I have always worked and don't get child benefit because of DH's immigration status so have no stake in this - just an opinion and some compassion for those going to be hit by this).

SirChenjin Mon 06-May-13 18:45:22

It won't hit you providing you claim CB or register to protect your NI contributions. When you claim SMP it is made clear on the forms that you need to do this.

For decades the Conservatives have promoted the idea that women whould stay at home and look after their families. Traditional values and all that good stuff.

And now they are going to shaft these 'traditional couples' who made the decision 30 or 40 years ago that one partner (almost always the woman!) would not work outside the home, on the understanding that in the event of the man's death, his pension contributions would continue provide an income for his wife.

In any other context this would be breach of contract, fraud, or even theft.

And the pathetic and transparent attempt to blame 'foregners who have never paid into the system in this country' for the ihntroduction of this measure is utterly contemptible. It WILL affect many many women and men in this country and possibly leave some people destitute.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 18:54:31

Yes, and the foreigners are relatively few really. The slant on this story really bother me.

AnnoyingOrange Mon 06-May-13 18:56:51

The pension is only worth £66, which no one could live on anyway. So I would assume that they would always need another income source as well in order to live

SirChenjin Mon 06-May-13 18:56:57

The new pension will provide a flat rate of c£7K for everyone who's spent at least 35 years caring for children or the elderly. It's an individual pension and current pensions will be unaffected.

AuntieStella Mon 06-May-13 18:59:40

That's not quite right, lapsedpacifist.

Independent taxation of married women was introduced to UK in 1990, when Thatcher was PM.

As HRP (in its variously named guises) was introduced in the 1970s, and this measure only reaches back as far as 1981. There has been no 'SAHM gap' for a generation, despite the concept being trotted out from time to time (sometimes by politicians who really should know better).

Viviennemary Mon 06-May-13 19:02:12

I heard just a snippet of the end of this and it was talking about women who lived abroad so I assumed it just meant them. But already men and women are getting separate pensions which is a good thing. But if a person's contribution may have to also provide a pension for a partner then it is only logical that everyone's contribution will have to go up.

Women know that if they don't work the required number of years they can't be entitled to a full pension. Don't they?

2rebecca Mon 06-May-13 19:21:01

This should be better for working women though who usually have a husband with his own pension and would rather pay smaller contributions and just get a pension for themself plus spouse/ dependent benefit if they die early, rather than fork out more to provide a pension for their spouse who doesn't need it. If some people want to put money aside for stay at home spouses they are still free to pay into savings accounts, pensions should just be for the individual paying into them.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 21:28:03

Is that how it work though Rebecca? I don't pay smaller pension contributions because I have a husband.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 21:32:02

In fact I must have a better pension than him as he worked off shore for many a year, and took 4 years out to do a degree as a mature student. Whereas I (fingers crossed) will do 45 years of full employment. I have done 25 and know I am sailing in the wind with regards to the future.....

Viviennemary Mon 06-May-13 21:33:00

I don't think it does work like this. You don't pay a smaller or larger contribution to the state pension depending on whether or not you have a spouse. And I don't know any other sort of pension that works like this.

Portofino Mon 06-May-13 21:33:56

Though it does frighten me somewhat that I have worked for 25 years, as I feel about 21.

janey68 Tue 07-May-13 07:24:33

You would think so wouldn't you Vivienne? But the statistics do show that a scary percentage of women are not clued up about pensions and have woefully inadequate provision.

Viviennemary Tue 07-May-13 16:21:39

But will £140 a week be enough for people to live on. If they have savings they won't be entitled to reduced community charge (except the reduction for single person if they live on their own) or any other benenfits.

badguider Tue 07-May-13 16:29:53

surely sah parents in the uk don't rely on the 'married person allowance' anyway? do they not all register to receive child benefit or make voluntary ni contributions?

Stay-at-home parents are entitled to make contributions of up to £2,880 per annum into a stakeholder pension which the government then tops up to make a total of £3,600. I use a SIPP for mine but there are a lot of providers of stakeholder pensions.

Surely non-working people should be making some provision to protect themselves, if only from a divorce scenario if nothing else. Obviously I am not talking about people who do not work due to illness or disability.

Viviennemary Tue 07-May-13 17:23:40

These NHS credits for SAHM's are only able to be claimed for 16 years. This may sound like a lot but what about the other 19 years if somebody never works. And also what about SAHM's who have a fairly high earning husband with a private pension and then they split up. Where do they stand then. I think it's a minefield and people don't realise.

Viviennemary Tue 07-May-13 17:26:11

I mean National Insurance credits not NHS credits.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now