Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

I’ve easily found £30bn of savings, so why can’t the government do this?

462 replies

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 10:36

How about this state pension adjustment proposal?

Currently, the state pension system pays the same to everyone, even to households with very large private pensions and investment incomes. Much of this money ends up funding luxuries.

The proposal is simple:
*full SP for everyone who depends on it (60% of pensioners)
*households with more than £12,000 a year from private pensions, work, or investments have 50p of SP withdrawn for every £1 above that level, up to the value of the pension itself
*A quarter of pensioners would only have a modest reduction, and only the wealthiest 15% would no longer receive a publicly funded pension they do not need.

I used chatGPT to do the calculations.

Savings? THIRTY BILLION A YEAR

That’s 1% of GDP

List of things that could improve?

restored trust between generations so young taxpayers see their money spent on genuine need, not luxury.

national renewal: homes, NHS, lower childcare costs, investment in schools, training, the police force. It could be used to help families who are struggling with mortgage costs.

re-directing spending from low-value consumption (luxuries, imports) to investment (homes, healthcare, infrastructure) improves living standards

Positive effect on the bond markets, sterling value, credit-rating agencies, inflation trends, reduction in government debt - the UK really really needs this right now

I’d absolutely get up off my bum and vote for a party that proposed this. Would you?

OP posts:
socialdilemmawhattodo · 02/11/2025 10:47

No thanks for me personally. But then I am within a decade of state retirement age and paid into the state scheme since I was a teenager. What would be your timeline for implementation? Eg anyone under 30 as they have nearly 40 years to make alternative plans?

Original poster
OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 10:46

drspouse · 02/11/2025 10:44

How much does your scheme cost to administer in terms of working out who has how much in private pension?
This is the usual argument - and it's a good one - for not making benefits means tested.

I agree. That’s usually the line that’s trotted out. Again, I plugged in that query: It shouldn’t cost anything extra since the government is already working on joined up infrastructure (e.g linking DWP info to HMRC).

OP posts:
milveycrohn · 02/11/2025 10:45

No idea why some words are on italics

Hallywally · 02/11/2025 10:45

Well if they introduced that, id stop contributing the chunk of my wage every month that goes towards my pension and just get state pension- it would give me a better quality of life now.

milveycrohn · 02/11/2025 10:45

Is your plan in addition to the income tax they already pay on their pensions?
Remember the State Pension is currently subject to income tax. It's just that currently the state pension is below the personal allowance (), so if anyone has an additional private pension, thus is subject to income tax at the usual rates (tax codes are adjusted to take the state pension into account).
So your proposal is for every retired person to have an additional 50 percent tax?
() this may change if personal allowances remain the same and the state pension goes up.

drspouse · 02/11/2025 10:44

How much does your scheme cost to administer in terms of working out who has how much in private pension?
This is the usual argument - and it's a good one - for not making benefits means tested.

Original poster
OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 10:44

modgepodge · 02/11/2025 10:40

Pensioners vote more than young people so parties don’t suggest policies which will upset them.

i suspect many people would feel ‘what’s the point in saving in to a private pension if it means I don’t get my full state pension’. Might as well not put in to a pension, unlsss you know you’ll be one of the ones with a huge pension. Much like some people on universal credit may not be motivated to take on additional hours as once transport/childcare costs are accounted for and their UC is reduced for the additional earnings, they’re no better off.

Not saying I disagree with the idea in principle, but I don’t think it’s as simple as you make out.

I ran the calcs on chatgpt about public sentiment:

Whether people would back this reform depends on how it is framed, who explains it, and when it is introduced. Yet the evidence suggests that, if presented clearly and fairly, a majority of voters would support it.

Around thirteen million people currently receive the State Pension which is about one in four voters. The remaining three-quarters are working-age, and many of them feel that the system no longer reflects today’s realities. Research by YouGov and Ipsos shows:

  • 60–70% of under-50s believe the triple lock and universal pension payments are unsustainable.
  • Around 40% of pensioners agree that wealthier retirees should receive less.
  • Roughly two-thirds of all voters support the principle that people with large private pensions should get a reduced State Pension.

So, it looks like it would actually be a vote winner at election.

OP posts:
rwalker · 02/11/2025 10:43

Currently I’m working towards retirement
picking up extra shifts and cutting back to increase my pension

so my question is why should I bother working more making cutbacks too boost my private pension
where I’ll end up no better off I might as well stop picking up overtime and spend a bit more on my holiday

modgepodge · 02/11/2025 10:40

Pensioners vote more than young people so parties don’t suggest policies which will upset them.

i suspect many people would feel ‘what’s the point in saving in to a private pension if it means I don’t get my full state pension’. Might as well not put in to a pension, unlsss you know you’ll be one of the ones with a huge pension. Much like some people on universal credit may not be motivated to take on additional hours as once transport/childcare costs are accounted for and their UC is reduced for the additional earnings, they’re no better off.

Not saying I disagree with the idea in principle, but I don’t think it’s as simple as you make out.

Blushingm · 02/11/2025 10:40

Because all those people who have paid in to work pensions have also paid tax and NI. Why should their state pension be reduced because they’ve been sensible and paid in to employer pensions?

HelenaWaiting · 02/11/2025 10:40

Exactly how many pensioners do you think would vote for it? It's electoral suicide. There is also massive potential for a legal challenge.

MsVisual · 02/11/2025 10:37

Now go and sell that to the electorate