to hope the government has the guts to tax WEALTHY pensioners more

[ReallyTired]

The Fabian society has suggested that wealthy pensioners pay more tax.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22220345

Some how I can't see a conservative wanting to tax wealthy pensioners more when they all vote Tory.

I find it unfair that pensioners with an income more the average family's income get free bus buses, winter fuel allowance, TV licence as well as paying less tax and national insurance. It is about time that the the wealthy pensioners took their share of the pain of the cuts.

I am in favour of well off pensioners having free bus passes, winter fuel allowance as these things encourage independence and improve health. I would like to see the money for these things clawed back by WEALTHY pensioners paying more income tax.

Final salary schemes are mostly closed now to new entrants having almost bankrupted many employers who offered them, this is with the exception of the public sector). Future pensioners will have a much less certain income post-retirement.

London man - but employers' NI is not a tax on the employee. if employers NI was abolished, salaries would not rise.

it is a company tax which adds to the cost of employment.

Whatever the voluntary contribution is that goes by direct debit out of your bank account.

Is that ok or can we examine in minute detail the life of every other poster on this thread.

Being a current sahm warrants this does it?

I was self employed for a while and have just always carried on paying it.

I presume that's ok.

Apart from the fact that you don't need to pay it as you get the relevant credits via claiming CB.

However if you want to pay an unnecessary tax (for four and a half years) then I'm sure the Treasury will be delighted.

Dp was worried that my pension contributions wouldn't be enough so insisted we pay it,we were advised to do so too,maybe incorrectly?

CB getting cut so maybe better to be safe than sorry but would prefer not to tbh.I was just planning on stopping it when I get a job.The money would be useful though if we don't need to and it shouldn't be much longer until I get an offer so maybe I'll cancel it.

Apologies I assumed I was going to be accused of lying.

Sq, you used to have to but the housewives lobby got the law changed so that they were credited when not working, another thing we now realise could not be afforded but was done in better times. It also eroded yet again the incentive to work which has led to national insurance being nothing like it was planned. It was supposed tob e if you worked very very hard then you would obtain very enhanced benefits, state pensions etc etc. Now just about everyone gets the same whether they bothered to work for 40 years or just put their feet up.

So I don't need to pay?

Was the change recent?

The reason the cb is clawed back via tax is to protect the pensions of people in your position.

As long as you still claim cb you get the credit for ni. It was why in the run up to the introduction there was a load of fuss and a late change to the way it was implemented.

Ah!

Thank you.

"Someone said all final salary schemes should be stopped but all those i know on final salary are from private companies so not paid by the state so that would actually hit the state because tax is paid on them."

Yes, many FSS pensions are private ones. The result is the same though: current workers (who won't ever get a pension half as valuable since they will only get back what they have actually invested) are having to pay for them. There is no magic money pot - those companies with private Final Salary schemes are having to pay huge amounts into their (closed) pension schemes to make up for massive financial shortfalls as the amounts paid in historically are NOT enough to pay the pensions promised. That directly leaves less money to pay current wages.

Yes, FSS may be what many expected but that doesn't mean it is unfair to move the goalposts. Say the banks by mistake told everyone whose surnames bagan with "N-Z" that they were due £50,000 instead of £5,000 in tax credits/CB/HB/Tax rebates (or whatever). If it was later discovered to be an accounting error, what is fairer? Tell them, "sorry there has been a mistake, it's only £5,000" or to say "don't worry, you were promised £50,000 so we will pay it and we will get everyone with names beginning "A-M" to pay for it. That is what the current older generation appears to be doing to the younger generation. There will be a backlash at some point. The young will get NO pensions at all if the UK goes bankrupt so why should they be paying for gold plated pensions for the current over 65's?

LondonMan speaks a lot of sense.

Undercover the point was that reducing fss in the private sector would not help the deficit. In theory companies could pay higher salaries but in reality they wouldn't so the government losses the tax.

www.moneywise.co.uk/news/2013-04-25/men-and-women-now-need-over-150000-to-fund-basic-retirement-income

Men and women now need over £150,000 to fund a basic retirement income

jacks it's not just about the deficit - it's about the baby boomer generation stealing from the young. Of course, it is all inter-related: the baby boomers borrowed and spent beyond their means and now it is pay back time. We will all need to help with austerity measures because the debt is so enormous, but there is no reason for pensioners to be ring fenced as they have been when they have done so comparatively well.

fasterstronger and how on earth are they to save that up whilst paying gold plated pensions to the older generation, and repaying student loans? It's frightening.

I'm think I'm generation x - depends on the cut off date - and I have spent too much money on credit cards at times that I had to repay over many years using the handy 0% rates that actually meant I just kept borrowing. My point is that it isn't only the baby boomers who overspent. Most of the country did and so I don't think you can claim the BBers stole from this generation.

Equally I don't think pensioners should be protected from the measures affecting the rest of us.

Square I hope you're able to confirm with HMRC that you didn't need to pay. I assume your taxable income in the past few years has been nothing (or negligible). It would be good if you could therefore claim it back.

u/csahm - stealing from the young really, get a grip ffs, (and look up the definition of theft) they are being paid what various governments elected by the people have said is their entitlement, having made their relevant contributions are required by the said government at the time. If they have saved extra or invested wisely and so have more, that is now a fault to be decried. wow!

We need to do something about the pension issue, that's a given, but increasing the tax burden for those on pensions is a non starter, it's disproportinate. Do what is being done, change the system before people get there, defer it's start to 70 now not phase it in (and watch the outcry for that too).

Actually why dont we go back to the previous system that those that don't amass full contributions then don't get a full pension, this would penalise sahm's as it did before. Oh wait I hear you say, that's unfair, yes it is but no less absurd than what you're saying.

Maybe if everyone took only what they needed rather than everything they were entitled to there wouldn't be such a huge burden on the system?

One of the elderly people my mum cares for claims WFA but admits she doesn't need it and gives it to her daughter instead (who spends it on treats for herself) Ditto those who claim but spend their winters in Spain never requiring heating!

I have lost count of the number of times that relatives have asked us to dispose of medicines from elderly parents who have died. A colleague totted up the value of one such medicine stash and it came to £800. That's £800 of NHS money that was incinerated because it can't be re-used.

An estimated £300 million is wasted every year from the NHS budget because of waste medicines. www.medicinewaste.com/

There are many many people with hoards of medications who don't use them but order them every month "because they are entitled to them"

If you don't need it then don't take it.

The problem with WFA is that you can't not take it. It's paid to all pensioners regardless of whether they claim it or not

We are moving more and more to people taking without necessarily putting in.

Who is paying the SAHP's NI! Its us - they arent paying it - they arent working and Xenia is right. We could come to a point whereby it is better to sit back and let those famous 'others' contribute.

Whether you get a full pension as an older person or pension credit or whatever the latest name is for it. It is still the same thing... Work, dont work, it doesnt matter - you will all get the same in the end!

I see a point in the future where actually if you have a private pension (having worked for years and years) you would not be 'entitled' to a state pension. The state pension will only be for people that havent contributed enough or have been sitting around for years claiming they are looking for a job...

Handcream that is what really worries me, if people are no better off if they make provision for themselves then why would anyone bother with a private pension. People will spend now and let the state pick up the tab later and then the generations to come will really be up the creek. Is that a legacy we want to leave them?

I think we are complacent with regards to "social security" now. We expect things that never existed before the advent of the NHS etc. you see many a thread where op wants another baby and the advice is "oh babies don't cost much And have a look at entitled to.co.uk" Many Families in recent years have worked out what they can afford based on handouts from the government. I don't think today's pensioners did that. They got little help. They "invested" in the pot and are now claiming what they were told they could.

My point being that many would have been net contributors all their working lives, where as a high proportion of families now rely on government assistance in one way or another all their lives.

Erm council housing has been around for years,ditto unemployment benefit.

I grew up in the 70s and 80s with my pensioner father bemoaning the benefit culture,yes that's right people the same age as him.

We have a pensioner family member who had 4 kids and is now rattling around in a massive home counties council house she refused the right to buy in the 80s because she wanted the council to keep doing the upkeep.

There were far more sahp then.

A lot of the benefit culture has been handed down from family member to family member for generations.In some ways I actually feel for this generation as they are the generation who are going to be weaned off it and often simply have been living a life they were brought up to live for generations.