To think pensioners paying NI is a step towards equality

[jnfrrss]

Apparently it would raise 2 billion a year and help cover social care.

Mail comments are furious people, but isn't it a step towards a more equal society and taxing everyone more similar regardless of age?

Ni just seems like such an outdated system and in an ideal world it would all be rolled into one tax with income.

Charging national insurance on pension income would cause double taxation (as it is already charged on pension contributions) and would reduce the amount people save for pensions so would not have any positive effects as the extra people require in benefits would probably be larger than any extra NI payments. People continuing to work after state pension age rarely do so through total choice so it would be a rather regressive tax to impose if people working past state pension age started having to pay NI contributions. On the other hand the partners of SAHPs should have to pay double contributions to cover their family choice of having an adult not working and therefore not contributing and tax credits should not be available unless both parents are in work if the youngest child is older than 2.

How can we move away from "pensioners are rich" when the prominent opinion on here is all "they worked hard all their life", "worked from 16", "fought in the war", "struggle to heat their homes"!

My parents and most of their friends just had one person in the family working and could take early retirement.

People of all agegroups face poverty and you can't keep taking the working population more and more when they will no doubt receive less than the people above them.

I don't believe that pensioners should have to pay NI.

I do, however, believe that the system needs a massive overhaul (although I have no idea what that would look like).

It makes me sad that PPs are not able to access their pensions till late 60s but it makes me sadder that by the time I retire, at the rate we are going, there either won't be a state pension or it will only be available in my late 70s. I, too, will have worked since I was 16 and paid into the system. That'll be 55/60 years worth of NI contributions.

I do think it's short sighted for people to have an "I paid in so I should get out" attitude (note: I did not say selfish). I can understand why people have this attitude but it is not going to fix the long term problem. We should be working and campaigning together to find a solution...

Oh, and that solution is very unlikely to involve the Tories...

my parents had 8 children. We had ponies, private education (some of us) and this was manageable on the one salary my father earned.

My mum didn't work for maybe 20 years. My dad was public sector and my mum a teacher, both retired early on enormous lump sums, final salary pensions, My dad at 50 my mum at 55. They live in a big house in a good area (all new neighbours who move in are porsche driving new media / barrister types) There have been no inheritances. I don't begrudge them this, but if you asked them they'd tell you how hard they had / have it... the same applies to Mil and Fil.

My parents and most of their friends just had one person in the family working and could take early retirement.

How lovely for your parents and their friends.

My parents have both always worked. Dad still works full time and he's 67 in a very labour intensive job. My mum is 66 and has just gone part time. I only know of a handful of couples who are in their 70s who would be the same as your parents but even then the man didn't take early retirement.

I think your views are skewed by your parents and their friends. That simply isn't the reality any more for the majority of the population and hasn't been for some time.

Yes, it's inaccurate to suggest this cohort have all worked hard all their lives. Some have, some haven't. Some have paid in enough to cover what they'll be taking out, most haven't and will be net takers (as is the case in all age groups).

In any case, we don't frame our taxation or indeed NI systems based on how hard people have worked. I work fewer hours to come out with similar annual money to someone who works full time on NMW but I don't get taxed more than them because of it. If we're to have taxation and NI policy based on how hard someone does or doesn't work, it should apply to the population as a whole not just people over 65. Unless and until this happens, the fact that some pensioners have worked very hard is irrelevant.

Anyone still working over state pension age is doing it because they need the money. And will have paid NI for around 50 years, it seems spectacularly unfair to make them keep paying for a pension they're already receiving and already have an excess of qualifying years.

Any "inequality" is already balanced out as today's pensioners had no paid maternity leave or free childcare. And the employers' share of NI is still payable regardless of the employees' age.

We need more money in the system so let's make big corporations pay the tax they owe instead of going after soft targets.

Anyone still working over state pension age is doing it because they need the money. And will have paid NI for around 50 years, it seems spectacularly unfair to make them keep paying for a pension they're already receiving and already have an excess of qualifying years.

My uncle continues to work as and when he wishes because his business acumen is very much in demand and he is incredibly well rewarded for his efforts. Within his social circle this is not unusual.

This may not be the case for the majority of pensioners but it’s not as rare as some may believe. My uncle is in excellent health and isn’t yet ready to spend his days languishing on the golf course. He earns annually considerably more than the national average salary.

Those assumptions simply aren't necessarily the case Bluelady.

Some people are working over state pension age because they like it. Do you think Ken Clarke needs the money, for example? Mick Jagger? Arsene Wenger? They have much more in common with wealthy people a few decades younger than them than they do with pensioners who can't afford to retire. Which is a good argument in favour of merging income tax and NI.

Pension recipients also haven't necessarily paid NI for 50 years: they could have paid it for a short period but be receiving a pension based on those contributions. Although, as has already been pointed out, we don't actually design our taxation and NI systems based around who works hardest anyway. This is why I pay the same income tax and NI as someone who earns the same as me but has to work twice as many hours to do it.

Do we have any actual stats for income levels of pensioners who continue to work? I know we have stats for pensioner income levels per se but that's not the same thing. Some pensioners have high incomes without doing anything, others will be working and be much worse off.

Most people who work after retirement age do so because they are poor. Someone already shared on the thread information showing that was the case.
My FIL worked after his retirement age as he had tied accommodation and was worried about where he was going to live. Family and friends helped him find somewhere he could afford to live.

Where? The only links I see are dealing with other things.

Throwing a tiny group of highly paid well known people into the argument is ridiculous. The vast majority of people over state pension age work in low paid jobs because they can't make ends meet on a state pension. If they have no other pension, they've probably worked in low paid jobs all their lives. The state pension for people born pre 1953 is a pittance. Why would we ask some of the poorest people in our society to pay more tax? It's the complete reverse of equality.

I think it should be means tested. When DH receives his pension we'll still have 2 DC in school, and we're in receipt of WTC at the moment.

@ilovesooty thanks for the heads up

If they have no other pension, they've probably worked in low paid jobs all their lives.

Or worked very little. But we can't really make sensible arguments on this issue without some actual stats.

Actually it's 30 qualifying years for a full state pension, so those of us who already have 40 plus years have more than paid for it( as well as contributing to a private pension).

Many of us still working are doing it to help support family. We've paid our fair share.

Maybe sort out the companies- FB, Amazon etc- and get the millions in tax they owe before you start o the little people .

Both my parents worked (1 down an actual mine ) they don't have lavish early retirement they get by are we really expecting pensioners to contribute till they die?

Corporation tax was cut for no reason. We can just put that back up.

Many of us who are older need far more than 30 years employment for a full state pension, as we were contracted out. The contracting out was sold as something to encourage people to pay into private pensions. Now it means that many of us will not get a full pension. I am only mid 50s and have already worked for much more than 30 years.

I was just listening to this on the Jeremy Vine show. One thought that came to mind about young people feeling hard done by is inheritance. My WC parents got NOTHING when their parents died. In fact, my parents regularly had to pay for things for my grandparents to keep them out of poverty. In contrast both my DH and I will get a share of our WC parents properties which in total could amount to a couple of hundred thousand. If I were to snuff it tomorrow my DC's inheritance would be at least double this due to the value of our property in the SE and insurances. I think most children will inherit a lot more than their GPS or parents. No one is taking any of this into account.

I won't inherit anything - mid 50s here. In fact we are financially helping out FIL. Everything we have, apart from £2,000 my DP inherited when his mother died, we have earned ourselves. We have given FIL more than £2,000 by the way.

Or better still every one who works pay the same percentage.

As it stands anyone earning up to £892 per week pay 12% of their salary anyone earning over only pay 2% NI contributions. Rather then a someone who is still working 70 because they can not live on their pensions alone.

I hadn't realised that clutter.