To be annoyed pensioners effectively now get a bigger personal allowance

[FlightBeforeXmas]

So because of the fiscal drag from not increasing personal allowances the chancellor has announced basic state pension will not be taxable.
So if you earn this amount you pay tax on it despite having the extra costs of working.
Pensioners are also much more like to own their homes.
How on earth does this make any sense?

Regardless of views on pension amounts etc, I think this is such a bullshit argument - it always comes up on threads like this.
Are you saying that anyone below pension age who might be struggling should just get a better job? As if that never occurred to people?

Yes, that explains it.

I think the OP has misinterpreted.

I can see nothing announced today about the tax threshold no longer applying to those in receipt of state pension other than that for some, their pension will not exceed the (frozen) tax threshold.

I agree.

That. You've misunderstood @FlightBeforeXmas .

When the basic state pension becomes fractionally more than the tax threshold in a couple of years, the tax that would be due would be tiny, and more expensive to collect than the income to the government. So that minority of pensioners for whom the state pension is their some source of income, will not pay tax.

Those pensioners are not the pensioners you should be resenting. They are the pensioners at rock bottom and who are struggling to make ends meet.

We live in a gerontocracy now. Tax the fuck out of every worker, sit back and watch house prices rise, allow students to swim in debt but god forbid pensioners should ever lose out on a single penny

Many pensioners now will spend almost as long retired as employed. Almost nobody could have paid enough taxes to cover that future pension, nobodies final salary pension scheme was fully funded by a lower salary whilst employed. These are all being paid by people working today, most of whom, wont have a final salary scheme, are being taxed more on pension savings, work longer hours than in the past, and will maybe see 10 years of retirement at most.
Of course people should expect a decent standard of living when they cant work. But it is unfair that because so many voters are retired pensions are completely protected from inflation in the way that employment income isn't.

The difference is that pensioners can't earn more than their state pension [other than private pension income which they do pay tax on].

@ShesTheAlbatross well if you’re earning pension equivalent then yes, there’s scope to earn more. And you have a lot more years to do it than a pensioner.

Getting old is rubbish, the state pension is the lowest in Europe yet some people think we are all going on multiple cruises and living in mansions. No, lots of older people are still working, do voluntary work, care for grandchildren for free, have multiple health issues to cope with- its not a bed of roses. You’ll be old one day and maybe you will then have more empathy and not try to stir up generational hatred.

If you are above a certain income it will be taken back but not in a lump sum. My DH has received it but isn’t entitled to it. I can’t remember the process but he certainly won’t be keeping it.
TBF we don’t need it so we’re not complaining.

Oh do bore off. If their only income is the state pension they are hardly wealthy and it’s not worth the expense and hassle of trying to collect it. If they have a private pension or investment income they will be tax as they do now.

I am trying to save for my first home. I understand that I could receive a better return if I invest in stocks and shares but at this point in my life I don’t want to take the risk.

I don’t understand why the over 65s are allowed to invest this much in a cash ISA when those who might actually need to make a significant purchase in the coming years aren’t.

This.

I think OP should ask for her thread subject line to be edited. The hatred against pensioners on MN is dreadful.

My DB already pays tax on his state pension as many do , that won’t change

Government has recognised that over 65s may be more cautious about investing in stocks and shares.

Some of us rely on annual income from savings to boost our pensions and would not wish to potentially jeopardise that security.

Can you explain what you mean please. I haven't seen anything about this.

Yes and a guaranteed inflationary increase each year too, at minimum, which workers (at least those not on the minimum wage) don't get.

Yep, my husband has a small earned income in addition to a low state pension, a small private pension and some annual income from interest on savings. He pays tax on his total income (which includes his state pension) and that will not change.

"If you think that working age people can all easily increase their incomes"

Don't be disingenuous ; however hard it is to find extra work have a side hustle etc ( and there have been many times e.g 70 and 80's when working age people found this difficult) it is far easier for them than a 67/ 68 year old.

I'm a younger 'boomer' and having started work at 15, I get my state pension at 67. The pension age is going up to 70 but following generations start work much later these days. Swings and roundabouts.

We do not yet know the full details of this yet and I doubt very much if they have been worked out. I think this would only apply to people who only get the state pension and nothing else.

So? The same applies to me but clearly I have to suck it up. When the inevitable crash arrives in the next 18 months when the AI bubble bursts I might lose it all. But that’s ok apparently.

This, combined with the triple lock remaining and the winter fuel allowance being protected whilst salary sacrifice is hit with NI contributions is frankly an insult to the working population.

I haven’t misunderstood or got the thread title wrong. My point is that surely the personal allowance should be the same for pensioners and working people.

As a pensioner, I’m paying tax, I’ve never not paid tax since I was 16.🤷‍♀️