AIBU to think claiming two state pensions seems unethical?

[CoffeeAndCats3]

I wrote about this on another thread, but thought I'd start my own as it irks me and I'm wondering if IABU.

My parents emigrated from the UK in their early/mid thirties and have never lived in the UK since. They are now late 60's. My Mum told me recently that both her and my Dad are claiming a full UK pension, in addition to a full pension in the country them emigrated to. They don't need this money, but she seemed quite smug about how they can 'double dip' and live the Life of Riley while sitting on a load of money, rental properties etc. I told her it seemed a bit unethical to me, but she didn't understand my viewpoint at all.

How is this possible? She said that they only had to pay their (national insurance?) for a period of time after moving, to then be eligible for the full UK pension on retirement? Can someone explain to me if this is correct, as I half think they've scammed the UK system somehow!

DH and I do this. We pay into national insurance, get absolutely nothing back from the UK in services but will be able to claim pensions. Would you honestly turn down money that legally available to you?

Well the state pension is approx £12.5k per year. They left the UK in their early 30s so since then will have been paying minimum contributions (a fraction of what they’ll receive) to “earn” their entitlement to the pension, which they could be claiming for another 30+ years.

“get absolutely nothing back from the UK in services” quite rightly, as tax pays for services, not NI.

Yes personally I would turn it down because it’s immoral. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

You’re absolutely right. Irish friend of mine did the mandatory 5 years in London after university before moving home in her late 20s. Has done the topping up, I’m not quite sure how it works but she said she doesn’t have to pay in much annually, and will be entitled to a full UK state pension when the time comes, in addition to an Irish one. As a pp said, don’t hate the player, hate the game. Does seem like a massive waste of taxpayer funds though.

Why do you think it’s fair on the British people (who live here) that you should pay in so little and receive far, far more back?

I think it’s fine to hate the players as well as the game. They have a choice not to take advantage of something that’s legal but unethical.

Many countries don’t require you to have worked as long either. I have a family member who had a senior public sector job abroad for 15 years and those contribs alone allow him to claim full state pension for that country as well as his uk pension (he was a uk taxpayer every year throughout his career too, so put in at least 40 years into the uk system tbf). I was surprised other countries have such low year qualifications for full retrieval

I don't think this is possible actually

According to your own personal ethics, not theirs.

There was an interesting documentary I watched about border force a few years back where an elderly woman with dementia (one parent had been British) hadn’t ever set foot in the UK. She lived in either South Africa or US with her offspring. She was getting too expensive in terms of healthcare and knowing that the UK has a “free healthcare at point of use for everyone” (more or less), they flew to the UK and dropped her off and went back to SA/US. Was particularly cruel of her family but I did think at the time how much that one woman would cost the state, a woman who had never been here or paid in anything before, set up with housing, welfare and healthcare. I suspect is not as edge a case as it sounds.

I’d like to hear anyone justify how it’s fair to live here for only 5 years, pay a few hundred quid in for another 5 years and then take over £12k every year for (usually) decades. I don’t think anyone would be able to argue it’s ethical, even though it’s legal.

Oops. Wrong thread.

It doesn't increase annually if you're not resident in the UK - it stays at the amount you were entitled to when you first start drawing it and never changes. So there's that...

Read my previous post, i used to work in this area.

Paying less than £170 a year for 20 years, so less than £3200 lump sum, allows you to claim £12.5k per year SP.

Seems like a pretty good investment with regards to getting much more back than you pay in.

The one time lump sum payment, the equivalent of one quarter of the annual pension payout, is just wild returns and completely unaffordable for UK nationals.

That depends on which country you live in. It increases if you live in the EU or certain other countries (there’s a list).

If I had more than enough money already, yes I would not claim the pension in this case. I think it's morally wrong. Particularly when you know the country is struggling so much financially.

However, I understand that it is all legal so 'techically' you (and they) are doing nothing wrong.

I think it's a loophole that needs to be closed.

That depends. Some foreign countries, e.g. Australia are outside the triple lock so it's frozen, others, e.g. the EU are inside the lock.

I think what has occasioned this thread is the recent kite-flying or faux concern about welfare v. defence and the triple lock has come under scrutiny. An obvious target that would cause less concern is those overseas.

Except.....such overseas recipients of the UK state pension now also have the vote for GEs.

That is a heck of a return on your investment, at the expense of the UK! Unbelievable really that this is allowed.

"Technically" means really. They are really doing nothing wrong.

It also may well be that in some countries, e.g Australia, you have to claim your UK pension before being considered for the means-tested state pension, so it makes sense to top up NI contributions.

Being outside the triple lock pisses off the Au government big time, as more Pom retirees shift onto the Au state pension due to dwindling pensions levels.

It has changed.

You need to update yourself on the changes if you’re going to present yourself as informed.

Maybe you and @echt should read my previous posts.

I'm the one that explained it changed in April this year and explained the changes.

Not sure why you're having pop at me as I haven't criticised your posts at all.

While I haven’t done the calc, there would be a number of years after earning the pension after which if you are still alive it would be statistically certain you’re taking out more than you put in. And not a crazy number of years, prob in the 10-15.

I'll share my initial post again from page 1 for those that missed it.