Pensions For Dummies
- Thread starter Frozennova
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,188
- Location
- Billericay, UK
So what happens to your pension if you leave the NHS before 25 years?
Accrued benefits are preserved and uplifted each year by a nominal amount linked to some sort of index - CPI, RPI or AWE.
To clarify you (and others) can put in up to £40k a year. So for example, if you and your employer contribute £20k each any further contributions by you would generate a tax bill.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Some are some aren't. The old scheme, which has been stopped, works in this way.
I think the new 2015 NHS scheme stops the accrual if you stop contributing. It does preserve the benefit. The payout doesn't start until Stat pension age now, which will be 66, 67 or 68 for most people currently contributing.
Else while you continue accruing, they take your little pot each year and add to it. There are ways to access it early, but they take a slice out of it for each year early you take things. I recall seeing 7 years early for a age 60 retirement meaning you get 66.5% of your pension or similar figure.
It is a little strange, as the old scheme for most people paid out at age 60 (there was an interim one aged 65) so they will be able to claim their old bit (10 years in the case of the chap above) at age 60, while continuing to work until 67 to claim the other component.
Going to be a tax nightmare, as no doubt the archaic systems will still be in use then
Utter utter drivel.
Private pensions (whether a SIPP or a pension fund) are extremely transparent. Funds (OEICs or other) are required to make their underlying holdings available, along with all their charges.
Pooled funds - in the event of a market decline, yes, the holders will lose out, as it is THEIR money that is invested.
I believe the 2015 scheme does still increase but not by the full amount it would if you were still an active member.
I'm pretty sure that's the old scheme. DB pensions can apply a charge of up to 8% per annum for each year early that the pension is taken. I don't believe the NHS scheme applies that maximum rate though, and the figures you quote seem to bear that out.
The new scheme (2015) just asks that you pay more for early retirement: http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/Documents/Pensions/ERRBO_factsheet-20160309-(V6).pdf
Still fantastically generous schemes though.
It means you have been a good a dutiful citizen throughout your life and done as told and when it comes to cashing in the goverment will give you ZERO.
Where upon
The chap across the street who had a new car every 5 years, nice holidays, still paying the mortgage will get significant help from the goverment.
Oh and before you all start nagging at me, this is exactly what is happen to family members. System is proper broken but there you go.
Where upon
The chap across the street who had a new car every 5 years, nice holidays, still paying the mortgage will get significant help from the goverment.
Oh and before you all start nagging at me, this is exactly what is happen to family members. System is proper broken but there you go.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
That is true for basically buying added years, in the new scheme method.
This is the actual early retirement without additional contributions checklist.
http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/Documents/Pensions/2015_VER-ARER_factors_V3.pdf
Various months and year factors as taken in reference to your stat retirement age.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Yet...
We shall see what will happen in the future, I will be interested to see if any government will change this in the future, and I think they will at some point, have a basic untested pension and a top up tested pension. Like the various allowance, winter fuel etc, that no doubt will become parts of the means tested machine.
That's more like - makes more sense. Quite a tough decision to take an early retirement from these schemes.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Indeed, it is rather interesting the way they have staged it too, especially with folks who are currently working, say for the past twenty years in nhs, and still expected now to do another twenty seven, they will get some of their pension at sixty, and I wonder does the govt hope they will remain on part time, to fill the gap between pension a and pension b. Or if they hope pension a simply wont be enough and for a few years the nhs will be well stocked numbers wise with experienced but decrepit staff.
Just wtf will want surgery carried out by a sixty four five and six year old dentist, brain surgeon, paeditrician? Just sounds like it is pushing things. Yes people are liviing longer, but they are not just as useful at very skilled, accurate tasks at such ages.
We've already had this in the past with MIG (Minimum Income Guarantee) but have moved away from that after the last Labour governments.
The current government isn't currently exploring means testing the State Pension but has commissioned a report from the Government Actuaries Department to consider the future of the State Retirement Age and life expectancies, led by John Cridland. This will report in May 2017 and has looked at whether the retirement age could move from being universal to one based on more individual testing (demographic, occupational and environmental factors). However, that appears to have already been ruled out due to the huge complexity involved and the enormous political challenge.
It is instead likely to report and recommend no further move towards means testing, but to consider a dynamic retirement age based on the principle of the State Pension aiming to provide for a retirement of a certain percentage of an individual's life based on their age.
For example, people retiring in the past 10 years have benefited from the State Pension for 33.3% of their life, while people retiring in the past 20 years have benefited from the State Pension for 32% of their life. That shows the improvement in life expectancy in just a decade, and the cost of 1 or 2% to these figures is enormous.
No wonder the likely solution is to start with abandoning the triple lock.
I take the point, but don't want to turn this into an NHS thread
. All workplaces have evolved (or have to evolve), and a very general aspiration would be that later life work roles would be more focussed on a transition of knowledge and experience rather than normal day to day expectations and duties of a front line active role.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 1,094
- Location
- GB
I left the forces after nearly 19 years recently. I'm 41 and lucky to be in receipt of my pension now. It hacks me off that I did 3 tours of Iraq and 3 of Afghan for it and because I left and got a very well paid role I lose so much of it in tax!!
Or maybe they were never in the position to ever save, not that you ever thought about it did you
Last edited:
Or maybe they were never in the position to ever save, not that you ever though about did you
Exactly, some people spend their entire life on the breadline unfortunately
