Georgie boy is after your pension money!

[Deleted member 18588]

What Mr Osborne seems to have forgotten is that retirees have the time and, in many cases, the money to spend on which he collects VAT and generally keeps money flowing around. Thus as usual with politicians he's kicking the ball down the road.

Most young people I know have student loans, desperately saving a deposit or paying high rents and saving to help kids with their education. Saving for retirement for many is just a luxury.

I must be missing the point.

What exactly has been done or is proposed that will reduce the income of retirees?

Relief on pension contributions has long been difficult to justify, particularly at higher rates. After all why should the State be enhancing the retirement provision of the better off. The nett cost of contributions is currently lower for HRT payers compared with the rest of society,

 

[Deleted member 18588]

The reason that so many people are buying homes to let (and forcing up prices) is because they see that as a better source of income in retirement than a traditional pension!

And yet they receive no tax relief on the costs which would rather seem to defeat your original argument.

 

[delc]

And yet they receive no tax relief on the costs which would rather seem to defeat your original argument.

That rather depends on the returns you get on your investment. I am not advocating tax avoidance for the sake of it! However a tax break on payments into a pension fund should encourage people to plan for their old age.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

That rather depends on the returns you get on your investment. I am not advocating tax avoidance for the sake of it! However a tax break on payments into a pension fund should encourage people to plan for their old age.

But why do they not need that same "encouragement" before purchasing investment properties?

Previously you suggested that people could not afford pension contributions yet now you say that those same folk can afford to purchase Buy to Let properties.

I'm sorry but somewhere along the line your argument does not stack up.

 

[delc]

I must be missing the point.

What exactly has been done or is proposed that will reduce the income of retirees?

Relief on pension contributions has long been difficult to justify, particularly at higher rates. After all why should the State be enhancing the retirement provision of the better off. The nett cost of contributions is currently lower for HRT payers compared with the rest of society,

It doesn't affect the incomes of current retired people with pensions, but it may affect the retirement incomes of those working people who are currently paying into a pension fund. They face a choice of paying bigger contributions, which affects their incomes now, or getting smaller pensions when they eventually retire. Either way they are losing out! A lot of Higher Rate Taxpayers would not regard themselves as being rich!

 

[delc]

But why do they not need that same "encouragement" before purchasing investment properties?

Previously you suggested that people could not afford pension contributions yet now you say that those same folk can afford to purchase Buy to Let properties.

I'm sorry but somewhere along the line your argument does not stack up.

They can afford to buy But to Let homes with the very low rate mortgages that are currently on offer, and may decide that this is a better use of their money than a traditional pension scheme. Also gives them an asset that they can sell at a profit at a later date.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

They can afford to buy But to Let homes with the very low rate mortgages that are currently on offer, and may decide that this is a better use of their money than a traditional pension scheme. Also gives them an asset that they can sell at a profit at a later date.

Then if they can afford to make that choice I think it would be fair to say that they do not require State funded subsidies before they will contribute to their pensions.

As my dear old Dad used to say " you can't have the toffee and the ha'penny!"

 

[evahakool]

The reason that so many people are buying homes to let (and forcing up prices) is because they see that as a better source of income in retirement than a traditional pension!

It's a wise move IMO for what you class as ordinary people to invest in property rather than a traditional pension , but I wouldn't agree it's all these peoples fault for forcing up rents.

With the volitile way the markets are who can blame these ordinary people for trying to protect their hard earned money.

More to do with stay away landlords keeping properties empty and unscrupulous landlords, look in any big city in the UK to see how many empty properties there are.

 

[delc]

It's a wise move IMO for what you class as ordinary people to invest in property rather than a traditional pension , but I wouldn't agree it's all these peoples fault for forcing up rents.

With the volitile way the markets are who can blame these ordinary people for trying to protect their hard earned money.

More to do with stay away landlords keeping properties empty and unscrupulous landlords, look in any big city in the UK to see how many empty properties there are.

When my wife died she owned a maisonette. Until probate was granted on her will, which took several months, I was not allowed to sell it or rent it out. This may the cause of some of the empty properties!

 

[Tashyboy]

It's comforting that the government have got £130 million off Google for the last 10 years in tax. Oh no it's not coz they have robbed the working man/ miner of more in that time.

 

[delc]

It's a wise move IMO for what you class as ordinary people to invest in property rather than a traditional pension , but I wouldn't agree it's all these peoples fault for forcing up rents.

With the volitile way the markets are who can blame these ordinary people for trying to protect their hard earned money.

More to do with stay away landlords keeping properties empty and unscrupulous landlords, look in any big city in the UK to see how many empty properties there are.

Just out of interest, what do you think the purpose of keeping properties empty is? Unless they are earning rents, they are just money pits!

 

[evahakool]

Just out of interest, what do you think the purpose of keeping properties empty is? Unless they are earning rents, they are just money pits!

If someone brought a property in a big city and left it empty for 5/10 years and then resold they would make money on them.

Why are so many property's in big city's empty?

 

[delc]

If someone brought a property in a big city and left it empty for 5/10 years and then resold they would make money on them.

Why are so many property's in big city's empty?

Might as well earn so money from fixed term letting in the meantime!

 

[SocketRocket]

It's comforting that the government have got £130 million off Google for the last 10 years in tax. Oh no it's not coz they have robbed the working man/ miner of more in that time.

Labour got zilch from them for half of that time.

Remember that Google is an American company and as such pay their Corporation tax to the USA They have paid tax and National insurance for their Employees to the UK as well.

Whats the difference between a Working Man and a Miner?

 

[Tashyboy]

Labour got zilch from them for half of that time.

Remember that Google is an American company and as such pay their Corporation tax to the USA They have paid tax and National insurance for their Employees to the UK as well.

Whats the difference between a Working Man and a Miner?

Dont know of a working man that has been robbed of billions from his pension, Yet. But it will happen. So the answer to your question is nothing, eventually.

 

[MegaSteve]

Remember that Google is an American company and as such pay their Corporation tax to the USA

Believe they are quite good at avoiding paying any there also...


If you want to take a profit out of a healthy economy then you should be prepared to pay your fair share to see said economy remains in good order...

 

[SocketRocket]

Believe they are quite good at avoiding paying any there also...


If you want to take a profit out of a healthy economy then you should be prepared to pay your fair share to see said economy remains in good order...

Google has not done anything illegal.

It's quite normal for Companies to sell their products internationally and pay Corporation Tax in the country they are registered.

 

[daverollo]

It's a great topic to bring up Delc.

Having skimmed through it, it's going to take me an hour or more to respond to correct the amount of misinformation within the thread, can't say I have that much spare time on my hands at the moment, need to carry on earning money to put away into my pension!

I manage my own pension fund through a SIPP and well up on current and past pension regimes, final salary included.

 

[MegaSteve]

Google has not done anything illegal.

I appreciate they haven't done anything illegal...

Goes back to my earlier post... Since I've been around no government has ever been bothered to ensure there are good rules/laws to see big multi-national corporates contribute their 'fair share' to the pot... Don't really have to whilst they have the soft option of taxing PAYE person to the hilt...

 

[Foxholer]

I appreciate they haven't done anything illegal...

Goes back to my earlier post... Since I've been around no government has ever been bothered to ensure there are good rules/laws to see big multi-national corporates contribute their 'fair share' to the pot... Don't really have to whilst they have the soft option of taxing PAYE person to the hilt...

PAYE folk are easy targets - they have very few ways to reduce their tax, and then only by pretty limited amounts. (Very) high earners and companies have more options and the sums/savings involved make it worthwhile. Companies frequently make decisions where the tax considerations are a major factor! Where to base themselves is one of those and it's the various governments that are really 'at fault' in this area imo. If all governments charged the same corporation (mainly) tax, then the problem would not exist!

Multi-national companies are often in the fortunate position of being able to 'bargain' with governments. They, like other PLCs, are also actually legally obliged to provide their shareholders the best return they can, and if avoiding (not evading) tax does that, then they have little choice but to do so. Of course, the shareholders are (generally) then taxed on their proceeds, so the government still actually gets paid - just not one of the several 'churns' that it would normally get!

I still like the idea promoted by a party back home of reducing Corporation Tax to 10%. The reasoning was that that was sufficiently low to eliminate the wasteful, negative, consideration of tax on decision making, allowing executives to focus their efforts positively on building growth!

The government, via tax in its various forms, is really an obscene blood-sucking extortion machine!