Retirement

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
15,809
Location
Yeovil
Visit site
Pru is now under M&G Wealth. T The Pru has changed massively now though.

Aa a Pru pensioner I am still kept up to date with what is happening to the company via our pensions magazine but not the actual products.

Pru themselves became very big in the far East and wanted to go that direction and ditch the UK.
 

Tashyboy

Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
19,735
Visit site
Had my Tax codes come through today for my pensions for next year. 5 pensions and three are in the pension protection fund PPF. Basically that’s the government fund that’s set up when your company pension goes Belly up 😡
I would still like to see Pension payments from companies given the same priority as paying tax.
 

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
33,225
Visit site
There still seems to be an "insistence" on the part of some pension organisations that you should take just 4% of your pot per year.....but this totally misses the fact that many folks sadly wont make it beyond the 20th year of retirement or, their health/mobility suffers so they become far less active and need far less money in the later years. I'd rather have a little bit more money in the early years when i'm healthy enough to enjoy it.

soon to be 58, soon to be replaced at work by a low cost Romanian, considering options as to what to do come year end. :D
The 4% is if you want, or need, your pension pot to be sustained ‘for the duration’, and though it doesn’t seem to be framed in a way to make that guidance more crucial for smaller pots. But what’s a smaller pot?

Noting that the average pot for 55-64 yr olds in the UK is just over £107,000. Which might sound a lot….however…the 4% guideline would give an annual drawdown pension (before tax) from that of £4,280. If of state pension age and getting the full state pension about 20% of that pension pot drawdown goes on tax…leaving £3,425…£285/month - or about £70/week. Add the £203/week full state pension and you have about £275/week - not exactly the riches of Croesus.

With that level of monthly income there could be significant pressure to drawdown quite a lot more than 4%. You can go ahead and do that but the smaller pot is getting depleted very quickly and investment growth could very easily not cover the drawdown…indeed might fall well short of covering it…and the pot ever decreases and ever more quickly decreases if the drawdown amount is fixed against a reducing pot.

With larger pots the scope for drawdown of >4% is there as the pot remains large enough to sustain future drawdown albeit perhaps at a reduced level being required, but that being consistent as your needs might lessen.

This below looks a useful site for pension and retirement facts and figures…but we have a Financial Advisor for advice on what is sensible and appropriate for our specific needs and aspirations.

 
Last edited:

Skytot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2022
Messages
548
Visit site
The 4% is if you want, or need, your pension pot to be sustained ‘for the duration’, and though it doesn’t seem to be framed in a way to make that guidance more crucial for smaller pots. But what’s a smaller pot?

Noting that the average pot for 55-64 yr olds in the UK is just over £107,000. Which might sound a lot….however…the 4% guideline would give an annual drawdown pension (before tax) from that of £4,280. If of state pension age and getting the full state pension about 20% of that pension pot drawdown goes on tax…leaving £3,425…£285/month - or about £70/week. Add the £203/week full state pension of about £275/week - not exactly the riches of Croesus.

With that level of monthly income there could be significant pressure to drawdown quite a lot more than 4%. You can go ahead and do that but the smaller pot is getting depleted very quickly and investment growth could very easily not cover the drawdown…indeed might fall well short of covering it…and the pot ever decreases and ever more quickly decreases if the drawdown amount is fixed against a reducing pot.

With larger pots the scope for drawdown of >4% is there as the pot remains large enough to sustain future drawdown albeit perhaps at a reduced level being required, but that being consistent as your needs might lessen.

This below looks a useful site for pension and retirement facts and figures…but we have a Financial Advisor for advice on what is sensible and appropriate for our specific needs and aspirations.

Thanks for posting that link , very simple and informative. But it’s depressed me , my pot is only just above average so I can see myself working up to retirement age .
 

AussieKB

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
1,118
Location
Australia
Visit site
How do you retire if you do not own a house ????
surely you keep working, I know some people do not earn enough to buy,
but what is the logic of giving up an income when you have to pay rent.
 

PhilTheFragger

Provider of Entertainment for the Golfing Gods 🙄
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
15,414
Location
Aylesbury Bucks
Visit site
How do you retire if you do not own a house ????
surely you keep working, I know some people do not earn enough to buy,
but what is the logic of giving up an income when you have to pay rent.

That’s the problem, a group of people who can never retire and must work till they drop.
 

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
33,225
Visit site
The BIG problem is folk retiring with way below average pension pots, who are paying rent.

This is going to be a massive issue in the very near future 🙁
...and it's an issue that has been known about for many years...so what's been done or is being done about it...? Not a lot. The requirement on employers to set up workplace pensions for their employees will go a small way towards giving those reaching state pension a little more money, but in the context of rental costs it's not help much at all - and what we will have is the public purse funding rental property owners purchase of property through housing benefit.
 

PJ87

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
21,564
Location
Havering
Visit site
Well the folk who've never worked seem to chug along ok ... I've often wondered how.

I run the numbers once. With so many people moaning about "life on benefits" "broken Britain" costs the UK less than tax fraud does. But it's the people we go after

And the money they get the lifestyle they can afford is for want of a better word. Depressing

I'm sure theres a couple who are happy like that . For me tho just no. I couldn't live like that
 
Last edited:

pendodave

Tour Rookie
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
3,266
Visit site
How do you retire if you do not own a house ????
surely you keep working, I know some people do not earn enough to buy,
but what is the logic of giving up an income when you have to pay rent.
I'm not sure of the logistics, but if you're poor enough to qualify for pension credit, you probably get housing benefit.
This probably works better for those who have no money at all than those who have a bit saved away (or a little bit of personal pension). I've no time or inclination to do the research, but I suspect you have to spend all that you've accumulated before you qualify for those benefits.
I'm imagining designing a system that meets all needs "fairly" is complicated to the point of impossibility.
 

pendodave

Tour Rookie
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
3,266
Visit site
what we will have is the public purse funding rental property owners purchase of property through housing benefit.
To those that have shall be given... Mathew something-or-other iirc.
I know you'll appreciate a bit of scripture.
Unfortunately, funneling public money to the wealthy is something of a habit in our country.
 

harpo_72

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
5,998
Visit site
That’s the problem, a group of people who can never retire and must work till they drop.
I think you will find that is the working population who has to support those not working.
My understanding is what is being taken now isn’t actually investments or what you have paid in … that’s long gone. It’s what is being collected today. Which isn’t sustainable and we should be actively recouping possible tax revenue and misspends .. from the big boys, make them pay it first then argue afterwards .. the post office strategy
 

Voyager EMH

Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
6,134
Location
Leicestershire
Visit site
I'm not sure of the logistics, but if you're poor enough to qualify for pension credit, you probably get housing benefit.
This probably works better for those who have no money at all than those who have a bit saved away (or a little bit of personal pension). I've no time or inclination to do the research, but I suspect you have to spend all that you've accumulated before you qualify for those benefits.
I'm imagining designing a system that meets all needs "fairly" is complicated to the point of impossibility.
Housing benefit goes to the owner of the property not the poor people living in that property.
The working tax payers' money goes to support those who have multi-property ownership.
 

Captain_Black.

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
451
Visit site
I think the future will be interesting to say the least.
People may be living (slightly) longer? But not necessarily in good health.
With an ever increasing state pension age, we are going to have a massive issue in the future.
We'll have a whole raft of people not well enough to carry on working (especially manual workers) but too young for a state pension.

Due to unaffordable housing, we will have workers unable to work & no money for rent, food & day to day living.
Then there is the social care issue (as in we don't have a social care system)
What happens to all the renters & low paid in old age with no savings or their own home?
We don't have anywhere for them to go to be cared for if that is what they need.

A time bomb waiting to go off.
 

PJ87

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
21,564
Location
Havering
Visit site
I think the future will be interesting to say the least.
People may be living (slightly) longer? But not necessarily in good health.
With an ever increasing state pension age, we are going to have a massive issue in the future.
We'll have a whole raft of people not well enough to carry on working (especially manual workers) but too young for a state pension.

Due to unaffordable housing, we will have workers unable to work & no money for rent, food & day to day living.
Then there is the social care issue (as in we don't have a social care system)
What happens to all the renters & low paid in old age with no savings or their own home?
We don't have anywhere for them to go to be cared for if that is what they need.

A time bomb waiting to go off.

I always get flack for this but I strongly believe state pension should be means tested instead of triple locked.

For example I don't think I should even get one with the private pension available

I think it should be linked to the minimum wage , so if that goes up so does pension.


You start off on minimum wage. Like benefits of your private pension goes above x amount your state drops off until it's gone

Then the poorest in society get a fair amount and the fortunate who can afford to save for retirement don't get the support

However it's always said "it encourages people to not save to get the state"
 

harpo_72

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
5,998
Visit site
I always get flack for this but I strongly believe state pension should be means tested instead of triple locked.

For example I don't think I should even get one with the private pension available

I think it should be linked to the minimum wage , so if that goes up so does pension.


You start off on minimum wage. Like benefits of your private pension goes above x amount your state drops off until it's gone

Then the poorest in society get a fair amount and the fortunate who can afford to save for retirement don't get the support

However it's always said "it encourages people to not save to get the state"
I think if you have a pension that pays x you are taxed on it as income ?
 

Voyager EMH

Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
6,134
Location
Leicestershire
Visit site
Personal income allowance for 2023/24 is £12,570.
Everyone pays tax on income above this - pensioners included.

And

The personal allowance reduces by £1 for every £2 of income above £100,000. The personal allowance is lost if taxable income exceeds £125,140 (2023/24).
 

harpo_72

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
5,998
Visit site
Personal income allowance for 2023/24 is £12,570.
Everyone pays tax on income above this - pensioners included.

And

The personal allowance reduces by £1 for every £2 of income above £100,000. The personal allowance is lost if taxable income exceeds £125,140 (2023/24).
Perhaps it would be fairer if the tax rate for pensioners with incomes beyond £35k are doubled .. sounds mean but most won’t have mortgages and can holiday anytime of the year so don’t have enforced costs
 

Captain_Black.

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
451
Visit site
Perhaps it would be fairer if the tax rate for pensioners with incomes beyond £35k are doubled .. sounds mean but most won’t have mortgages and can holiday anytime of the year so don’t have enforced costs
Given that the older you are, the more likely you are to vote, the party who introduced something like that would be annihilated at the next election.
 
Top