[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
>> | No. 3840
3840
The OFT have come out and said that many old (i.e. set up before 2001) pension schemes have high charges and offer savers poor value for money. They've also suggested a cap for auto-enrolment schemes, but it's going to be an almost meaningless gesture as you'd be very hard pressed to find a provider offering auto-enrolment terms with annual management charges greater than 1% anyway. |
>> | No. 3841
3841
Spy.jpg Did someone say pension....? |
>> | No. 3842
3842
UK pensions are a waste of time. It's amazing how it varies abroad though. Value for money is far better elsewhere, sadly (for most the UK population being screwed daily). |
>> | No. 3843
3843
>>3842 |
>> | No. 3858
3858
To me, Auto Enrolment seems like an excuse to scale back the State Pension because more people will have their own personal pensions. |
>> | No. 3859
3859
>>3858 |
>> | No. 3860
3860
>>3859 |
>> | No. 3861
3861
>>3860 |
>> | No. 3862
3862
Annuityrates.png >>3861 |
>> | No. 3863
3863
>>3861 |
>> | No. 3864
3864
>>3863 |
>> | No. 3865
3865
>>3858 |
>> | No. 3866
3866
>>3865 |
>> | No. 3867
3867
>>3866 |
>> | No. 3868
3868
>>3867 |
>> | No. 3869
3869
>>3868 |
>> | No. 3870
3870
>>3868 |
>> | No. 3871
3871
>>3869 |
>> | No. 3872
3872
>>3871 |
>> | No. 3873
3873
>>3872 |
>> | No. 3874
3874
>>3873 |
>> | No. 3875
3875
|
>> | No. 3876
3876
I could be wrong, but aren't group money purchase schemes quite dated now? As far as I'm aware, they're occupational schemes that employers used in the 80's and 90's when they were switching from defined benefit (final/average salary) schemes to defined contribution schemes which still kept the trustee structure in place. These days new pension schemes are almost certain to be group personal pension plans. I don't know if this meant the trustees could choose what the scheme assets should be invested in or if that only applies to defined benefit schemes. |
>> | No. 3877
3877
>>3876 |
>> | No. 3878
3878
>>3877 |
>> | No. 3879
3879
>>3877 |
>> | No. 3880
3880
>>3875 |
>> | No. 3881
3881
>>3868 |
>> | No. 3883
3883
Apparently they're mad on Mumsnet that Auto-Enrolment means they'll have to pay pension contributions for nannies, gardeners and cleaners. |
>> | No. 3885
3885
>>3884 |
>> | No. 3886
3886
>>3883 |
>> | No. 3887
3887
>>3885 |
>> | No. 3892
3892
Cofunds have announced they're scrapping their £40 annual platform charge (although the reality is that they forgot to actually charge anyone for it since they implemented it in January). |
>> | No. 3893
3893
They've just had a pensions expert on BBC Breakfast, because Scottish Widows have released a report saying that a 25-year-old needs to save £66 per month if they want an annual income of £5,800 (with no inflation proofing) on top of the State Pension when they retire. |
>> | No. 3894
3894
>>3893 |
>> | No. 3895
3895
>>3894 |
>> | No. 3896
3896
>>3895 |
>> | No. 3897
3897
>>3896 |
>> | No. 3898
3898
Can someone explain because I'm not quite sure. What's the difference between giving my money to a pension provider and keeping money stuffed underneath my mattress? |
>> | No. 3899
3899
>>3898 |
>> | No. 3900
3900
>>3899 |
>> | No. 3901
3901
>Management fees charged by pension providers could be capped between 0.75% and 1%, according to proposals being set out by the government. The Treasury is consulting on its plans to cap fees, which it says could save people tens of thousands of pounds. Some older schemes set up more than a decade ago have been found to charge up to 2.3% a year in management fees. |
>> | No. 3902
3902
>>3901 |
>> | No. 3935
3935
I was at a presentation by Standard Life and Aviva earlier. |
>> | No. 3936
3936
>>3935 |
>> | No. 3937
3937
>>3936 |
>> | No. 3945
3945
>>3936 |
>> | No. 3946
3946
>>3945 |
>> | No. 3947
3947
They've been talking about salary sacrifice at work. They gave me a statement that shows that if they reduce my gross pay by nearly 6% my net pay will remain the same because there's less income tax and national insurance to pay along with no personal pension deduction. They then pay an employer contribution that is just under 13% greater than what's paid overall now. Any reason I shouldn't do it? |
>> | No. 3948
3948
>>3947 |
>> | No. 4036
4036
>>3948 |
>> | No. 4037
4037
Last thing I'll say on the pension charges cap, the FT say it is a bad idea but can see why Webb has gone for it as it "offers the chance for jolly soundbites. It is not, however, based on good economics." The OFT also recommend against a cap. |
>> | No. 4049
4049
The problem with salary sacrifice and lowering your gross pay is the impact on the "ladder". Typically once you get a rung up you should have a floor under you that increases each step of the way. By accepting this drop you're knocking yourself down if you move to another employer or role. |
>> | No. 4050
4050
>>4049 |
>> | No. 4052
4052
>>4049 |
>> | No. 4095
4095
Apparently Mexico is the only developed nation with a State Pension less generous than ours. |
>> | No. 4096
4096
>>4050 |
>> | No. 4097
4097
>>4095 |
>> | No. 4098
4098
>>4096 |
>> | No. 4099
4099
>>4098 |
>> | No. 4100
4100
>>4096 |
>> | No. 4101
4101
>>4098 |
>> | No. 4105
4105
>>4100 |
>> | No. 4108
4108
>>4105 |
>> | No. 4228
4228
>>4097 |
>> | No. 4262
4262
On the subject of National Insurance: |
>> | No. 4263
4263
>>4262 |
>> | No. 4264
4264
>>4262 |
>> | No. 4265
4265
>>4264 |
>> | No. 4266
4266
>>4265 |
>> | No. 4268
4268
>>4262 |
>> | No. 4271
4271
>>4268 |
>> | No. 4273
4273
>>4271 |
>> | No. 4275
4275
>The date when people must be 68 to draw a state pension - formerly scheduled for 2046 - will be brought forward to the mid-2030s, Chancellor George Osborne will announce later. Plans to be announced in Mr Osborne's Autumn Statement mean the age could rise again to 69 by the late 2040s. |
>> | No. 4276
4276
>>4275 |
>> | No. 4277
4277
>>4275 |
>> | No. 4278
4278
>>4276 |
>> | No. 4279
4279
>>4277 |
>> | No. 4280
4280
>>4278 |
>> | No. 4281
4281
>>4280 |
>> | No. 4282
4282
>>4280 |
>> | No. 4283
4283
>>4276 |
>> | No. 4288
4288
>>4283 |
>> | No. 4290
4290
>>4288 |
>> | No. 4331
4331
Pensioners are being 'burgled' by insurers on annuities |
>> | No. 4358
4358
The Graun are saying people in their 20s should be putting 12% of their salary away for retirement and even more if they leave pension saving until later. |
>> | No. 4359
4359
>>4358 |
>> | No. 4360
4360
>>4359 |
>> | No. 4733
4733
I've heard that if you get enrolled in a pension scheme the government have made it a bit of a hassle to opt out in the hope that people won't be bothered - something about going to the far end of a fart to request the necessary forms because your employer isn't allowed to give you one so they can't pressure you into opting out. Even if you do opt out your employer will already have made a deduction from your pay and you'll have to wait until the next payroll to get it refunded. At least, these are the gripes I've heard from colleagues. |
>> | No. 4734
4734
>>4360 |
>> | No. 4736
4736
>>4734 |
>> | No. 4738
4738
>>4736 |
>> | No. 4746
4746
>>4738 |
>> | No. 4756
4756
So when are interest rates going to finally go up high enough (or at all) to make saving and pensions worth while? Right now and for some time it has felt punishing to those who spent their lives doing the right thing while the BoE and government push everyone to breaking point and bend over backwards for those who were reckless and lived beyond their means. |
>> | No. 4758
4758
>>4756 |
>> | No. 4760
4760
>>4756 |
>> | No. 4761
4761
>>4756 |
>> | No. 4762
4762
>>4761 |
>> | No. 4764
4764
>>4761 |
>> | No. 4765
4765
>>4760 |
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Delete Post [] Password |