HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » International » United Kingdom (Group) » MPs want no delay to gove...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 01:42 PM

MPs want no delay to government-backed pension changes

(Reuters) - Restrictions on a government-backed pension plan aimed at helping more Britons save for their retirement should be lifted as a matter of urgency, a parliamentary committee said in a report on Monday.

The Work and Pensions Committee said removing the limitations on the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST), which cap the amount an employee can contribute to their pension pot each year and ban transferring existing pensions in and out of the scheme, should not be delayed until 2017.

The government is trying to cut a soaring pensions bill that is set to reach 120 billion pounds in 20 years. It wants people to pay into their own pension pots rather than rely on the state.

The changes would allow people to save more for their retirement rather than having the amount they can pay into their pension capped by NEST. They would also be able to consolidate their separate pension pots into one place if they move jobs.

The Work and Pensions Committee has called for the changes after the take-up of NEST by Britain's largest employers was lower than expected because of the restrictions.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/11/uk-britain-pensions-idUKBRE91A0DJ20130211

3 replies, 632 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply MPs want no delay to government-backed pension changes (Original post)
dipsydoodle Feb 2013 OP
pennylane100 Feb 2013 #1
LeftishBrit Feb 2013 #2
dipsydoodle Feb 2013 #3

Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 12:40 AM

1. Without reading all the details,

it sounds like a good idea. People will save for their retirement if the plan is a good one. I like the idea of taking it from one place of employment to another. That is what would work well in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:32 AM

2. We shall see what happens.

I think your signature line about big and small print may be quite relevant here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 08:03 AM

3. Its a complex subject.

The original 4000 cap may have been to do with limits beyond which , assuming pension contributions to remain subject being exempt from income tax , net tax receipts would fall by too much. With no limit anyone with half a brain would use any available slack to keep themselves within the basic rate tax.

There was another issue recently on the subject or retirement age and pensions within the public sector. Its suddenly dawned on them that by increasing the retirement age the cost of continued employer's contributions, in this case government and presumably local authorities , the additional NH contributions would create an absurdity in certain budgets.

This isn't just Cameron's mob : neither party seem to put enough thought into changes they attempt to bring about and their ultimate effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread