New Pension Calculator
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Cotswolds
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well my master-plan is to cut and run at my 38 pt (just prior to 15 changeover), take max commute to throw at mortgage and should still be left with 10k+ per year pension. From that point I'll start a new pension scheme with a civvie airline.... providing I can get a job.
I'd rather have a known quantity and enjoy life now rather than keep every penny for 67-68-69-70 (or whatever they eventually move it to) which I may not reach or at best be limited to how much I can enjoy the money. But that's the crux of the thing, everyone's life plan and outlook is different!
I'd rather have a known quantity and enjoy life now rather than keep every penny for 67-68-69-70 (or whatever they eventually move it to) which I may not reach or at best be limited to how much I can enjoy the money. But that's the crux of the thing, everyone's life plan and outlook is different!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Norwich,Norfolk,UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Age 55 or 60?
I've just found the link to the calculator and I'd like to pick-up on a point already covered.
Why would the calculator give a default retirement age of 60. Surely, its not been set there just to cover the v small percentage of Air ranks or those who are occasionally extended past 55. I would have thought it would be set at the most likely retirement age, allowing you to pull the bar up if required.
Therefore, I can only arrive at the following conclusions:
a. It is a cynical attempt to keep us all happy (as we will not have terms of service that allow us to continue past 55) by showing us a pension figure which is impossible to achieve.
b. The NEM really is going to offer service to 60.
What are the thoughts of those experts out there?
Why would the calculator give a default retirement age of 60. Surely, its not been set there just to cover the v small percentage of Air ranks or those who are occasionally extended past 55. I would have thought it would be set at the most likely retirement age, allowing you to pull the bar up if required.
Therefore, I can only arrive at the following conclusions:
a. It is a cynical attempt to keep us all happy (as we will not have terms of service that allow us to continue past 55) by showing us a pension figure which is impossible to achieve.
b. The NEM really is going to offer service to 60.
What are the thoughts of those experts out there?
JM
FTRS already have terms of service to age 60 and some to 65. So I see no reason why Regulars can't crack on to age 60 in this age when we're all fitter than yesteryear.
LJ
Dad's Army anyone?
FTRS already have terms of service to age 60 and some to 65. So I see no reason why Regulars can't crack on to age 60 in this age when we're all fitter than yesteryear.
LJ
Dad's Army anyone?
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 4th Jun 2013 at 21:00.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jagmate
If it didn't illustrate to 60, I suppose that the MoD might be exposing itself to charges that it never had any intentions of introducing it? As Leon says, some can already soldier on until 60 so why not have the eldest point as the default setting?
Bobby
Why wait until you're out? If you can, make sure that you have at least considered a pension for Mrs T as well, even if she isn't a tax payer. Cue Robbie Williams.
Biggest single financial regret - Echelon Wealthcare
If it didn't illustrate to 60, I suppose that the MoD might be exposing itself to charges that it never had any intentions of introducing it? As Leon says, some can already soldier on until 60 so why not have the eldest point as the default setting?
Bobby
Why wait until you're out? If you can, make sure that you have at least considered a pension for Mrs T as well, even if she isn't a tax payer. Cue Robbie Williams.
Biggest single financial regret - Echelon Wealthcare
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a question for you regarding PAS. I went onto it recently and won't have completed the required 5 qualifying years when AFPS15 comes into effect. If I was to PVR after this point but before the 5 years are up would my pension be locked on the PAS one up to this point or would I revert back to my old pay scale?
I'm confused as to what people are referring to as the "default point of retirement at 60"...? I just inputted the end of my current engagement as my retirement point, where does the 60 default come into it? Am I missing something really obvious...
Not sure how it works with AFPS15 (I left last year), but I didn't complete the required 5 yr service as PAS and instead got an equivalent 'Specialist Aircrew' pension based on my 22 years service. This was the default arrangement (as detailed in the JSP and AP) and wasn't affected by the fact I left on redundancy (non-app). Look up the terms for PAS pensions and read the para on qualifying service. That will tell you what happens if you leave before the full 5 years. Safe to say - you'll be better off staying for the full 5! Unless the rules have changed, at least if you do go early, the pension is better (at 'Spec Aircrew' rates) than non-aircrew pension for the same rank.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Downsizer,
The age 60 bit refers to the first age at which you can leave with a pension paid immediately without the actuary reducing it to take into account the fact that it has been brought in payment early. The only exception is for those who get an ill-health pension.
If you leave before 60 (other than with an ill-health pension), for the service you give on AFPS 15, you will get a pension preserved until state pension age and, if you meet the criteria, you will get an EDP and EDP lump sum. This is on top of your protected benefits from your current pension scheme.
The age 60 bit refers to the first age at which you can leave with a pension paid immediately without the actuary reducing it to take into account the fact that it has been brought in payment early. The only exception is for those who get an ill-health pension.
If you leave before 60 (other than with an ill-health pension), for the service you give on AFPS 15, you will get a pension preserved until state pension age and, if you meet the criteria, you will get an EDP and EDP lump sum. This is on top of your protected benefits from your current pension scheme.
Downsizer,
The age 60 bit refers to the first age at which you can leave with a pension paid immediately without the actuary reducing it to take into account the fact that it has been brought in payment early. The only exception is for those who get an ill-health pension.
If you leave before 60 (other than with an ill-health pension), for the service you give on AFPS 15, you will get a pension preserved until state pension age and, if you meet the criteria, you will get an EDP and EDP lump sum. This is on top of your protected benefits from your current pension scheme
The age 60 bit refers to the first age at which you can leave with a pension paid immediately without the actuary reducing it to take into account the fact that it has been brought in payment early. The only exception is for those who get an ill-health pension.
If you leave before 60 (other than with an ill-health pension), for the service you give on AFPS 15, you will get a pension preserved until state pension age and, if you meet the criteria, you will get an EDP and EDP lump sum. This is on top of your protected benefits from your current pension scheme
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Odiham
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think what I, and several other people, am asking is:
Will the retirement age in the RAF move from 55 to 60 with Pension 2015?
Dont care about deferred this or EDP that, just whether or not I will have to serve to 55 as standard. Clearly the pension under 15 becomes much much better if you serve to 60......
Will the retirement age in the RAF move from 55 to 60 with Pension 2015?
Dont care about deferred this or EDP that, just whether or not I will have to serve to 55 as standard. Clearly the pension under 15 becomes much much better if you serve to 60......
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: somerset
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a pilot 2nd tourist having served almost exactly 50% (10 years) of my commission. I took a picture of my pension under the 75 scheme last year for comparison and the figures stated below are from the 38 point (all open source).
39,411 lump sum.
13,137 per annum.
This is the new figures at the 38 point using 75/15 scheme? Using the exact same data.
20,922 lump sum.
6,974 per annum.
Are there any others in a similar situation to me where half way through my commission I am looking at getting a 50% reduction in my pension? I have tried and retried and cannot find any mistakes in my data entry but have requested a full forecast to make sure the figures are correct.
Anybody want to take a guess at what will happen if the pilots in my situation with ATPL's and significant heavy experience get told they face a 50% pension reduction on the backdrop of a possibly improving civil airline market?
39,411 lump sum.
13,137 per annum.
This is the new figures at the 38 point using 75/15 scheme? Using the exact same data.
20,922 lump sum.
6,974 per annum.
Are there any others in a similar situation to me where half way through my commission I am looking at getting a 50% reduction in my pension? I have tried and retried and cannot find any mistakes in my data entry but have requested a full forecast to make sure the figures are correct.
Anybody want to take a guess at what will happen if the pilots in my situation with ATPL's and significant heavy experience get told they face a 50% pension reduction on the backdrop of a possibly improving civil airline market?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tel, there is no secret. But the treasury will not offer fri's until they see the outflow rate and IMO, not until after the next general election when they can boast about cost savings. I am seeing many first tourists get their tickets in now as there is no point in sticking round for the 1000 captains.
From what I have worked out, the fri will have to be in 6 figures to keep me in... There are plenty of jobs outside of poleing too that pay better and induce less stress. I unlike many others will stick it till 38 but I do fear for our experience levels once the outflow starts.
From what I have worked out, the fri will have to be in 6 figures to keep me in... There are plenty of jobs outside of poleing too that pay better and induce less stress. I unlike many others will stick it till 38 but I do fear for our experience levels once the outflow starts.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leon,
Ref your #45, a couple of years ago, there were 230 serving beyond the age of 56.
Armed Forces: Pensions: 15 Feb 2011: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou
Ref your #45, a couple of years ago, there were 230 serving beyond the age of 56.
Armed Forces: Pensions: 15 Feb 2011: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wokka,
There was a question asked in the House recently by the Lib Dem MP for Chip'nam (I couldn't find it). He asked that if firefighters were now 'expected' to work until aged 60, what scope was there for firefighters to retire with (full?) benefits if they failed their breathing apparatus physical tests. The reply came back that if they retired earlier, there would be that actuarially reduced benefit.
The point though, is that firefighters now seem to be targeting aged 60. I don't have any idea what conclusions or parallels may be drawn from that but there appears to be precedent. At the risk of unfairly rushing to a cynical judgement, I imagine there would be a deluge of 57 year olds failing their BA tests unless there were a reduction.
There was a question asked in the House recently by the Lib Dem MP for Chip'nam (I couldn't find it). He asked that if firefighters were now 'expected' to work until aged 60, what scope was there for firefighters to retire with (full?) benefits if they failed their breathing apparatus physical tests. The reply came back that if they retired earlier, there would be that actuarially reduced benefit.
The point though, is that firefighters now seem to be targeting aged 60. I don't have any idea what conclusions or parallels may be drawn from that but there appears to be precedent. At the risk of unfairly rushing to a cynical judgement, I imagine there would be a deluge of 57 year olds failing their BA tests unless there were a reduction.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vin Rouge,
Don't forget the tax on that FRI - you'd have the privilege of being an Additional Rate Tax Payer. Anyone fortunate enough to be earning more than £150,000 (included in that is the FRI of course, which will include those who it is aimed at) will see their tax rate on income over that limit reduced from 50% (where it has been since this tax was introduced in April 2010) to 45%. This group of people will pay more tax in the 2013/14 tax year than they did in 12/13 due to a rule which applies to those earning over £100,000.
If you earn more than £100,000 in the year, the tax-free personal allowance is gradually reduced at a rate of £1 for each £2 you earn over the £100,000 limit. Those earning £118,880 or more in 2013/14 will therefore have no tax-free allowance. Because the threshold between 20% and 40% tax has been reduced, those who earn between about £117,000 and £157,000 will find that they actually pay more tax than they did the year before – when those earning less and those earning more will each pay less than they did the year before.
For a 50% taxpayer, however, the tax relief on pension contributions is a serious uplift - after all, it means that you could (if it was the best course for you) make a (currently) maximum £50,000 annual contribution for just £25,000 and refer back to any 3 previous years unused allowance. That's the theory; bear in mind your AFPS notional contribution also chips away at the annual allowance. The annual allowance drops to £40,000 next year.
The Salary Calculator - Take-Home tax calculator
Don't forget the tax on that FRI - you'd have the privilege of being an Additional Rate Tax Payer. Anyone fortunate enough to be earning more than £150,000 (included in that is the FRI of course, which will include those who it is aimed at) will see their tax rate on income over that limit reduced from 50% (where it has been since this tax was introduced in April 2010) to 45%. This group of people will pay more tax in the 2013/14 tax year than they did in 12/13 due to a rule which applies to those earning over £100,000.
If you earn more than £100,000 in the year, the tax-free personal allowance is gradually reduced at a rate of £1 for each £2 you earn over the £100,000 limit. Those earning £118,880 or more in 2013/14 will therefore have no tax-free allowance. Because the threshold between 20% and 40% tax has been reduced, those who earn between about £117,000 and £157,000 will find that they actually pay more tax than they did the year before – when those earning less and those earning more will each pay less than they did the year before.
For a 50% taxpayer, however, the tax relief on pension contributions is a serious uplift - after all, it means that you could (if it was the best course for you) make a (currently) maximum £50,000 annual contribution for just £25,000 and refer back to any 3 previous years unused allowance. That's the theory; bear in mind your AFPS notional contribution also chips away at the annual allowance. The annual allowance drops to £40,000 next year.
The Salary Calculator - Take-Home tax calculator
I am a pilot 2nd tourist having served almost exactly 50% (10 years) of my commission. I took a picture of my pension under the 75 scheme last year for comparison and the figures stated below are from the 38 point (all open source).
I've not checked your figures but you are part of a group of relatively young aircrew that my particular ivory tower is exceptionally worried about. In certain regards you find yourself forced into a group of people (informally referred to as the '05 Experiment' - a term massively out of date) that will not have the pull-factor of an immediate pension at the 16 year point.
We have already been tracking aircrew (primarily pilots) who joined from 2005. This group will start to hit their 11-year point (a traditional itchy-feet point) from 2016 onwards. Without the allure of a healthy 'pension' for 5 years further service it is difficult to see what, in financial terms, will draw them through for another 9 years for a rather paltry EDP. The gap is too wide for very little reward. Others may point at the value of the deferred pension at age 68, but that is just too far away for most.
The brutal reality for the individual and the Service is that the rate of churn will increase to a level that we may not be able to sustain. The NEM goes even further and positively embraces the up-or-out principle, yet we have no practical solutions on how we sustain this 'encouraged' (intentional or not) outflow. Many small fleets have pinch-points with OCU/Fs and increasing IPS by 30 to 50% is just not achievable.
As is often the case the financial burden has moved from one budget (pensions) to others (FLCs). The only handbrake we have to stop runaway dilution is the absence of capacity or resources to train the replacements. So we will achieve a heady mix of dilution and gapping.
The new pensions and NEM mix will work for a large % of SP and save some money. It will not work for the highly skilled element - and this group includes many others outside of the aircrew cadre.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Al, that's why I state 6 figures. I reckon if they were to pay out the fri as an increase in salary over the period of retention, it would be more of a winner, but I don't somehow see the treasury going for that one, do you? 