New Pension Calculator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: somerset
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vin Rouge, Just this once,
Thanks for your replies. In my view (purely a heavy pilots one) what one lost from not joining the airlines as soon as possible after the captains ocu return of service, was made up for by the lump sum and full pension at the age of 38, + service life (which I enjoy) + service perks.
Now that equation looks to be significantly skewed by a huge reduction in pension along with continuing eroding of perks that being part of the service might not make up for. What annoys me is that I'm really enjoying my job right now but feel a significant pressure to consider other options as I have a duty to do what's right for my family as well as myself. I know the civil market isn't guaranteed but surely people like me, and the considerable amount of more disgruntled pilots than me, will see the 'airlines' as a much better option. Where will this leave sqn's, experience wise, in 10 years?
People have already made the argument to me 'you didn't sign up for the money did you' no I didn't, absolutely not. But I am entitled to be able to plan my future and with 10 years left until 38 point reductions this big are difficult to manage.
Anyway I'm getting ahead of myself. I shall wait a while and see where things sit approaching 1st April 15 and make my decision then, as I expect a lot of my colleagues will also!!
Thanks for your replies. In my view (purely a heavy pilots one) what one lost from not joining the airlines as soon as possible after the captains ocu return of service, was made up for by the lump sum and full pension at the age of 38, + service life (which I enjoy) + service perks.
Now that equation looks to be significantly skewed by a huge reduction in pension along with continuing eroding of perks that being part of the service might not make up for. What annoys me is that I'm really enjoying my job right now but feel a significant pressure to consider other options as I have a duty to do what's right for my family as well as myself. I know the civil market isn't guaranteed but surely people like me, and the considerable amount of more disgruntled pilots than me, will see the 'airlines' as a much better option. Where will this leave sqn's, experience wise, in 10 years?
People have already made the argument to me 'you didn't sign up for the money did you' no I didn't, absolutely not. But I am entitled to be able to plan my future and with 10 years left until 38 point reductions this big are difficult to manage.
Anyway I'm getting ahead of myself. I shall wait a while and see where things sit approaching 1st April 15 and make my decision then, as I expect a lot of my colleagues will also!!
I read on Friday that there's going to be a New Employment Model (NEM) consultation in similar manner to that which was done for the Future Reserves (FR) 2020 consultation. It appears that they will use KPMG to do this work for the MOD.
What struck me is that they have introduced a pension before they have agreed the terms of NEM. So there is a chance that the retirement age remains at 55 but the pension starts at 60. Our chance is to get the word out on what we want in the consultation which will start in the late Summer of 2013.
LJ
What struck me is that they have introduced a pension before they have agreed the terms of NEM. So there is a chance that the retirement age remains at 55 but the pension starts at 60. Our chance is to get the word out on what we want in the consultation which will start in the late Summer of 2013.
LJ
Leon,
I believe the pension and NEM are entirely separate; the NEM was never necessarily intended to consider a change in pension terms.
Someone in the crewroom recently seemed sure that the NEM won't provide any shockers and will provide grandfather's rights for most things. The pension doesn't because it's forced upon us by an act of parliament rather than a change in terms of employment decided by our paymasters. His impression was that while parliament can force us to accept a new pension, the NEM won't be able to retrospectively adjust your TOS.
So if you're in to 55 when it enters, you'll still be in to 55... it's the gap to 60/SPA and what happens with the poor guys who're about to hit 38/16 points and consider longer service if a promotion is now only tied to (say) service to 44.
I couldn't see ANYONE accepting promotion or PAS if they didn't include guaranteed service to 55 or beyond. Being out at 38 is one thing, PVRing at 34 is another, but being out on your ear at 44 without the pension benefits is fairly shocking.
I believe the pension and NEM are entirely separate; the NEM was never necessarily intended to consider a change in pension terms.
Someone in the crewroom recently seemed sure that the NEM won't provide any shockers and will provide grandfather's rights for most things. The pension doesn't because it's forced upon us by an act of parliament rather than a change in terms of employment decided by our paymasters. His impression was that while parliament can force us to accept a new pension, the NEM won't be able to retrospectively adjust your TOS.
So if you're in to 55 when it enters, you'll still be in to 55... it's the gap to 60/SPA and what happens with the poor guys who're about to hit 38/16 points and consider longer service if a promotion is now only tied to (say) service to 44.
I couldn't see ANYONE accepting promotion or PAS if they didn't include guaranteed service to 55 or beyond. Being out at 38 is one thing, PVRing at 34 is another, but being out on your ear at 44 without the pension benefits is fairly shocking.
TEL,
I get the impression that they looked at the pension and realised how much money they're "wasting" by paying guys like you and me £10-13k per annum from age 38 until we cark it.
With the immediate pension gone, for guys in your shoes, there's now 2 sensible points to leave from what I can see. When you have enough hours to do an easy switch to a civil job, or at 55/60 after a full career.
The impact of losing the age 32-33 pension trap people will be interesting. With most of a tour to run until my 38 point, I only stand to lose about £500 per annum. Anyone younger than me by even just 1 or 2 years starts to lose out considerably, and anyone who joined post-2005 is stuffed. Why would you stay longer?
I get the impression that they looked at the pension and realised how much money they're "wasting" by paying guys like you and me £10-13k per annum from age 38 until we cark it.
With the immediate pension gone, for guys in your shoes, there's now 2 sensible points to leave from what I can see. When you have enough hours to do an easy switch to a civil job, or at 55/60 after a full career.
The impact of losing the age 32-33 pension trap people will be interesting. With most of a tour to run until my 38 point, I only stand to lose about £500 per annum. Anyone younger than me by even just 1 or 2 years starts to lose out considerably, and anyone who joined post-2005 is stuffed. Why would you stay longer?
So if you're in to 55 when it enters, you'll still be in to 55... it's the gap to 60/SPA and what happens with the poor guys who're about to hit 38/16 points and consider longer service if a promotion is now only tied to (say) service to 44.
Promotion to sqn ldr will equal LOS 30 (end of Tier 2); promotion to wg cdr (Tier 3) will see you to age 60. The working assumption is that PAS will also see an offer to age 60.
Aircrew officers will be exempt from the 12 year 'up-or-out' point as completion of first OCU will trigger an offer of service to the 20 year (EDP) point.
I have seen nothing on transitional arrangements beyond the rather worrying 'single-service manning control opportunities' phrase.
As accommodation and housing charges increase as you move through the Tiers it will be interesting to see how the new pay bands work.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Frozen South
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re-posted from another thread..
Don't know if this helps, but for a Flt Lt on AFPS75 leaving at 38 and living until 85...
If he leaves 1 year post being forced onto AFPS15 - total loss = £23 308
2 years, total loss= £46 567
3 years, total loss= £70 063
etc etc...
Don't know if this helps, but for a Flt Lt on AFPS75 leaving at 38 and living until 85...
If he leaves 1 year post being forced onto AFPS15 - total loss = £23 308
2 years, total loss= £46 567
3 years, total loss= £70 063
etc etc...
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO,
Interesting.
Could be all irrelevent - if Comrade Balls is to be believed. Over the weekend, he announced that Labour's planned cap on Annually Managed Expenditure (£352 billions spent on running Whitehall, benefits, EU contributions, debt interest) would include pension spending (if Labour got elected). Two things; he'll either now spend the week removing his foot from his mouth and trying to make everyone think he isn't really the complete and utter liability that he tries so hard to make everyone think he is - or the cat is out of the bag.
What price now the triple lock? Either way, I really fear for AFPS and all public sector pensions.
VR,
If this fillet of personnel is so tightly defined, what would help it.. more money? Probably not. That sounds daft, but what des this niche want and need? Long term stability and not having to worry about being caught between the career devil and the deep blue sea. So, instead of going down the route of chucking money at something, why not be creative; why not offer a year to two's gardening leave at the end of the engagement period? It would allow a second career to be started and new coy pension benefits to start to be accrued in lieu of AFPS decimation and it might act like a laxative in the training pipeline.
Just thinking aloud; still haven't had that first coffee.
Interesting.
Could be all irrelevent - if Comrade Balls is to be believed. Over the weekend, he announced that Labour's planned cap on Annually Managed Expenditure (£352 billions spent on running Whitehall, benefits, EU contributions, debt interest) would include pension spending (if Labour got elected). Two things; he'll either now spend the week removing his foot from his mouth and trying to make everyone think he isn't really the complete and utter liability that he tries so hard to make everyone think he is - or the cat is out of the bag.
What price now the triple lock? Either way, I really fear for AFPS and all public sector pensions.
VR,
If this fillet of personnel is so tightly defined, what would help it.. more money? Probably not. That sounds daft, but what des this niche want and need? Long term stability and not having to worry about being caught between the career devil and the deep blue sea. So, instead of going down the route of chucking money at something, why not be creative; why not offer a year to two's gardening leave at the end of the engagement period? It would allow a second career to be started and new coy pension benefits to start to be accrued in lieu of AFPS decimation and it might act like a laxative in the training pipeline.
Just thinking aloud; still haven't had that first coffee.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you?
I had a good bash on the pension calculator today, essentially to see what I'd get at 16/38 vs 44 or PVRing any year in between. There is a bulge of pilots in my peer group and the figures surprised me.
For context, I'm a 35.5 year old Sqn Ldr pilot, on AFPS 75. So my IPP is in 2.5 years, the last 8 months of which and anything thereafter will be on the enforced new pension. I am pretty sure the RAF will have little to offer me beyond 44 so I had all but ruled out staying past then. My work/life balance is levelling off!
-If I leave at 38 I get a reasonable and tempting wedge.
-If I PVR at 39 I lose £1300pa on my immediate pension and £4000 off my lump sum although my max commutation almost mitigates this but I'd also lose a year of flying pay
-Until I'm 42 this remains the case where IP and lump sums are lower than at 16/38 but the max commutation is increasing slightly.
-At 42, I've done 4 years on the new pension which when added to my 16 means the 20 year benefits of the new pension kick-in and everything jumps back above my 16/38 figures. I'm still losing 12 months of flying pay.
-By 43 I'd soak up the last year to get the best deal with my preserved 44 option. But I'd be 44.
My point? If there is a remote chance of dusting off my still valid ATPL (ok, CPL/IR with ATPL credits) in 2.5 years, why would I chose to stay and work for four more years where at any point I want to leave I lose out in addition to the loss of flying pay?
Assuming the pension calculator is at least in the right ball park, I'm off! And I suspect, many of my experienced peers too.
Ray
For context, I'm a 35.5 year old Sqn Ldr pilot, on AFPS 75. So my IPP is in 2.5 years, the last 8 months of which and anything thereafter will be on the enforced new pension. I am pretty sure the RAF will have little to offer me beyond 44 so I had all but ruled out staying past then. My work/life balance is levelling off!
-If I leave at 38 I get a reasonable and tempting wedge.
-If I PVR at 39 I lose £1300pa on my immediate pension and £4000 off my lump sum although my max commutation almost mitigates this but I'd also lose a year of flying pay
-Until I'm 42 this remains the case where IP and lump sums are lower than at 16/38 but the max commutation is increasing slightly.
-At 42, I've done 4 years on the new pension which when added to my 16 means the 20 year benefits of the new pension kick-in and everything jumps back above my 16/38 figures. I'm still losing 12 months of flying pay.
-By 43 I'd soak up the last year to get the best deal with my preserved 44 option. But I'd be 44.
My point? If there is a remote chance of dusting off my still valid ATPL (ok, CPL/IR with ATPL credits) in 2.5 years, why would I chose to stay and work for four more years where at any point I want to leave I lose out in addition to the loss of flying pay?
Assuming the pension calculator is at least in the right ball park, I'm off! And I suspect, many of my experienced peers too.
Ray
Ray,
I have seen similar maths in recent days leading to similar decisions. The 'law of unintended consequences' regarding flying pay does not make it easy to retain people. Work longer and get less is clearly stupid - there was a very good reason why (pre-JPA) FP was not abated on PVR beyond the 38/16 point; to do otherwise we artificially force people at out at option points.
Anyway, if you do find yourself approaching your 38 point without a clear job ahead it is worth applying for PAS as no FP=No abatement on PVR. Could save you nearly £16k on a 1 year PVR.
Regarding PVR terms - during the AFPS15 consultation is was suggested that the abating of pension on PVR (officers only) would not be a feature of the new scheme as it fell foul of the parity argument that was part of the original AFPS05 consultation. Yet it has stayed with us for both schemes… time for a legal challenge I think...
I have seen similar maths in recent days leading to similar decisions. The 'law of unintended consequences' regarding flying pay does not make it easy to retain people. Work longer and get less is clearly stupid - there was a very good reason why (pre-JPA) FP was not abated on PVR beyond the 38/16 point; to do otherwise we artificially force people at out at option points.
Anyway, if you do find yourself approaching your 38 point without a clear job ahead it is worth applying for PAS as no FP=No abatement on PVR. Could save you nearly £16k on a 1 year PVR.
Regarding PVR terms - during the AFPS15 consultation is was suggested that the abating of pension on PVR (officers only) would not be a feature of the new scheme as it fell foul of the parity argument that was part of the original AFPS05 consultation. Yet it has stayed with us for both schemes… time for a legal challenge I think...
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: The guest house
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know the implications for AFPS 05, but for AFPS 75...
I am in a similar position to Ray, due to hit IPP/exit date on AFPS 75 soon after implementation of AFPS 15. Using the new pensions calculator, I am roughly £2k per year worse off (not including loss of flying pay) if I leave at IPP/exit date if it is considered to be leaving by PVR due to the new 20/40 return of service that is part of the new pension, rather than leaving at completion of service.
I am out to pasture on a last tour of duty with 2 years to run, but the implications are that there is the potential for this to be now 6 years to go if wanted/extended by AFPS 15 return of service. I am sure there are many others in this situation so I await with baited breath the promised DIN with full details of FAFPS implementation and the resultant changes to my, and many other's, terms of service.
This change of return of service has many implications which have not yet been fully briefed or understood by people (including the powers that be and Manning).
I am in a similar position to Ray, due to hit IPP/exit date on AFPS 75 soon after implementation of AFPS 15. Using the new pensions calculator, I am roughly £2k per year worse off (not including loss of flying pay) if I leave at IPP/exit date if it is considered to be leaving by PVR due to the new 20/40 return of service that is part of the new pension, rather than leaving at completion of service.
I am out to pasture on a last tour of duty with 2 years to run, but the implications are that there is the potential for this to be now 6 years to go if wanted/extended by AFPS 15 return of service. I am sure there are many others in this situation so I await with baited breath the promised DIN with full details of FAFPS implementation and the resultant changes to my, and many other's, terms of service.
This change of return of service has many implications which have not yet been fully briefed or understood by people (including the powers that be and Manning).
Last edited by Guest_22; 12th Jun 2013 at 08:11.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guest 22
" if I leave at IPP/exit date if it is considered to be leaving by PVR due to the new 20/40 return of service that is part of the new pension, rather than leaving at completion of service."
How come? I understand that if you (we) are on AFPS 75, the 16/38 point is a preserved right. Hence I told the calculator so. If you stay on but leave before 44 point, also preserved under grandfather rights, then it would be a PVR but as I described earlier at least the 20 year FAFPS benefits kick in at 42?
Don't you love the fact that we don't know and resort to a rumour network?
Ray
" if I leave at IPP/exit date if it is considered to be leaving by PVR due to the new 20/40 return of service that is part of the new pension, rather than leaving at completion of service."
How come? I understand that if you (we) are on AFPS 75, the 16/38 point is a preserved right. Hence I told the calculator so. If you stay on but leave before 44 point, also preserved under grandfather rights, then it would be a PVR but as I described earlier at least the 20 year FAFPS benefits kick in at 42?
Don't you love the fact that we don't know and resort to a rumour network?
Ray
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: The guest house
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accrued rights
Ray (and everyone)
From the DIN, your accrued pension is frozen at AFPS15 introduction and not your exit date.
Compare this change to that when AFPS05 was introduced. You had to accept the new return of service that came with the new pension if you took the offer to transfer. There is no offer to transfer this time, it's compulsory! Hence exit dates have the potential to be moved...
As I said previously, I await the DIN that contains the full implementation detail so I can make a few life choices.
Guest
From the DIN, your accrued pension is frozen at AFPS15 introduction and not your exit date.
Compare this change to that when AFPS05 was introduced. You had to accept the new return of service that came with the new pension if you took the offer to transfer. There is no offer to transfer this time, it's compulsory! Hence exit dates have the potential to be moved...
As I said previously, I await the DIN that contains the full implementation detail so I can make a few life choices.
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, if you do find yourself approaching your 38 point without a clear job ahead it is worth applying for PAS as no FP=No abatement on PVR. Could save you nearly £16k on a 1 year PVR.
Last edited by FFP; 12th Jun 2013 at 21:12.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO,
You make some really good points – let me add to them if I might, from a different perspective; I agree completely that there is a tranche of officers which is in a pickle, but potentially, everyone is going to be in a pickle with their pension. The Lifetime Allowance changing again, to your detriment. The Lifetime Allowance is a limit on the value of benefits from your pension schemes – whether lump sums or pension income – that can be paid out without triggering an extra tax charge.
The Lifetime Allowance for most people is £1.5m in the tax year 2013-14. It applies to all the pensions you have, excluding your State Pension. In 2014-15 the Lifetime Allowance will reduce to £1.25 million. Will it affect you? Multiply your annual pension by 20, add your lump sum - what’s the number? Is it going to be over £1,250,000 (and that’s not even taking into account any post military civvy accrued benefits which may well bedefined contribution), are you considering individual protection from the Lifetime Allowance charge?
https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...lowance-charge
How does the new Lifetime Allowance of £1.25m affect you? Look at it this way. As it currently stands (at £1.5m) if you are on track for a final salary pension (with no separate lump sum) of more than £75,000 a year, or, a salary-related pension over £56,250 plus the maximum tax-free cash lump sum, then it will - you will incur a tax charge of 55% on anything that you benefit from (or crystalise). Note that benefits paid out to your survivors if you die also use up Lifetime Allowance.
I have just had a chat with the man at HMRC who is overseeing this latest consultation and asked him how it would affect members of a pension scheme where accrual is (nominally at least?!) non contributory. He was very nice and when he started suggested renegotiating an employment contract, even he paused mid sentence because he realised that renegotiation can’t happen with military personnel. This further latest reduction in Pension Lifetime Allowance must have an effect on anyone who aspires to the loftiest of perches and if you are one of those, its important that you get your head around this.
It makes saving a few thousand pounds here or there, with the very greatest of respect to those who are (justifiably) concerned, worried and annoyed by it, pale into insignificance – and is especially vital to those officers and airmen who are a) successful and b) joining companies after a successful military career and who DO have the opportunity to negotiate a bespoke contract. In other words, should your head really be turned by a (superficially at least) great group pension scheme which might turn out to be a poisoned chalice? It is also vital for those who become consultants – are you adding to a personal pension which is only going to present you with a tax charge of 55% when you wish to crystalise it?
Secondly, the pensions minister (Steve Webb) is starting to sound like a Discovery that has been trying to get out of the mud for ages and is only now starting to gain traction. About what? Defined Ambition pensions. Intended to reduce the difference between Defined Contribution and Benefit schemes and more ‘fairly’ (chortle) blur the boundaries of actuarial/investment/future etc risk between employers and employees, who is to say that this isn’t going to be the next big thing for AFPS?
Steve Webb: DB will be 'dead' without defined ambition | News | Money Marketing
AFPS, even in ’15 format, IS still ultimately unaffordable. If you’re looking at staying in for the long haul, stay light on your feet, identify your unique financial end game, look at the macro perspective and don’t become fixated about any one particular issue that is on your radar now – if the loadie is telling you that the crew microwave isn’t working, make sure you don’t overlook the wing falling off.
Sorry for being glum; it really depresses and annoys me – no wonder there isn’t a military trade union. Someone please ply me with alcohol at Waddington tomorrow night.
You make some really good points – let me add to them if I might, from a different perspective; I agree completely that there is a tranche of officers which is in a pickle, but potentially, everyone is going to be in a pickle with their pension. The Lifetime Allowance changing again, to your detriment. The Lifetime Allowance is a limit on the value of benefits from your pension schemes – whether lump sums or pension income – that can be paid out without triggering an extra tax charge.
The Lifetime Allowance for most people is £1.5m in the tax year 2013-14. It applies to all the pensions you have, excluding your State Pension. In 2014-15 the Lifetime Allowance will reduce to £1.25 million. Will it affect you? Multiply your annual pension by 20, add your lump sum - what’s the number? Is it going to be over £1,250,000 (and that’s not even taking into account any post military civvy accrued benefits which may well bedefined contribution), are you considering individual protection from the Lifetime Allowance charge?
https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...lowance-charge
How does the new Lifetime Allowance of £1.25m affect you? Look at it this way. As it currently stands (at £1.5m) if you are on track for a final salary pension (with no separate lump sum) of more than £75,000 a year, or, a salary-related pension over £56,250 plus the maximum tax-free cash lump sum, then it will - you will incur a tax charge of 55% on anything that you benefit from (or crystalise). Note that benefits paid out to your survivors if you die also use up Lifetime Allowance.
I have just had a chat with the man at HMRC who is overseeing this latest consultation and asked him how it would affect members of a pension scheme where accrual is (nominally at least?!) non contributory. He was very nice and when he started suggested renegotiating an employment contract, even he paused mid sentence because he realised that renegotiation can’t happen with military personnel. This further latest reduction in Pension Lifetime Allowance must have an effect on anyone who aspires to the loftiest of perches and if you are one of those, its important that you get your head around this.
It makes saving a few thousand pounds here or there, with the very greatest of respect to those who are (justifiably) concerned, worried and annoyed by it, pale into insignificance – and is especially vital to those officers and airmen who are a) successful and b) joining companies after a successful military career and who DO have the opportunity to negotiate a bespoke contract. In other words, should your head really be turned by a (superficially at least) great group pension scheme which might turn out to be a poisoned chalice? It is also vital for those who become consultants – are you adding to a personal pension which is only going to present you with a tax charge of 55% when you wish to crystalise it?
Secondly, the pensions minister (Steve Webb) is starting to sound like a Discovery that has been trying to get out of the mud for ages and is only now starting to gain traction. About what? Defined Ambition pensions. Intended to reduce the difference between Defined Contribution and Benefit schemes and more ‘fairly’ (chortle) blur the boundaries of actuarial/investment/future etc risk between employers and employees, who is to say that this isn’t going to be the next big thing for AFPS?
Steve Webb: DB will be 'dead' without defined ambition | News | Money Marketing
AFPS, even in ’15 format, IS still ultimately unaffordable. If you’re looking at staying in for the long haul, stay light on your feet, identify your unique financial end game, look at the macro perspective and don’t become fixated about any one particular issue that is on your radar now – if the loadie is telling you that the crew microwave isn’t working, make sure you don’t overlook the wing falling off.
Sorry for being glum; it really depresses and annoys me – no wonder there isn’t a military trade union. Someone please ply me with alcohol at Waddington tomorrow night.
Last edited by Al R; 13th Jun 2013 at 09:28. Reason: (to clarify pension amounts affected by lifetime allowance in current tax year)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not forget either, the fund continues to grow iaw the index of the day. Lots of NHS consultants are leaving the NHS pension scheme and starting up one or two rather esoteric (completely lawful) types of pension whereby another family member can also be party to the same pension as the (high earning) spouse but can receive a disproportionate amount of the subsequent investment growth - ideal to bolster a partner's earnings and to lower one's tax bill. Is it contrary to 'the spirit' of legislation, that latest benchmark?
Its getting to the point where you almost want to say to a client to get divorced..
"Darling, we need to talk"
"Yes darling?"
"Darling, I want a divorce"
"
But why?"
" Its.. its.. its my Lifetime Allowance, I need you to take me for a 50% Pension Sharing Order".
Its getting to the point where you almost want to say to a client to get divorced..
"Darling, we need to talk"
"Yes darling?"
"Darling, I want a divorce"
"
But why?""
Its.. its.. its my Lifetime Allowance, I need you to take me for a 50% Pension Sharing Order".
JM,
Rumour network, no sources revealed...
As said previously, the NEM is not set in stone but yes, the current proposal is wg cdr = offer to age 60. I have still seen nothing on transitional arrangements and given that the presentations at stn level start this summer it all looks a little last minute dot com.
Rumour network, no sources revealed...
As said previously, the NEM is not set in stone but yes, the current proposal is wg cdr = offer to age 60. I have still seen nothing on transitional arrangements and given that the presentations at stn level start this summer it all looks a little last minute dot com.