Widows and widowers - pension.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: EGNX country
Age: 68
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is pleasing to see military widows getting better treatment, but police widows have been campaigning for a similar arrangement to that offered to the armed forces, however they have been turned down due to the cost and difficulty in changing the relevant legislation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skydiver,
I'm putting the finishing touches to some FOI requests to the MoD and Government Actuary's Dept to check the validity of the alleged precise underlying costings to AFPS, and also including the scenario if the principle of retrospective awards were extended across the public sector. To say costings are difficult to establish isn't good enough. They're already there, I just a) don't believe them, and b) think they should be put into context.
In its various handouts, the Treasury (HMT) has estimated that retrospective pension awarding would cost AFPS £120 millions over 40 years. To put matters into perspective, HMT estimates that it will cost £100 - £150 millions a year to abolish the 55% charge on unused personal pensions at death. Either way, I suspect it would welcome the challenge, it's doing all it can to make the cost of public sector pensions unaffordable.
If it was down to me, I would make the case that widows/ers of service personnel were different to teachers etc anyway, especially those affected by Banner, Granby, Grapple, Corporate deaths etc.. ie; those in most need.
I'm putting the finishing touches to some FOI requests to the MoD and Government Actuary's Dept to check the validity of the alleged precise underlying costings to AFPS, and also including the scenario if the principle of retrospective awards were extended across the public sector. To say costings are difficult to establish isn't good enough. They're already there, I just a) don't believe them, and b) think they should be put into context.
In its various handouts, the Treasury (HMT) has estimated that retrospective pension awarding would cost AFPS £120 millions over 40 years. To put matters into perspective, HMT estimates that it will cost £100 - £150 millions a year to abolish the 55% charge on unused personal pensions at death. Either way, I suspect it would welcome the challenge, it's doing all it can to make the cost of public sector pensions unaffordable.
If it was down to me, I would make the case that widows/ers of service personnel were different to teachers etc anyway, especially those affected by Banner, Granby, Grapple, Corporate deaths etc.. ie; those in most need.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What an Autumn statement.
The writing on the wall for AFPS is ever more clear. If you die pre 75 and if your pension is in drawdown or has been annuitised, your pot is bequeathed free of tax. AFPS income by contrast, is either taxed or lost - if ever there was a statement of intent to undermine the principle of Defined Benefit pensions.
Options? Member contributions, later payments, lower annual incremental increase rates with CARE AFPS15?
The writing on the wall for AFPS is ever more clear. If you die pre 75 and if your pension is in drawdown or has been annuitised, your pot is bequeathed free of tax. AFPS income by contrast, is either taxed or lost - if ever there was a statement of intent to undermine the principle of Defined Benefit pensions.
Options? Member contributions, later payments, lower annual incremental increase rates with CARE AFPS15?
