|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 9, 2019 19:43:14 GMT
They get massive pensions funded by the tax payer and tax relief at their highest rate funded by the tax payer. They are just whining because it's been capped. Perhaps they need you to be advising them. On R4 today there were some surgeons/consultants talking about this and they didn't seem to be idiots, or whining either. They're reducing their hours or taking early retirement because it's financially beneficial, or at least that's what they believe (hence maybe the need for advice). I've also been in a position of making no more money by working extra hours. It's not relevant to this thread as it was related to capped benefits paid by my employer, not tax. The end result was the same though, I worked fewer hours <shrug> It's very important to be absolutely clear exactly what people are saying. It being financially beneficial for them to take early retirement isn't the same as making no more money by working extra hours or not being able to afford to work extra hours. as well as limiting how much you can put into pensions the govt have effectively capped how much you can take out. So if you're 60 and you have a massive, massive NHS pension courtesy of the tax payer, all fully guaranteed and index linked,and you are bumping up against the maximum, you may well feel you might as well retire now, take the NHS pension and do a bit of consultancy work, because you aren't going to get a bigger pension by working on. That's not at all the same as saying you can't afford to work on or you will be disadvantaged by it. It's a problem peculiar to Doctors because of the massive amounts stuck into their pensions by the taxpayer. |
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jul 9, 2019 19:53:47 GMT
It's very important to be absolutely clear exactly what people are saying. It being financially beneficial for them to take early retirement isn't the same as making no more money by working extra hours or not being able to afford to work extra hours. I realise that but they had issues which, independently, covered all those points. One said effectively he was paying for the privilege of working extra hours, which sounds like a whine, but when all he's doing is working fewer hours as a result... I'm inclined to trust his POV. But, I'm not debating the issue as I'm sure you know more than me, so it'd be a pointless argument by proxy on my side. |
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 9, 2019 20:08:45 GMT
He's wrong.
But let's be clear who this really affects.
You need to be on £200k pa plus, have a pension fund of £1million plus and have your employer paying in more than £10k pa and they have paid in more than £40k pa for the last 3 years.
I'm not weeping.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 9, 2019 22:27:40 GMT
Works like a company car. effectively if the company pays too much into your pension it's treated like a benefit in kind and generates a tax bill. The issue comes because you can normally pay 40kpa into a pension but if you earn over £150k the allowance reduces. So if you earn £150k basic and do £50k overtime your allowance comes down to £10k. So if the NHS have paid £20k into the pension you've overfunded by £10k and get a £4k tax bill. You either don't take the benefit or get the scheme to pay the tax internally or pay the tax bill and have a massive massive guaranteed inflation linked pension paid for by the tax payer. My heart is hardly bleeding. JV's an accountant surely, she must know about this sh*t. I am not and have never been a tax accountant so not sure where you got that from. I am just going off the article which suggests there are tax bills for those who are at or near the threshold. I am going to assume said doctors know their financial situation and if they say the way the charges are structured means they cannot afford to do extra shifts then I will have to accept that pending evidence to the contrary. You seem to be calculating what you think the amounts are but I am not sure what your source of information is: “Consultants have begun refusing to work beyond their planned hours after receiving unexpected tax bills, following new pension rules in 2016. It says a major problem for doctors is that all their income is taken into account when calculating their annual allowance, including work that is non-pensionable. In addition, the annual allowance is based not just on their annual income, but also on the growth in their pension pot. Because of the way the allowance is calculated many consultants will face a significant tax bill even if their earnings are only just above £110,000 a year.“ Now it could be they have been quoted incorrectly and instead of saying “could not afford it” they meant “the reduction in financial incentives make it no longer worth it”. But in either case I see no issue with them changing their work to avoid extra costs / as they cannot afford it / because it is no longer worth it. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 9, 2019 22:29:11 GMT
Depends on the pay scale for the extra shifts and the tax bill. It says the problem is it takes their entire income into account. So if they say they can’t afford it, they can’t afford it. It takes their entire income into account when calculating the pension allowance. all they have to do is opt out of the pension and no tax bill or elect for the scheme to pay the tax bill for them. They get massive pensions funded by the tax payer and tax relief at their highest rate funded by the tax payer. They are just whining because it's been capped. How is opting out of the pension an option when one presumes they will need a pension of some sort and there is no guarantee the situation will be better in a private pension. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 9, 2019 22:31:56 GMT
They get massive pensions funded by the tax payer and tax relief at their highest rate funded by the tax payer. They are just whining because it's been capped. Perhaps they need you to be advising them. On R4 today there were some surgeons/consultants talking about this and they didn't seem to be idiots, or whining either. They're reducing their hours or taking early retirement because it's financially beneficial, or at least that's what they believe (hence maybe the need for advice). I've also been in a position of making no more money by working extra hours. It's not relevant to this thread as it was related to capped benefits paid by my employer, not tax. The end result was the same though, I worked fewer hours <shrug> Well this is the thing. Ming is putting himself forward as an expert on their particular pension scheme, yet even the article lists the rules as far more complex than he is claiming them to be. It could be a case that all senior medical personnel are actually idiots and are incorrect when they think it’s not financially beneficial / they cannot afford to work the extra shifts. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 9, 2019 22:33:41 GMT
He's wrong. But let's be clear who this really affects. You need to be on £200k pa plus, have a pension fund of £1million plus and have your employer paying in more than £10k pa and they have paid in more than £40k pa for the last 3 years. I'm not weeping. Out of interest how do you know he’s wrong about his personal financial situation? |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 10, 2019 4:35:33 GMT
It could also be the case that the surgeons are doing what comes naturally to fat, greedy housecats the world over: raping the system for all it's worth while pretending to be hard done-by. Just like pretty much every other bugger at the NHS trough.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 10, 2019 6:05:34 GMT
Anyone catch the item on R4 this morning about the NHS charging overseas visitors?
Utterly disgraceful. There was no attempt at balance, just a series of sob-stories from piss-takers who have been pulled up for trying to fiddle the system. Should have got health insurance, shouldn't you? What's more, they shouldn't be allowed to clear customs without it.
Oh, and who was the poitial heavyweight whose endorsement they sought? Abbo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 10, 2019 6:07:00 GMT
Bloody hell the queues at customs if Bearman has his way...
|
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 10, 2019 6:21:47 GMT
Perhaps they need you to be advising them. On R4 today there were some surgeons/consultants talking about this and they didn't seem to be idiots, or whining either. They're reducing their hours or taking early retirement because it's financially beneficial, or at least that's what they believe (hence maybe the need for advice). I've also been in a position of making no more money by working extra hours. It's not relevant to this thread as it was related to capped benefits paid by my employer, not tax. The end result was the same though, I worked fewer hours <shrug> Well this is the thing. Ming is putting himself forward as an expert on their particular pension scheme, yet even the article lists the rules as far more complex than he is claiming them to be. It could be a case that all senior medical personnel are actually idiots and are incorrect when they think it’s not financially beneficial / they cannot afford to work the extra shifts. it's not their particular pension scheme that is causing the problem, it's the inland revenue rules. it's universal to all pension schemes. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 10, 2019 6:52:06 GMT
Well this is the thing. Ming is putting himself forward as an expert on their particular pension scheme, yet even the article lists the rules as far more complex than he is claiming them to be. It could be a case that all senior medical personnel are actually idiots and are incorrect when they think it’s not financially beneficial / they cannot afford to work the extra shifts. it's not their particular pension scheme that is causing the problem, it's the inland revenue rules. it's universal to all pension schemes. Well then your suggestion they leave the scheme (and one presumes pays into a different one) leaves them with the same issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 10, 2019 7:00:06 GMT
I didn't say anything about paying into a different scheme. if you think the tax bill is going to outweigh the benefit leave, but it can only outweigh the benefit if you have exceeded the lifetime allowance already: www.gov.uk/tax-on-your-private-pension/lifetime-allowanceIf you've already exceeded the lifetime allowance, (which for the purposes of the NHS pension equates to a guaranteed £50kpa plus guaranteed index linked for life) then the benefits of staying in the scheme are questionable. In which case leave and don't pay the tax. Stick the money in bitcoins. i just don't think that someone with pension benefits over £1m is top of the pile for tax breaks so they can put more in. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 10, 2019 7:21:31 GMT
It just appears you are giving information not in the article with regards who incurs a tax bill.
But either way leaving the pension is one option - not doing the extra shifts is another and it would appear the more sensible one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 10, 2019 7:24:56 GMT
it's all there: How does the system work? The government gives tax relief on contributions to pension schemes, and allows up to 25% of the benefits to be taken tax-free at retirement.
Since 2006, there have been limits on the amount that can be contributed each year and the total benefit that can be built up over a career.
If the growth in a doctor's pension scheme exceeds this annual allowance they face a charge, or a reduction in their pension benefits.
The limit on the annual allowance has come down from £255,000 a year in 2010-11, to £40,000 a year for those earning broadly less than £110,000 in 2018-19.
In addition, a tapered annual allowance was introduced in 2016 for higher earners. This means that the annual allowance is reduced by £1 for every £2 earned, says the British Medical Association (BMA).
It says a major problem for doctors is that all their income is taken into account when calculating their annual allowance, including work that is non-pensionable. In addition, the annual allowance is based not just on their annual income, but also on the growth in their pension pot.
Because of the way the allowance is calculated many consultants will face a significant tax bill even if their earnings are only just above £110,000 a year.
There is also a lifetime allowance to consider. Doctors who accumulate just over £1 million in pension funds become liable to pay tax on their pension.
NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts, said senior staff were now saying they could not afford to work at weekends to bring waiting lists down.
A senior anaesthetist at one hospital worked 27 Saturdays last year to reduce waiting times but now cannot afford to, the organisation said.
Another hospital has seen numbers waiting for routine surgery increase by 50% since April, with staffing issues due to the pensions problem partly to blame.www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48903913 |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 10, 2019 8:20:46 GMT
it's all there: How does the system work? The government gives tax relief on contributions to pension schemes, and allows up to 25% of the benefits to be taken tax-free at retirement.
Since 2006, there have been limits on the amount that can be contributed each year and the total benefit that can be built up over a career.
If the growth in a doctor's pension scheme exceeds this annual allowance they face a charge, or a reduction in their pension benefits.
The limit on the annual allowance has come down from £255,000 a year in 2010-11, to £40,000 a year for those earning broadly less than £110,000 in 2018-19.
In addition, a tapered annual allowance was introduced in 2016 for higher earners. This means that the annual allowance is reduced by £1 for every £2 earned, says the British Medical Association (BMA).
It says a major problem for doctors is that all their income is taken into account when calculating their annual allowance, including work that is non-pensionable. In addition, the annual allowance is based not just on their annual income, but also on the growth in their pension pot.
Because of the way the allowance is calculated many consultants will face a significant tax bill even if their earnings are only just above £110,000 a year.
There is also a lifetime allowance to consider. Doctors who accumulate just over £1 million in pension funds become liable to pay tax on their pension.
NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts, said senior staff were now saying they could not afford to work at weekends to bring waiting lists down.
A senior anaesthetist at one hospital worked 27 Saturdays last year to reduce waiting times but now cannot afford to, the organisation said.
Another hospital has seen numbers waiting for routine surgery increase by 50% since April, with staffing issues due to the pensions problem partly to blame.www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48903913Yes it doesn’t say only those with a fund 1m and more will face a tax bill. (“There is ALSO a lifetime allowance etc....”). Which suggests tax on pensions (once drawn) for those with pots in excess of 1m and tax bills for those who are over the 110k due to the way the allowance is calculated. Two separate things which you have merged into one. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2019 9:40:10 GMT
How does the taxpayer fund their pensions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 10, 2019 9:47:39 GMT
Never said only those with a fund of £1m will face a tax bill.
Those with over £1m in benefits may be better off out of the scheme because the tax bill you generate may outweigh the benefits you receive.
If you aren't over the limit then the benefits will outweigh the tax.
I thought you were an accountant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Jul 10, 2019 9:48:32 GMT
How does the taxpayer fund their pensions? Well the NHS pay the pension and who do you think funds the NHS? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2019 9:54:39 GMT
Cock-eyed way of looking at it though. I assumed one paid into a pension fund which financed the pension. The NHS is a 'free' public service and it's the public which benefits by not having to pay for it. So strictly speaking it's those who never use the NHS who pay.
|
|
