Les Cameron

311 posts

Les Cameron

Les Cameron

@LesCameron7

Dunning, Scotland Katılım Mayıs 2018
88 Takip Edilen86 Takipçiler
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@pensionstully @David_J_Robbins I disagree with them too. Contractual cancellation rights can differ to FCA ones and the hanbook says it is the variatuon of a contract to make income withdrawals that is cancellable. And if there's no relevant pension it's an unauthorised payment so no LSA used.
English
0
0
0
108
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
HMRC: "the payment of a tax-free lump sum cannot be undone."
David Robbins tweet media
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins

Interesting article by @Frances_Ivens & @joshkirbywrites quoting @pensionstully (link in reply): pension providers disagree re: whether cooling off periods apply to tax-free lump sums; FCA "approached for comment". 1. If cooling off periods do apply, some savers could take tax-free cash before every Budget, just in case. 2. There would also be a difference between contract-based and trust based schemes. 3. If they don't, will the clarification be forwards-looking only? Or will the cash that savers have repaid be returned to them? The "Labour made me do it" headline is a bit silly - none of the stories about tax-free cash being under threat were briefed by the Government and the media knows that this stuff sells papers/generates clicks. But cuts to tax-free cash have not been ruled out and some on the Labour side have championed them. So anyone with a big DC pot over 55 was taking a bet on what would be announced in the Budget when they did/did not withdraw their £. And that will be the case at future fiscal events, too.

English
4
2
14
6.6K
Rory Percival
Rory Percival@rorypercival·
I mean, it looks like the Telegraph has actually written that this couple (67 and 77) have had to sell their boat and gone back to work full time on account of the tax on 60 buy-to-let properties. A supposedly serious newspaper is happy to print this self-evident nonsense?
English
1
1
12
725
Stu Holbrook
Stu Holbrook@lutzebroom·
@PensionsMonkey Do we know what has happened to the lump sum death benefit allowance in the new world? We’ve only just got our heads around that and now it’s gone? I really wish they’d stop mucking about with pensions
English
1
0
1
356
Tom McPhail
Tom McPhail@PensionsMonkey·
As I understand the new pension IHT rules and the double taxation mean tax rates of either 64% or 52%
English
10
3
10
5.2K
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@David_J_Robbins I've never thought of that being related to the operation of individual pension tax relief. I think the treatment of employer conts is a separate thing!
English
0
0
0
90
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
It 's needed if HMG wanted the way employees are taxed in respect of employer contributions to be consistent with flat rate relief on individual contributions. As you allude to, if you don't do that, higher rate taxpayers can keep 40% relief via salary sacrifice. And, more importantly, the change would not affect ~75% of the "cost of income tax relief" that relates to not taxing individuals upfront on contributions already paid by employers.
English
1
0
1
64
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
Regulations laid before the Commons yesterday (half way through the tax year). If abolishing the Lifetime Allowance is this difficult, restoring it would be worse.
David Robbins tweet media
English
3
0
5
558
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@David_J_Robbins The formula for ssptfc does not work where there is enhanced or primary protection amongst other things. Unless the polixy intent has changed and no one is aware.
English
0
0
1
64
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
@LesCameron7 Haven't looked at them yet and am far from an LTA specialist anyway. But interested to know what you think is wrong.
English
1
0
0
42
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
Do you mean the example in the SPP paper (separate post)? If so, it's (confessedly) simplified but I think it roughly works. To apply flat rate to DB, you'd need a way of assigning employer contributions to individuals and AA methodology is one way to do that (not a very satisfactory way, but none are). It's possible that they'd give flat rate relief on employee contribution and deduct employee contributions value from AA-style input value to derive the value of employer-financed accrual, then tax that. Do you think I'm missing something?
English
3
0
0
46
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@David_J_Robbins Contd.. to restrict the tax relief for a net pay contribution you just need to do a payroll adjustment. By increasing their PAYE due. The cobt got 40% so you just need to add 15% back.
English
0
0
0
53
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@David_J_Robbins I'm not sure why restricting individual tax relief requires a valuation of a deemed employer contribution unless you are using annual allowance as the mechanism to do so.
English
0
0
0
51
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@dontdelay What about tax free to dependants and a tax charge if non dependants. Maybe set at 25% up front on payment/designation then marginal rate on withdrawals.
English
0
0
0
23
David Hearne, CFP™
David Hearne, CFP™@dontdelay·
We already have a pension death tax (for most people, because most people live beyond 75) it’s just anomalous that it’s tax free on death before 75, so that would be an easy one to equalise As would charging NI on employer pension contributions, which are often employee pension contributions that have been salary sacrificed. That’s another anomaly that largely depends on whether your employer offers the facility or not. Could easily be equalised too So there’s two policies, that not only raise tax, but also simplify pensions, and hopefully therefore public engagement
Tom McPhail@PensionsMonkey

Removing higher rate income tax relief would always have been ambitious (and would’ve broken an election pledge). A new pension death tax and a cut in employer NICs relief still look the most likely pension tax raids thetimes.com/article/4cdf91…

English
6
0
6
2.9K
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@DanAtkinsonUK @BenjaminFabi Aye, about face - law doesn't reflect what we were told the position was going to be. No TTFAC advantage for pre 06 pensions.
English
0
0
1
47
Dan Atkinson
Dan Atkinson@DanAtkinsonUK·
@BenjaminFabi That’s the one (and will be fixed)👍🏻 I’ve not read up hugely on the precommencement pensions as we’ve not had clients impacted. @LesCameron7 might have a view?
English
1
0
0
51
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
@LesCameron7 Are you talking about this? I thought the quoted answer was ambiguous (perhaps deliberately so) as to whether the issue being decided was whether or how. But agree it has been toned down for some time, compared to the immediate post-Budget attempt to make this a dividing line.
David Robbins tweet media
English
1
0
0
28
David Robbins
David Robbins@David_J_Robbins·
Accepting that a Bill committee is a place to debate details rather than principles, it's still mildly interesting that the shadow minister did not say anything about Labour planning to reinstate the Lifetime Allowance and substitute an NHS-only solution.
David Robbins tweet media
English
1
1
2
338
Alex Riley
Alex Riley@AlexandreRiley·
New enquiry with payrise from 98k to £130k. Seems nice. But not only do they lose the personal allowance (which we all know about) but they also lose 15hrs (2024) and 30hrs (2025) free child care for their 2 year old, which is also removed at £100k 🤔
English
4
0
8
1.5K
Les Cameron
Les Cameron@LesCameron7·
@Capt_aint @RayVay HMRC confirmed someone who used 100% of LTA when LTA was £1m taking £250k cash can now get £18,275. ss4 of the relevant paragraph overrides ss2 (which is the one that says 100% get £0
English
2
0
1
52
RealityBytes
RealityBytes@Capt_aint·
@LesCameron7 @RayVay Les, that's a very interesting article but are you certain that some one who has used 100% of LTA can use a transitional tax free amount certificate to try and secure more PCLS (assuming they received less than £268,275). Their lump sum allowance is 0, irrespective of certificate
English
2
0
0
32