Except that it means that someone just a few pounds over the cut-off point gets no extra help, while someone just below gets topped up to that point *and* gets extra help with other benefits, grants, etc. and ends up much better off!
The former. Only my private pension is taxed. I suppose the provider finds out how much state pension I get from HMRC.
It's all taxed, effectively.
The state pension is liable for tax, but of course it's less than the normal tax-free allowance. That doesn't stop them REDUCING the tax free allowance by the amount of the state pension, so the private pension is taxed 'sooner'. The private pension provider is just told your tax code, which shows a smaller tax free amount, to compensate for the state pension.
What would my overseas pension providers do with a UK tax code? They wouldn't have a clue what it meant (not that I would, either).
In article snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net>, Sam Block snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com writes
I didn't say "all"
But means testing comes at a cost and brings injustice for those just over the means test limit. Income tax is progressive and the mechanisms are already in place.
State Pension is paid without being taxed so I would say the former. Private pensions are taxed at source according to your tax code.
Yes. Via your tax code.
In article snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater snipped-for-privacy@greenbee.net writes
Do they pay your pension into a UK account? If so they will understand the UK tax system. (I am assuming you are UK resident, if not I wouldn't claim to understand how it works))
Taking off the more well of regardless of whether they are pensioners or not. Some might say taking from prudent savers and spiffing against the wall on spendthrifts and scroungers.
I knew someone who was 50p over the limit. Just a decent working class woman who had worked all her life and paid a bit into her pension fund.
Yes, private and public
Same Mr Brown enforced a pension holiday to get more corporation tax when stock markets were riding a high. When they went down suddenly the pension funds were under funded.
Aren't they obliged to now?
Government is the biggest sponsor of a private pension fund
Retirement Pension (known to many as "the state pension") is not means-tested.
It doesn't matter who your "they" represents, Retirement Pension is
*not* means tested.It is, of course, subject to income tax.
"Taxed" does not mean the same as "means tested".
If it did, it would mean that wages and salaries are means-tested (and they're not).
That's an age-old "problem" with means-tested benefits.
On balance, given what it means, I'd rather not be entitled to means-tested benefits.
Both of your pensions are taxable and taxed (unless something has gone wrong and HMRC don't know about your retirement pension).
HMRC are not allowed to recover tax deductions, however justified, from Retirement Pension. They can only deduct from other income (such as occupational pensions).
That's what happens to me too - I get RP in full (such as it is) and all the income tax is collected from my "other" pension.
It's as broad as it's long.
If your foreign private pension cannot be attached at source by HMRC, you'll have to pay your income tax annually or in instalments, direct to HMRC.
There is no "limit" in that sense.
Individuals can get means-tested benefits if they need them (need being defined by comparing actual income with scale-rate calculations). But not if they don't need them (ditto).
Limit for pension credit which is the gateway to the means tested benefits for pensioners.
One does, one doesn't.
Why should that follow. They understand how to set up an international standing order, that's all. There's no reason that they should know or care about the UK tax system.
If I wasn't UK resident, the whole question of my pensions being UK-taxed would be moot, wouldn't you say?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.