Crosswords0 min ago
Very Confused Over Pension Date Info
29 Answers
I've looked at the state pension info on the internet and I still cant work out the following.
When can a man born June 20th 1956 draw full state pension ?
When can a woman born March 6th 1956 draw full state pension ?
and....
If they are married does that effect the payments?
When can a man born June 20th 1956 draw full state pension ?
When can a woman born March 6th 1956 draw full state pension ?
and....
If they are married does that effect the payments?
Answers
Sorry jno, that's not right - it is 66 for both. You've used an out of date document. The better place to check this is here: https://
13:53 Fri 18th Jan 2013
“Does that mean current pensioners will stay on the lower rate (think its currently about £107) if so, that is hardly fair is it - the ones who will qualify for the higher rate don't have to accrue as many years NI credits either ......... I had 41 years. “
Yes it does mean that and yes it is hardly fair. It will introduce a pensions “apartheid” - the very thing the new scheme is said to avoid. There are almost 11 million pensioners at present, many of them receiving the basic State pension of £107. This is about 30% less than the new proposed flat rate of £144. Mr Cameron and IDS make great play of comparing this new sum with the current guaranteed minimum income of £142 which State pensioners who have no other income are bound to receive. (They get the remainder by way of “Pension Credits”). But many people who have made full NI contributions usually have other income (such as a private pension) which means they only receive the basic sum.
The State pension scheme is no more than a glorified benefits system where huge numbers of people receive benefits out of all proportion to the sums paid in in NI. The reform that is needed is to re-establish a realistic link between money paid in and money withdrawn. Those who have made the greatest contributions should receive the most and it should be termed a “pension“; those who have made little or no contributions should receive a bare minimum “benefit “.
Yes it does mean that and yes it is hardly fair. It will introduce a pensions “apartheid” - the very thing the new scheme is said to avoid. There are almost 11 million pensioners at present, many of them receiving the basic State pension of £107. This is about 30% less than the new proposed flat rate of £144. Mr Cameron and IDS make great play of comparing this new sum with the current guaranteed minimum income of £142 which State pensioners who have no other income are bound to receive. (They get the remainder by way of “Pension Credits”). But many people who have made full NI contributions usually have other income (such as a private pension) which means they only receive the basic sum.
The State pension scheme is no more than a glorified benefits system where huge numbers of people receive benefits out of all proportion to the sums paid in in NI. The reform that is needed is to re-establish a realistic link between money paid in and money withdrawn. Those who have made the greatest contributions should receive the most and it should be termed a “pension“; those who have made little or no contributions should receive a bare minimum “benefit “.
New Judge. Excellent post
"But many people who have made full NI contributions usually have other income" Very true if you are a single pensioner, but if you are married and your joint earnings are above the amount required to claim benefits, then you get nothing but your state pension. If you can see what I mean.
"But many people who have made full NI contributions usually have other income" Very true if you are a single pensioner, but if you are married and your joint earnings are above the amount required to claim benefits, then you get nothing but your state pension. If you can see what I mean.
Yes I do, Lottie.
Qualification for Pension Credits is based on joint income when couples live together. This means that if one party, who would qualify for the credits if living alone, is penalised because the partner has income which takes the two of them above the limit to qualify. Quite why this should be escapes me. Furthermore, it is strange that joint income is easily assessed for this purpose. However when it was suggested that a fairer way to limit Child Benefit for higher earners would be on joint income it was said to be "too complex".
Qualification for Pension Credits is based on joint income when couples live together. This means that if one party, who would qualify for the credits if living alone, is penalised because the partner has income which takes the two of them above the limit to qualify. Quite why this should be escapes me. Furthermore, it is strange that joint income is easily assessed for this purpose. However when it was suggested that a fairer way to limit Child Benefit for higher earners would be on joint income it was said to be "too complex".
Latest Posts
Technology2 mins ago
Spectator N0 2651 By Fieldfare
Crosswords4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
News4 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.