AVC drawdown at retirement?


AFAIK Revenue have a capitalization formula to account for this increase in survivor benefit to 100%. So it can be funded based on the formula and the allowable pension pot adjusted accordingly. It can then be drawn down from an ARF in the normal way.

@S class, did you have any non pensionable pay or allowances available to increase the Revenue pension limit?
 
Last edited:
At retirement you can have a pension of 2/3rds final salary + an ARF or Annuity funded from your AVCs.
Correction.

What I should have said is...

At retirement you can have a pension of 50% final salary + tax free lump sum of 150% final salary + an ARF or Annuity funded from your AVCs.
 
The definition of salary per revenue definitions is different to the PS scheme; it includes more than just basic pay and can be indexed in line with inflation. Also, the uplifted scale can give a higher lump sum (and pension) than the 3n80th/n60ths. There's always scope for AVCs on a PS pension.
 
The definition of salary per revenue definitions is different to the PS scheme; it includes more than just basic pay
I don't think the definition of salary differs. However, some allowances and payments made to PSs are pensionable and some are not. Those that are not pensionable for PS Superann purposes may be allowed by Revenue. However, this probably doesn't apply to the majority of PSs.

can be indexed in line with inflation
I don't get this one - can you elaborate or illustrate?

Also, the uplifted scale can give a higher lump sum (and pension) than the 3n80th/n60ths

Service beyond "normal retirement age" which is also beyond the usual 40 years required for a full pension can be used to extend the lump sum by up to 5 years, ie, to a maximum of 135/120 of pensionable pay (Revenue's definition of same). So a Class D retiring with 45 years of service at 65 could draw an extra 15/80 from an AVC tax free.
Is this what you are referring to here or is it something else?
 
I don't get this one - can you elaborate or illustrate?
An average of 3 or more years salary with inflation applied could give a higher salary, where the actual salary has increased at a lower rate than inflation over the period used.
 
An average of 3 or more years salary with inflation applied could give a higher salary, where the actual salary has increased at a lower rate than inflation over the period used.

Now I am even more lost!
 
Thanks everyone. All very interesting, lots to think about.

I just want to bring it back to basics for a moment and try and avoid complex calculations etc.

I found this definition of “AVC overfunding”

“If you have accumulated excess funds, over and above your tax free shortfall and will have guaranteed pension income (either from your job/state pension or other income) which will put you into the higher income tax threshold (40%), your AVC fund is overfunded.
Many employees, especially members of Defined Benefit Schemes, may find themselves facing a huge tax bill on these funds in retirement. This means, that although you would have got tax relief going into your AVC, at your marginal rate of tax, you could be faced with a tax liability of up to 52% when withdrawing these AVC funds on retirement”.

I mean is this essentially it? If you are being taxed at 40% when accessing AVC’s, it’s probably not worth your while and you should explore other options to save/invest for retirement? And AVC’s are really only beneficial to top up your pension in retirement only if you can keep it in 20% income tax rate?
 

In pensions jargon, "overfunded" means that you have exceeded Revenue maximum allowable pension / lump sum limits relative to your salary.

The above definition describes a position where it doesn't make sense to contribute AVCs due to being taxed at the high rate when you withdraw them.

The two are not necessarily the same situation. I could contribute AVCs that are within permissible Revenue limits but will be taxed at the high rate when I withdraw them.
 
Overfunding is when your total AVCs are larger than the revenue allowed total.

I posted a new thread


This demonstrates how much AVCs are allowed just to cater for the shortfall in surviving spouse pension.

In your case, as a post 95 employee, you can fund for the surviving spouse pension and also for the shortfall in your pension due to the inclusion of the Contributory Pension into your Public Sector pension.

You will be able to make AVCs well in excess of 300k without overfunding.
 
“If you have accumulated excess funds, over and above your tax free shortfall and will have guaranteed pension income which will put you into the higher income tax threshold (40%), your AVC fund is overfunded.
This is completely wrong
 
Yes, that’s it. I tried to put in the link but it wouldn’t let me post.
 

This is an unusual take on "overfunding" and not how it is normally defined. But, yes, you are probably on course to pay tax at the top rate on pension income. It is a personal decision on whether or not you wish proceed with building up the AVC pot on that basis - people have differing views on that. Personally I would not be depriving myself now for the sake of making AVCs - other than to prepare for the option of early retirement. But others quite reasonably opt for the AVC route in similar circumstances.
 
There must surely be a strategy where you retire earlier but don't use the 'other' sources for a few years,living instead off the AVC pot and avoiding excessive taxes
 
So can I put as much as I want via AVC’s without repercussions, ie. Fines from revenue etc, apart from income tax etc.
Thanks
 
Can you not withdraw lump sum from the AVC's instead of your main scheme ??
Yes, you could take the max lump sum out of the AVC pot only and leave the main scheme pension undiluted.
BUT, you would have to make sure that the lump sum and undiluted pension when combined are within Revenue overall limits.