Given Noonan's raid on pension funds, can the government be trusted?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr Strangelove said:
The USC was announced in December 2010 two weeks after the bailout agreement.

The levy on pension assets was announced subsequently, in May 2011 and the prior commitment to introduce standard rating on all contributions was abandoned.
Click to expand...
If 20% maximum tax relief was introduced the effective relief on contributions would have been as low as 8% (20% income tax relief - 8% usc - 4% Prsi).
The maximum taxation of pension drawdowns would be 52% (40% income tax + 8% USC + 4% Prsi) and that would have ended pensions for the Irish population.
 
Last edited:
S class said:
If 20% maximum tax relief was introduced the effective relief on contributions would have been as low as 8% (20% income tax relief - 8% usc - 4% Prsi).
The maximum taxation of pension drawdowns would be 52% (40% income tax + 8% USC + 4% Prsi) and that would have ended pensions for the Irish population.
Click to expand...
You actually think that’s the maths of it?

‘20 - 8 - 4’
 
S class said:
That problem was dealt with when they invented the USC.
Not relieved on contributions and then double charged on drawdowns.
Click to expand...
No, it was the Income Levy you're thinking of. They promised it would be temporary, and it was. USC is completely unrelated and just happens to have the same rates as the temporary levy
 
S class said:
He raided pensions yearly for 5 years.
Click to expand...
So what though?

They were raided for a few years, and weren’t raided for the other decades.

The point is, it’s insane to allow that unique period to cloud your judgement.

Fast forward a number of years to when the retiree who ignored pensions is substantially worse off. They sure showed Michael Noonan, didn’t they!
 
Gordon Gekko said:
It was 0.6% for 2011 to 2013, 0.75% for 2014, 0.15% for 2015, and then it was abolished.
Click to expand...

And the compounded cost of the levy???? It wasn't off interest or profit. It was off your entire fund.
It went on for a year longer than originally designed and took nearly €2.5 billion out of private savings.
Not saying it is a reason not to invest in pensions but let's not pretend it was anything but idiotic and a raid on people's savings.
 
. It was charged on the market value of assets in pension schemes held on 30 June in each year at a rate of 0.6% (2011 to 2013), 0.75% (2014) and 0.15% (2015).

The levy was discontinued from 2016 and currently, private pension holders are not required to pay a pension levy.

From oireachtas website (excuse spelling)
 
Fortune said:
I mis-remembered the rates, it was:
0.6% from 2011 to 2014, and
0.15% from 2014 to 2014.

www.oireachtas.ie

Pension Levy

Pension Levy Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 27 June 2023
www.oireachtas.ie
Click to expand...
You mean (from the link that you posted)?
It was charged on the market value of assets in pension schemes held on 30 June in each year at a rate of 0.6% (2011 to 2013), 0.75% (2014) and 0.15% (2015).

The levy was discontinued from 2016 and currently, private pension holders are not required to pay a pension levy.
Click to expand...
 
Bronte said:
Moderator's note: Moved from another thread

Would the 18 year old not be advised to wait until he's 55 to start a pension. At that age there is a lot of tax benefits which increase as you age and that's the time to then put in the money.

Especially given previous tax raids on pensions (Here's looking at you Michael Noonan).
Click to expand...
Interesting thread ! It shouldn't say Noonan though, it should say Finance Minister.
 
24601 said:
I'm just astonished that someone can rack up nearly 15k posts here and believe that an 18 year-old should wait until they're around 10 years from retirement before starting a pension. Incredible.
Click to expand...
Well there you go then and so far nobody has given me any figures to say I'm wrong. Someone on 200K at age 55 putting in the max from 55 to 65. (I've no idea, but it's an idea all the same).

Also as far as I recall, and I've not looked at pensions in a while, (it will come up for us this year, with a small pot of 50K) but I think that you can be screwed if the pot is valued low when you have to draw it down and take an annuity. And you're too old then to make it up to the level you want to comfortably retire at.
 
Bronte said:
Well there you go then and so far nobody has given me any figures to say I'm wrong. Someone on 200K at age 55 putting in the max from 55 to 65. (I've no idea, but it's an idea all the same).

Also as far as I recall, and I've not looked at pensions in a while, (it will come up for us this year, with a small pot of 50K) but I think that you can be screwed if the pot is valued low when you have to draw it down and take an annuity. And you're too old then to make it up to the level you want to comfortably retire at.
Click to expand...
So to summarise what you've said, you basically know nothing about pensions, but advise that nobody should have one until they're 55?
 
Last edited:
Politicians interfering in what pension funds can and cannot invest in is a much bigger current threat I think.

You might not like pension funds investing in certain industries, e.g. guns or carbon fuels, but the moment that door is opened you will find other interest groups queuing up to demand further restrictions on what funds can invest in. Or demanding that funds are invested into their pet projects. All of this is likely to suppress returns and increase risk in portfolios, and opens the door to even further political interference, up to and including full nationalisation of pension funds.

It's a very slippery slope, and best I think to keep politicians away from making investment choices.
 
Bronte said:
Well there you go then and so far nobody has given me any figures to say I'm wrong. Someone on 200K at age 55 putting in the max from 55 to 65. (I've no idea, but it's an idea all the same).

Also as far as I recall, and I've not looked at pensions in a while, (it will come up for us this year, with a small pot of 50K) but I think that you can be screwed if the pot is valued low when you have to draw it down and take an annuity. And you're too old then to make it up to the level you want to comfortably retire at.
Click to expand...
If it's a small fund, there are options to take the balance as taxed cash.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top