Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Yes, they are the property of the employee. The fund is made up of the employee’s own contributions, which may or may not be supplemented by the employer.Are they really owned by the employee? With all the rules around them they operate very much on a promise that you'll still be able to access them when the time comes, just like the promise the a DB will pay you when the time comes.
Technically DC Plan's funds are not the property of the employee though that doesn't mean they shouldn't be included as wealth...Yes, they are the property of the employee. The fund is made up of the employee’s own contributions, which may or may not be supplemented by the employer.
The fact that funds in which the pension pot is invested might not perform well does not affect ownership.
Ownership of defined benefit schemes crystallize only when the benefit is paid.
You can’t take a transfer value unilaterally.Technically DC Plan's funds are not the property of the employee though that doesn't mean they shouldn't be included as wealth...
I normally agree with Gordon on nearly everything but completely disagree that DB PLans should not be considered as part of someones assets or wealth....certainly for non public sector pensions who have not yet retired....now we might have a long discussion about what value you put on it but given you take a transfer value up to the point of retirement it would seem that would be a good starting point i.e. there is no difference once you take the transfer value with a DC pension so why would you argue different treatment?
Is it not just statutory for two years after you leave the job or similar?But you have a statutory right to take a transfer value with certain exceptions - as above, where it gets interesting is around the value but in most cases, the minimum transfer value is a reasonable proxy (until it's not!).
I certainly consider the value of my wife's DB pension entitlement as part of our wealth
A promise that will only go unfulfilled in a tiny number of extreme circumstances. Kinda like how your investment property might no longer be an asset if you forget to insure it and it burns down, or your investment in Zurich might go to €0 if they went bankrupt etc.But a DB is just a promise.
"Technically" why do you reckon they are not?Technically DC Plan's funds are not the property of the employee though that doesn't mean they shouldn't be included as wealth...
Yes. Older people have on average more wealth as they've had more time to accumulate it.Is the data broken down by age profile?
How would a 30 yr old with a mortgage of 450k have negative net wealth?
He will have an asset of at least 450k to set against the liability of 450k - unless he paid more for the property than the mortgage
In real term the 60 year old will have a better standard of living and a higher disposable income so it's fair to say that he's wealthier no matter what way you look at it (unless your a Shinner or the Loony Left).Is the data broken down by age profile? As this can skewed by age.
For example you could have a 30 yr old earning 150k just taken out a 30yr mortgage of 450k will have a minus net wealth Vs a 60 yr old who is earning 60k but paid of their mortgage.
Theoretically you'd expect everyone's debt burden to decrease each year as mortgages are typical the biggest liability.
Am I correct in that translates to 44% of households? Presuming there is no overlap?New data from CSO on transfers of wealth:
There is overlap - according to this section it's 36%: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpu...generationaltransferofwealth2020/keyfindings/Am I correct in that translates to 44% of households? Presuming there is no overlap?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?