Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

Teachers Pensions overseas
John Roycroft
Posted: 26 April 2012 12:10:39(UTC)
#1

Joined: 10/12/2010(UTC)
Posts: 59

I paid into the UK Teachers Pension scheme for 8 years before moving overseas to teach 15 years ago.
I can draw a small pension at 60.
An advisor has informed me that I can 'withdraw' the pension and invest it elsewhere (but Í will not be able to access it until I am 55)
Having done some research I cannot find any websites to support this.
The Teachers Pension website states that contributions can be withdrawn if you have less than 2 years of contributions.
I also believe it is possible to start receiving the pension at 55 but I would get much less than at 60.
Does anyone know if it is possible to 'withdraw' the pension?
Even if it is, perhaps having a guarenteed index linked pension at 60 is worth hanging onto (it isn't worth much but is a good safety net)
Many thanks
John Roycroft
Bahrain
Chris Holmes
Posted: 26 April 2012 12:57:43(UTC)
#2

Joined: 26/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 1 post(s)
John, your 'advisor' presumably refers to transferring your pension fund away from TPS and investing the cash proceeds within an alternative pension scheme - presumably a QROPS as it seems that you are still non-res.

This action will certainly benefit your advisor through commission or other costs, but may very well be to your detriment. There are circumstances, by which you might ultimately gain from this transfer, but they are very selective and in the overwhelming majority of instances, the potential loss by moving from TPS with 8 years service could run in to £thousands.

Seek advice from a UK Chartered Financial Planner; your last comment is the most pertinent.

Good luck.
2 users thanked Chris Holmes for this post.
John Roycroft on 27/04/2012(UTC), Guest on 28/04/2012(UTC)
Dennis .
Posted: 26 April 2012 23:26:31(UTC)
#3

Joined: 26/12/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,018

Thanks: 293 times
Was thanked: 2002 time(s) in 533 post(s)
I believe that in cases where you can "withdraw" your pension contributions ie get them paid back you have to pay tax on them. I also believe that there are virtually no circustances (apart from if your employer is likely to go bust and you have a large pension) where taking money out of a final salary scheme is worth doing.
I have a personal example of this from my first job in 1972, I left after a year and elected to have my final salary contributions back (about £100 at the time but about £1050 in today's money) had I left the pension alone I would now be receiving about £270/year. By withdrawing my contributions I also lost my employer's contribution.
2 users thanked Dennis . for this post.
John Roycroft on 27/04/2012(UTC), Guest on 28/04/2012(UTC)
anotherpensionman
Posted: 27 April 2012 11:36:09(UTC)
#4

Joined: 21/07/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
John

If you take any advice from this forum, take note of what Chris Holmes has said. He's spot on, you could potentially lose a lot of money if you transfer to a pesonal pension in haste. One big thing the TPS has for it is that you will have a guaranteed pension promise and, as the individual, you will not be taking any risk. If you transfer to a personal pension plan the reverse will be true and you will have to be prepared to take the full risk of investment fluctuations.

Once again, take note of your own final comment and Chris's reply.
2 users thanked anotherpensionman for this post.
John Roycroft on 27/04/2012(UTC), Guest on 28/04/2012(UTC)
Philmo
Posted: 27 April 2012 19:51:34(UTC)
#5

Joined: 12/05/2006(UTC)
Posts: 22

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
It's my understanding that the TPS is unfunded following the deal which the cash strapped labour government did with the TP trustees shortly after WW2.
So if teachers are permitted to withdraw pension capital for investment elsewhere, does that necessitate HMG borrowing capital at taxpayers' expense in order to enable that facility?
Sounds like lunacy and should be stopped immediately!
1 user thanked Philmo for this post.
John Roycroft on 28/04/2012(UTC)
Ian Cooper
Posted: 27 April 2012 21:14:09(UTC)
#6

Joined: 22/01/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
John,

I agree with the other responders.
Stick with the TPS.
I had 19 years in teaching (University) before moving into industry. I took up an Equitable Life pension plan. The EL representative advised me AGAINST coming out of the TPS and investing the proceeds with them. That was the best bit of financial advice I ever had:
EL subsequently robbed me (and thousands of other professionals who had invested with the 'oldest, most reliable company in the UK') of 20% of my subsequent pension pot.
As it happened, I went back into university teaching and was able to enhance my teacher's pension.
Index-linked schemes with employer contributions are becoming less common and less advantageous these days, but the old ones are definite 'keepers'
A small point...you may have a widow's benefit element in there too/
2 users thanked Ian Cooper for this post.
Guest on 28/04/2012(UTC), John Roycroft on 28/04/2012(UTC)
David Ince
Posted: 29 April 2012 07:28:14(UTC)
#7

Joined: 14/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
John,

As a teacher who is planning my retirement in phases (moving to part-time for 2 years and then possibly retiring at 55 - if funds permit!), one other benefit with the TPS is the lump sum you receive whenever you retire. This equates to 3 times whatever your annual pension is (tax free).

If you retire early your pension will be an actuarially reduced one and the TPS website (even without sign on details, password, etc...)has a 'resources' area located on the top "tabs" section with access to various pension calculators which are very helpful.

Good luck and, in my opinion, stick with the TPS.
1 user thanked David Ince for this post.
John Roycroft on 04/05/2012(UTC)
Philmo
Posted: 29 April 2012 09:02:06(UTC)
#8

Joined: 12/05/2006(UTC)
Posts: 22

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
It beggars belief that the fruitful public service pensions should be available before proper retirement age, unless necessitated by genuine ill health, of course!

1] The practice permits continuance of employment, usually on a contract basis with the same authority, so that such people are effectively being paid twice out of the public pocket!

2] The practice deprives UK plc of the services of such fit, able and highly skilled people for upto 25% of their available working life!

UK plc cannot afford to hand out such luxuries!
Why should she tolerate being short changed by these people?
David Ince
Posted: 29 April 2012 22:00:58(UTC)
#9

Joined: 14/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Dear Philmo

I have worked in both private (20 years) and public sector (coming up to 10 years) so I can reply to your post with a "foot in both camps". You seem to be quite emotive on this topic and have a misunderstanding that "these people" (public sector) are somehow "short changing UK plc.". I would advise you do some research before firing off with "all guns blazing!". The following info. may be of some help.

Some teachers, who were employed a few years ago are on 1/80th pensions and the contract with our employers is quite fair and equitable. Some of us pay in around 8% of our salary into a pensions pot which is topped up by our employers (common practice in the private sector in company Group Pension Schemes). In the private sector many people also have Personal Pensions to enhance their pensions investments which can be enhanced by their companies offering "salary sacrifice" schemes which help in reducing NI contributions of the employer. The fact that certain parts of salary or bonuses can be paid "gross" into a Private Pension is also a great benefit. I have used this option very effectively for my own pensions planning when I was in the private sector.

For teachers the goverment have a legal responsibility each year to check that the TPS (teachers pension scheme) is still able to match its current and future liabilities with its assets i.e. that it is fully affordable. At the last review (3 years ago) it was affordable and yet the government have refused to carry out this valuation for the last two years, hence the recent issue with the strikes etc. This whole issue of "affordability" was raised 3 years ago which led to teachers agreeing to pay more into their pensions and to change the scheme for new entrants to make it affordable. Maybe the Govt. is not undertaking its legal obligations because it won't like what it will find - you never know, the TPS might still be affordable and then where will that leave the Government? With "egg on its face" because it is insistent that the TPS is NOT affordable. Clearly, and rightly, UK Plc needs to find extra money from somewhere. Instead of just raising tax from ALL of us earning over the new personal allowance, it is trying to take money through stealth. I bet you would have a few choice words to say if your employer made fundamental changes to your terms and conditions without discussions or negotiations.

Anyone in the private sector can take 25% tax-free cash from their private scheme when they are 55 and start effective "drawdowns" from their remaining fund if they choose a SIPP. So I don't see why you have a problem with public sector workers effectively doing the same at 55 or anytime before their official retirement. Based on the actuarially reduced calculations and the fact that I am on an 1/80th scheme means that when I am 55 and want to retire I will receive 9.3% of my salary as a pension. I don't see your logic of how "I am being paid twice out of the public pocket". I have a fair contract of employment and if I choose to retire early I have to appreciate that I will only receive a small fraction of what I would receive had I stayed on well into my 60s. I hope that the above information helps with any misunderstandings you may have.
1 user thanked David Ince for this post.
Guest on 02/05/2012(UTC)
Philmo
Posted: 01 May 2012 18:14:11(UTC)
#10

Joined: 12/05/2006(UTC)
Posts: 22

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
DI
Whilst there is something in what you say, it takes some picking over to find it!
My two basic points are nevertheless valid as pensions were designed originally to provide an income in retirement, NOT to feather a comfortable resignation from responsible society, ie those of us who are upto the challenge of offering a full working life's effort!

There are many employment conditions, primarily in the public sector, which offer the facility to retire early on a "reasonable" pension, as often as not paid out of tax revenue, as most of the schemes are unfunded. Fire service, police, most civil servants, MoD especially, to name some. Many who do take full advantage actually continue in their posts and receive, for some unbelievable reason, both a pension and payment under contract! For why? Because it it's there and current T&C's allow it - that's all!
Don't the shareholders of UK plc deserve better than to be ripped off like this?

Classic case in point! My MP is a relatively youthful retired major. No doubt he is taking both his major's pension AND his MP's salary! For why are we paying him twice? - and both straight out of tax revenue? Because the rules allow him!

It's high time public staff reimbursement in all its forms was reviewed!

I stand by my view that people in both public and private employ should receive reimbursement for their efforts, while working, and that pensions should not be collectable until true retirement at the same date when the OAP becomes payable.
Then all is equitable!

[Of course provision must also be made for the infirm as necessary.]
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets