sandyf

A Full State pension can only ever be what you are entitled to on reaching retirement age. The frozen pension arrangement means you are deprived of the Full State pension in the following financial year if living in certain jurisdictions.

You should get your facts straight before trying to lecture someone. Pension credit has nothing to do with pensions, it is a benefit under the income support regulations and on the 6th April 2010 the qualifying age was increased from 60 to match the retirement age. I was 62 when I claimed in 2009.

You fail to realise that people fully contracted out will only get a full state pension that equates to the basic component. That does not mean they do not benefit from the other part of their NI in another way.

I wouldn't pay VFS for anything that I didn't have to, been dealing with them for 15 years and had a few problems. With Switzerland you have the choice of VFS or using Swiss Consular services, I would take the latter but whatever is most convenient. I have just done one for Germany and no longer had a choice. Last one I did for Germany was done at the embassy and got decision at the appointment, all very efficient. Now VFS has taken over it is a bureaucratic nightmare and a lot more expensive. If you use VFS you will go to the same office as I did and best bet is to get there by MRT to Samyan. On leaving the MRT keep an eye on the exits, one of them will take you up into the shopping centre. Office is fairly easy to find on 4th floor, I think to the left at the top, if you see Italy it is the other direction. No point getting there too early as they won't let you in until 10 minutes before, it says only the applicant but he let both of us in. Good luck.

The Schengen Agreement and the EU are not quite the same, the UK and Ireland never signed up, nor did Cyprus. Some EEA countries although not in the EU are also in Schengen. Schengen is more about freedom of movement than visas, it abolished internal border controls. If you are not a national from a Schengen country you need a visitor visa to enter, commonly called the Schengen Visa as it is a standardised format for the area. I was stationed in Germany early 70s and had to show my passport at the border control every time we went to Venlo in Holland a few miles away, not any more all border posts have gone.

That is not a fact, you are way off track. The fact is that the average working bloke of today will only receive a post 2016 state pension which may or may not be adjusted due to "Contracting Out". Everyone, and I mean everyone, has received a Full State pension. Full State pensions are adjusted to individual circumstances based on the pre 2016 basic pension or based on the new state pension. Pension credit has absolutely nothing to do with pensions, I was on pension credit before I reached retirement age. The government has a vested interest in keeping pensions low and creating a benefits dependent society. There is nothing new, years ago companies gave workers luncheon vouchers which turned into a form of currency. Won't be long before you see social security food vouchers being traded with pensioners not far behind.

Fairly obvious you are not fully aware of how the state pension evolved. You refer to basic an Full as though they are different versions of the same thing, the reality is there are pre 2016 pensions and post 2016 pensions. You are using the rhetoric the government wants to promote, helps the argument that pensions have risen. What is called the basic state pension is only a component of the pre 2016 pension. My state pension is made up from 5 components, the earliest additional component is Graduated Pensions, something that many will never have heard of. 1975 brought about a revolution in the pension system with the introduction of SERPS, what people receive as a state pension revolves around their working life since 1975. There is little doubt that those that gained the most were those in an occupational pension at the time. They became contracted out with part of their NI contribution going into the occupational pension. Individuals like myself weren't allowed to contract out until 1989 and by the time I became eligible it was too late. The pre 2016 state pension can be one of 3 scenarios, Fully contracted out - the basic state pension with possibly some Graduated pensions, No contracting out - the total of all pension components that existed during your working life, or a mixture of the 2. It is a complicated calculalation based on a split NI arrangement and there was never any government indication on how it was done. Those that contracted out had the same amount of NI taken from their wages but part went to the government and part into therir private pension. Those of us that gave all of it to the government under their legislation are now paying the penalty under different legislation from the same government. The directors of a private pension scheme would have been locked up.

Only a couple of weeks ago the PM was on the box saying they have an obligation to right the wrongs of the past, ommitting to say only when it suits the government. If there had never been any complaints about injustice then there would still be slavery etc etc. The majority are apathetic to injustice, until it affects them.

I agree with most of your post but you are wrong on the tax, I wasn't a particular high wage earner and my state pension is over the tax threshold. Don't forget that those on an occupational pension were having that pension boosted by being contracted out of SERPS. This tends to distort what is seen as the state pension. Many in Thailand will be receiving a pension that was partially funded by NI and is index linked, another factor in the injustice.

Not always been the case, I think it was about 30 or so years ago they started to use income tax to top up the NI in respect of the pension liability. There is a significant amount remaining in the NI fund that under some obscure ruling that cannot be touched, quite unbelievable. Whe I started my pension in 2012 I had 48 years and one incomplete years of contributions, last 3 and a bit were credits even though I was not registered as unemployed or on benefits.

I apologise for the misinformation in the post, it would appear that VAT on imported goods and associated VAT Returns does in fact come under the Customs department rather than the revenue dept. However they are 2 different taxes operating in different ways, import duty paid by the importer would be added to the selling price whereas VAT paid by the importer would be recovered from the next step in the chain. VAT liability = Output tax - Input tax. Although the article says "postal" these articles can never be taken literally and I would expect to see some change in how the likes of Lazada and Shopee operate.

Why on earth would anyone have to pay the Customs. It is a change in the VAT regulations, no change in import duty, and VAT is paid by the seller to the revenue department. The problem with online shopping is that sometimes it is difficult to know who the seller actually is. My suspicion would be that the companies taking the orders would be seen as factoring the goods and liable for the VAT. They would then need to recover any VAT already paid by the suppliers, the suppliers will have recovered any VAT paid to the manufacturers. The VAT actually avoids what you are suggesting. If they had decided to apply customs duty to all online shopping that had been imported, that would have been a can of worms.

Indeed they are not even prepared to follow the recommendations of the APPG enquiry in 2020. For these reasons, the main recommendation of this report is that the UK Government end the ‘frozen’ pension policy. We urge the Government to seek to provide UK pensioners living in ‘frozen’ countries with their full uprated UK state pension as soon as possible, particularly given the recent impacts of COVID-19 on this group. https://frozenbritishpensions.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Frozen-Pensions-APPG-1.pdf The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Frozen British Pensions exists to bring together parliamentary supporters of the case to unfreeze frozen British State Pensions Overseas and to campaign for reform on this issue. https://frozenbritishpensions.org/

A statement that could only come from the young. It wasn't until 1989 that a private individual could contract out of SERPS. When it came about I was told it was too late not enough time left to get over the start up cost and produce any significant return. Remaining in SERPs was the better option, but at that point in time overseas retirement wasn't on the horizon.

Truncating what was said is a breach of the rules but why should that matter. Many of the posts on this thread come from a lack of historical awareness. It is an unfortunate fact of life that many are oblivious to injustice and discrimination. The Suffragettes were part of the ‘Votes for Women’ campaign that had long fought for the right of women to vote in the UK. They used art, debate, propaganda, and attack on property including window smashing and arson to fight for female suffrage. https://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/museum-london/explore/who-were-suffragettes#:~:text=The Suffragettes were part of,to fight for female suffrage.

The wrongs of the past are never old, how do you think women got the vote or gay men avoided prison. A recent petition on the subject reached a level that required an answer in the House. This brought about media coverage that has never been seen in the past and a significant increase in public awareness, the majority of the UK public have no idea. Petition and answer can be seen here. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-02-19/debates/24021975000085/FrozenBritishPensions

Indeed, I think it was 1981 whe the UK government said it would not be entering into any new reciprocol social security agreements, until brexit came along. Canada does have a reciprocal agreement in place but at the time it was drawn up the Canadian pension could not be exported so pensions were not included. Some time later the Canadian policy was amended to allow pensions to be exported but UK has consistently refused to revisit the agreement. The whole issue stems from the fact that politically the state pension is viewed as a benefit and the legislation is embedded in the Social Security Act. The government could extract the state pension and make it stand alone legislation but there is no political will. About the only politicians that have said anything significant in the House are Jeremy Corbyn and Ian Blackford, in 2015 it was the topic of Ian Blackford's maiden speech. Every year the Social Security Act comes before parliament but debate is only allowed on the government changes, any attempt to bring up the state pension gets sidelined.

Didn't the government reduce NI contributions just a couple of weeks ago, and not for the first time. The Tories have been buying votes with the revenue that was intended for pensions for years. It is all a deliberate plan to make pensions fully funded from income tax and dispensing with NI, making it easier to run the scheme down as time goes bye. Income tax may eventually have to be raised to pay for abolishing national insurance, Jeremy Hunt has suggested the day after delivering the government’s spring budget. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/07/income-tax-likely-to-go-up-if-national-insurance-scapped-hunt-suggests

There was a time when it was 44 years of contributions. A friend of mine who had been made redundant had made his up with voluntary contributions and when they suddenly dropped it to 30 years he wrote and asked for a refund. Doesn't take much to guess the reply.

The governments main argument is that it has been that way for over 70 years. In that same 70 years there has been numerous instances of legislation being overturned, but then it is all about public opinion and how many votes can be generated. I hope Keir Starmer was paying attention at the time. "The Labour Party have today formally announced that they will support the APPG in its efforts to annul the Social Security Benefit Up-rating Regulations." https://frozenbritishpensions.org/jeremy-corbyn-gives-labours-backing-pension-unfreezing/

That is a distorted perspective. The UK state pension is a "pay as you go" scheme where the workers of today make contributions to pay the pensioners of today. When you become a pensioner that still applies. Government revenue from workers contributions is by default index linked so all pension entitlement arising from workers contributions should be indexed linked, selective index linking is pure discrimination. Brexit brought the legal requirement to pay uprated pensions in the EU to an end. The government didn't like the thought of the backlash from so many close to home so they manipulated the legislation to suit. In 2019 Therese Coffey made this statement, which was then withdrawn. Fairly obvious she thought pensioners elsewhere didn't need peace of mind. "The government is sending out letters outlining that even if we leave without a deal, pensions for those in the EU will be uprated for a further 3 years –an increase of at least 2.5% annually for the duration of this Parliament,worth up to £200 a year per person. And pensioners will be told they do not need to do anything to continue receiving their State Pension. During the 3-year period, the UK government plans to negotiate a new arrangement with the EU to ensure that uprating continues. Work and Pensions Secretary Dr Thérèse Coffey said: Pensioners in Europe who have paid into the system for years deserve peace of mind over their future finances. Not only are we providing much-needed reassurance for hundreds of thousands of retirees, we’re ensuring we are fully prepared for leaving the EU on 31 October. No matter the circumstances of Brexit, we’ve made sure that pensionersdo not need to take any action to continue receiving their hard-earnedState Pension.” A new dedicated call centre team based in Newcastle has also beenestablished in order to answer any questions from those affected. The uprating will also affect those living in the EEA states and Switzerland. The letters will be sent next week."

Quite the opposite, as you said it came about at the outset because at the time there was significant emigration such as the assisted passage scheme to Australia. Successive government have deliberately misinterpreted the intention to suit their own agenda and the subsequent reciprocal agreements created legalised discrimination. There is a significant difference between people heading off at an early age for a new life in the colonies and people going into retirement having paid full NI throughout their working life.

1948

Each to their own whichever suits, was last time for me, pushing up daisies by time it's due again.

And guess who the "method " came from? Your words "Do it online or get yer wife to do it." You are free to believe the "online" method does not require the original passport being sent to HMPO.