AIBU to be concerned that my State Pension is referred to as a 'Benefit'?

I agree with you Jess20, I noticed that State Pension claimants have been labelled 'benefit' claimants. If OAPensions are benefits, what is the point of working / contributing?? Therefore everyone will get the same whether they worked on not

Perhaps your combined income is too high to qualify for other benefits, whichever borough you live in.

My husband gets industrial injury benefit. Quite a lot of money BUT our borough includes it as income so we don't get housing or council tax benefit. In the next door borough they ringfence it as a payment to cover the extra cost of living for being disabled and don’t count it as income so we'd qualify for housing and council tax benefit. I just wish all places used the same criteria

If semantics were the issue, then how was it that the age-tested state widow’s pension which was paid to a widow until she reached the then women’s pension age of 60 - was abolished in 2001?

The argument was one of cost saving, or rather, cost redirection. The money was said to be redirected into the old age pension. Young widows like me - whose husbands had paid decades of NIC but who would never see their state pension - were, instead, awarded a short term widow’s bereavement allowance.

Also, when the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme (SERPS) was introduced in 1978, there was provision for widows to inherit up to 100% of their late husband’s entitlement.

In 1986, the Conservative Government, concerned at the emerging costs of SERPS, passed legislation which reduced the percentage of SERPS which could be inherited from 100% to 50% in respect of a death on or after 6 April 2000.

However, as a result of inadequate publicity for this change, the Labour Government decided to postpone it until 6 October 2002 and to phase in the reduction so that the full 50% cut would not be achieved until 6 October 2010. For those who had been misinformed and were not fully covered by the new arrangements, the departmental compensation scheme was a possibility. (Interesting in the light of the WASPI maladministration.)

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7631/CBP-7631.pdf

These past changes show that government can and will abolish or reduce contributory benefits on the grounds of cost.

Arguably, these are different. They are or were inherited benefits (that some can still inherit) rather than earned by the claimant. Nevertheless, the fact remains that they were always called pensions - widow’s pension, addtional state pension. It did not stop the governments of the day abolishing or reducing the entitlement.

In other words, the terminology is irrelevant.

New state pension is and will be less expensive for government to pay as the people who were able to contribute to basic state pension and additional state pension die and any inheriting partner dies too.

Equalising state pension age has been very costly for the women most affected by the change - lost pension we won't break even on unless we live beyond 80.

Anybody whose NI contribution record began on or after 6 April 2016 will not be able to contribute towards a higher state pension. Life expectancy for younger people is decreasing. It's evident that baby boomers are not enjoying the same longevity as their parent's generation. Similarly millenials may not have the longevity of their parents. It's a problem for the actuaries to address not least if AI reduces the number of jobs available for future generations but I do think that NIC has had its day.

For whatever reason, it was decided, a few years ago, to refer to pensions and a “benefit” and part of the welfare costs.

I think it’s part of this ”them and us” mantra the government like.🙄

And that’s what I object to muffin. We who are on the state pension should be concerned about the semantics of it, because your generation are paying for us, as we paid for our parents generation’s pensions, and I think your generation is likely to unfairly lose the right to claim a state pension unless you are impoverished, meaning means tested. That’s why they want to get rid of NI so that the link between paying for a benefit and the benefit is broken. However we will all just pay more in taxes.

The State Pension is a Ponzi scheme on the point of collapse. Folks my age (the dreaded millenials) are paying our NI right now with absolutely no expectation or even significant likelihood that we will be able to claim it when we are elderly.

In a Ponzi scheme, someone always gets left holding the bag, but we current bagholders do not have the option of opting out of paying it. Because it is needed to support those people who are claiming a pension now.

It would be more unfair to allow us to walk away. At least we are aware that we cannot expect to draw any state pension.

I just had a letter telling me about the increased weekly payment, so quite frankly they could call it a kick up the bum for all I care!

It’s much easier to stop a benefit than an entitlement.

I worked for the DHSS when I left school back in the 70's. Benefits were either contibutory benefits e.g. state pension, unemployment benefit etc or non contibutory benefits such as supplementary benefit (equivalent of universal credits etc) so it has been a benefit for over 50 years

Interesting that the state pension is referred to as a benefit, but the pension credit is not.
The way that it is likely to go is that with the semi-mandatory personal workplace pension, the state pension will become a benefit similar to what is now the pension credit, only going to those whose income is below the benefit threshold.
This will mean that there will be no standard pension for all.
NI used to stop at 60, but now you carry on paying to state pension age.

It is still possible, if you have made NI contributions for the relevant period of time, to claim New Style JSA or New Style ESA. Any top ups are made through Universal Credit. It can include a Housing element, paid instead of Housing Benefit.

Perhaps it would help you all to understand if I explain something. There are contribution based benefits, such as the pension, and the old contribution based sickness or unemployment benefits; then there are income based benefits, like the old income support. JSA, JobSeekers Allowance had an element of both but the income based was only payable if contribution element wasn't paid, due to not enough NI paid in the last two years.
The government have gradually changed everything to Universal Credit, effectively removing the contribution based altogether.

My late husband was in the Army when he died and I received half his pension. Imagine my surprise when an 'official' called it a benefit. He was surprised by my reaction. What a a hole!!!!

homefarm

The state pension has always been a benefit. It's very unfair, the 'new' state pension paid since 2016 is higher than the old one and you don't need so many qualifying years. Unfortunately I had the years but not the pension - I get the old one.

@homefarm Sorry that is incorrect they are different schemes with different rules, therefore it is not true that every one who reached pension age before the new rules only get the basic many get far more than that due to paying into whatever earnings related second state pensions were active during their working life, graduated retirement benefit, SERPS S2P could always increase the amount you got from the state SERPS alone (using 2024/2025 rates) could give you an extra £218.39 a week over the 2024/2025 basic pension rate of £169.50 alternatively you could contract out of SERPS and get a works/company pension to increase your pension income.

It is also not true that everyone who reaches state pension age after 6th April 2016 automatically get the new higher rate in fact the governments own figures show that less than 1/2 do.

Most of us paid NI as asked, and did it in the expectation of getting a pension in our turn. If we were misled about that it is not our fault

I dont always agree with what Doodledog posts but in this I do 100%. No one told me as a young woman that I was contributing to an unfair ponzi game which is one of the most corrupt and misleading of all systems.

Governments in other countries used a different model. It was up to successive governments in this country to anticipate that there would be a demographic problem after the so called "boomer" generation aged but they sat on their lazy asses and did nothing to reform or alleviate the system.

Jess - Surely the State Pension isn't a benefit but an Entitlement?
Yes, I agree in principle- but surely all "benefits" are actually entitlements?

MaggsMcG some benefits are taxable.

NannyWren

I have another seven years to wait for my (state) pension/benefit.
I was the one who cared for my darling children, juggling temping with school holidays. My ex husband took the child benefit, the business we grew together and his military pension. I didn't fight for a share, he was an abuser and I wanted out asap.
I'm currently caring for my DH who has cancer. I don't have carer's allowance as we have savings.
Thankfully my second husband does have a pension, but will that even be advantageous to me?
We've worked hard to own a house outright together. That's one blessing to fund our care in old age, if we are privileged to reach old age.
Quite honestly I am beginning to feel more anxious with each passing year. I dread to think how my DDs feel about their finances as pensioners.

@NannyWren , I think carers allowence can be claimed regardless of your savings . Look into this as you should be able to claim .

If they want to call it a benefit then they shouldn't be taxing it.

Every time this topic comes up someone points out (often sneering) that we haven’t paid into a pot, as though we don’t all know that. It doesn’t matter.

Most of us paid NI as asked, and did it in the expectation of getting a pension in our turn. If we were misled about that it is not our fault. If we knew all along that we were paying for the people before us, it doesn’t matter either. Again, we did it in the expectation of getting a pension in our turn.

That there is not enough money (if we prefer to see economics in that way) then again, it is not our fault. Governments are supposed to manage things like that in return for the cooperation of the population, (in this case in the form of contributions). If they mess up, they are supposed to make it better. They were the ones with the demographic figures and the expenditure forecasts, not us. We did our bit.

Don’t fall for the excuses. Those of us who played the game by the rules are entitled to get what we were promised - whether that promise was signed in blood or a tacit understanding.

Yes it's a benefit, so was the old child allowance which many of us will have claimed. I can't really understand why people are getting upset with this. The whole point with benefits is that the recipients are entitled to them under the law.

homefarm

The state pension has always been a benefit. It's very unfair, the 'new' state pension paid since 2016 is higher than the old one and you don't need so many qualifying years. Unfortunately I had the years but not the pension - I get the old one.

If you are on the old pension, I imagine that you would be able to claim Pension Credit if you have no other income and savings below a certain threshold. Because of the additional benefits that brings, that would probably make you better off than someone in a similar position but retiring now on the new state pension.

This has been discussed at length on other threads. There is no provision under the new state pension rules to build an additional state pension.

Under the old rules you could build as much as £204.85 per week additional pension on top of the £156.20 basic pension. £361.05 versus £203.85.

Plus, some WASPIs has to wait another six years to receive the new state pension - a loss which, at the new state pension rate, will take around fifteen years from age 66 to recoup.

If you were contracted out of SERPS/SP2 so didn’t build an additional state pension you should have a Guaranteed Minimum (occupational) Pension to compensate.

I should add that Iwas 68 when I retired.