New State Pension

Labour like to describe pensioners as “people on benefits” despite the fact that they’ve worked and paid taxes for 45 years or more.

NotSpaghetti

Factually it is a benefit.
It's a contributory benefit - part of our social security expenditure.

But all other benefits aren’t taxed.

Benefits which are taxed:

• Bereavement Allowance (previously Widow’s pension)
• Carer’s Allowance or (in Scotland only) Carer Support Payment
• Contribution-based Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
• Incapacity Benefit (from the 29th week you get it)
• Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA)
• Pensions paid by the Industrial Death Benefit scheme
• State Pension
• Widowed Parent’s Allowance

www.gov.uk/income-tax/taxfree-and-taxable-state-benefits

Menopauselbitch

NotSpaghetti

Factually it is a benefit.
It's a contributory benefit - part of our social security expenditure.

But all other benefits aren’t taxed.

Some other benefits are taxable, eg JSA, ESA, maternity pay, bereavement allowance etc.

pen50

It is a benefit, you didn't save for it, your taxes and NI paid for other people's pensions while you were working, and now your state pension is paid for by younger workers' tax and NI in turn. There has never been a state pension pot.

This. Very few people cover their costs, especially as we age and use more services.

I’ve just looked up how much the average UK worker pays in NI each month. It is £182.
My husband retired quite recently. To his amazement, he has just received a letter telling him that his state pension is to increase by 4.8% each month. This will bring it to just shy of £950.
The state pension is most certainly a benefit.

I'm not sure why he's amazed as the triple lock rise of 4.8% was confirmed in the Autumn Statement in November 2025.

That aside:

From StatXplore courtesy of Moneybox’s Paul Lewis

At May 2025, 758,363 people on old state pension and 64,603 on new state pension received more than £300 per week. At May 2023, 9030 received more than £400 per week and160 more than £500 per week.

Numbers and amounts paid will diminish over time as those receiving additional state pension through SERPS/S2P and graduated pension and those who inherited pensions from spouses and civil partners die.

Those whose NI record began after 5 April 2016 will never build the size of state pension that older pensioners could build or inherit as previous generations could.

It was the point of introducing the new State Pension, not only to simplify the system to eliminate the complications of contracting out of SERPS/SP2 but to make it cheaper to pay.

As said the state pension in future will be less but if pensioners are to have a living income it will have to be supplemented by other taxes.

Assuming the income thresholds are similar there is not going to be any net gain.

Graphite

I'm not sure why he's amazed as the triple lock rise of 4.8% was confirmed in the Autumn Statement in November 2025.

That aside:

From StatXplore courtesy of Moneybox’s Paul Lewis

At May 2025, 758,363 people on old state pension and 64,603 on new state pension received more than £300 per week. At May 2023, 9030 received more than £400 per week and160 more than £500 per week.

Numbers and amounts paid will diminish over time as those receiving additional state pension through SERPS/S2P and graduated pension and those who inherited pensions from spouses and civil partners die.

Those whose NI record began after 5 April 2016 will never build the size of state pension that older pensioners could build or inherit as previous generations could.

It was the point of introducing the new State Pension, not only to simplify the system to eliminate the complications of contracting out of SERPS/SP2 but to make it cheaper to pay.

Because he’s been struggling with serious illness for several years. We’re comfortable financially and have different priorities right now.
Anyway, we don’t agree with the triple lock.

Why shouldn’t pensions keep pace with the rise in price of consumer goods and wage rises? They both contribute to cost push inflation which we all pay for.

MPs have just awarded themselves a 5% pay rise, They willl be paid an additional £4,695 per annum or £90 a week.

New State Pension, currently £230.25, rises by 4.8% to 241.30 in April meaning an annual increase of £574 or just £11 a week - barely enough to buy few basic groceries.

As I have said already, some people have more SP than that but many have much less. The smaller the pension the smaller the increase.

StatXplore shows that at May 2025, 636,311 old State Pensioners and 173,164 new State Pensioners received only £100 pw or less. They will get a princely rise of £4.80 per week or less.

Pensioners are always playing catch up. The triple lock is based on the various measures of inflation taken the previous summer. By the time we are paid the new pension rate in the following May (not April as SP is paid four weeks in arrear), there have been more consumer price rises and more wage rises adding to inflation.

This year's triple lock percentage rise is based on wage growth from May 2025 to July 2025, so effectively pensions are uprated almost a year later.

NotSpaghetti

Factually it is a benefit.
It's a contributory benefit - part of our social security expenditure.

Yes, factually that’s true, and those who’ve not contributed directly still “benefit” from it.

Graphite

Why shouldn’t pensions keep pace with the rise in price of consumer goods and wage rises? They both contribute to cost push inflation which we all pay for.

MPs have just awarded themselves a 5% pay rise, They willl be paid an additional £4,695 per annum or £90 a week.

New State Pension, currently £230.25, rises by 4.8% to 241.30 in April meaning an annual increase of £574 or just £11 a week - barely enough to buy few basic groceries.

As I have said already, some people have more SP than that but many have much less. The smaller the pension the smaller the increase.

StatXplore shows that at May 2025, 636,311 old State Pensioners and 173,164 new State Pensioners received only £100 pw or less. They will get a princely rise of £4.80 per week or less.

Pensioners are always playing catch up. The triple lock is based on the various measures of inflation taken the previous summer. By the time we are paid the new pension rate in the following May (not April as SP is paid four weeks in arrear), there have been more consumer price rises and more wage rises adding to inflation.

This year's triple lock percentage rise is based on wage growth from May 2025 to July 2025, so effectively pensions are uprated almost a year later.

Also our state pension is one of the lowest in Europe.

Don’t most European workers pay more tax?

ArthurAskey

Labour like to describe pensioners as “people on benefits” despite the fact that they’ve worked and paid taxes for 45 years or more.

Honestly, what a nonsense comment! All governments and MPs have used that term, not just Labour AND furthermore, if you are insinuating it’s used as a derogatory term it is far more likely to be used by the Tories.

Basgetti

Don’t most European workers pay more tax?

I’d have no issue whatsoever in paying more tax in order to have a better state pension and better services.

Neither would we have, Cossy.

Me too!

Not true at all. Many Contributory benefits are taxable.

It is about mid table in terms of how much we receive. But remember, it reflects the low amount we pay towards it.

It strikes me that there is so much that is not clear, not transparent, not understood about pensions and other benefits managed by the DWP, and so much prejudice instigated and perpetuated by certain media against “ people on benefits”, lumping everyone together as “scroungers”, which possibly accounts for pensioners not wishing to consider themselves to be in receipt of a “benefit”.

Yes, there are some who claim fraudulently, but it is a tiny proportion. Some families may actually be better off on benefits, or not pushing up their working hours as they would lose out on Universal Credit.
Then there is the cliff edge of Pension Credit and all its add-ons, which those just under the threshold miss out on.

The system has grown piecemeal but any government which tries to straighten it out has an impossible task, creating divisions and dissatisfaction, as with the old and new State Pensions.

MP’s have just awarded themselves a 5% pay rise

Not correct though, it was awarded ‘to them’ by some committee or other, they didn’t do it themselves.

True. My mistake. It has been awarded by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) since 2010. Before that MPs did decide in HoC resolutions based on advice from the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB).

In 2008, the House agreed to a resolution that provided for automatic, formula-driven increases based on public sector pay, intended to stop MPs from voting directly on their own pay.

My point though was to illustrate that the percentage rise depends on the starting point: a 5% rise on an already generous salary compared to a 4.8% triple lock rise on what might be a very small pension.

Calendargirl

^MP’s have just awarded themselves a 5% pay rise^

Not correct though, it was awarded ‘to them’ by some committee or other, they didn’t do it themselves.

I don’t think MPs are paid enough. Imo, they should receive an higher salary and be barred from outside paid interests.

Sometimes, I wonder if MP pay should be performance-related and that there should be a progressive pay-scale based on experience and responsibilities taken on.

If one looks at Parallel Parliament and similar sites to see the extent of what individual MPs do; how often they ask questions, take part in debates, present bills, table motions, what committees they are members of, APPGs and so on, it’s very clear that some do more than others.

The allocation of places on Select Committees is based on the size of the party on the HoC so that can be unfair to members of smaller parties and independents but it should stop them getting involved in other aspects of Parliamentary business.

Anyone can stand for MP and be elected. They don't even have to undergo a DBS check.

Once elected, there must be a certain degree of having to hit the ground running but new MPs will be inexperienced and I think pay should reflect that.

Immediately after he was elected, the former Reform MP James McMurdock bragged that he was having to take a substantial pay cut to become an MP. A diligent journalist from the Bylines Times soon noticed that his CV looked suspicious and spoke to him employers. They said he had been a junior clerk who wasn’t to be trusted with anything important, that his MP salary would, in fact, be a very substantial pay rise.

I don’t know how well McMurdock he does his job. He may work very hard for his constituents and have made a difference.

When he was with Reform, he would ask the occasional question in the HoC which I suspected was fed to him from other party MPs. Since leaving Reform in July 2025 he has spoken only 16 times in the HoC and serves on no committees or APPGs.

parliamentlive.tv/Search?Keywords=&Member=James+McMurdock+MP&MemberId=5361&House=&Business=&Start=05%2F07%2F2025&End=04%2F03%2F2026

www.parallelparliament.co.uk/mp/james-mcmurdock

Certainly ought to be performance related in the Lords.