Isn't it time we raised the cut-off age for paying NI

In theory that is a good idea, Wildstrawberry, but it would leave young people wide open to exploitation, if it were a case of 'work or starve'. They are already discriminated against by having a lower rate of minimum wage, and apprentice wages are laughable. If they couldn't claim when unemployed they might be forced to work for very low wages. Such a scheme would have to be backed up with decent and rigorously-enforced wage controls.

I know what you mean, though. A genuinely contributions-based insurance scheme would be a better system. A friend of mine's son left university and went back to live in the family home, claiming UC despite having no expenses and having never paid in a penny. When he had to go on some sort of job-finding course my friend was outraged, as 'he had qualifications'. He now works part-time (as a result of the course), but has his wages boosted as they fall below the threshold, so is not trying to get full-time employment. I don't think that is right when there are young people who are homeless and hungry - the money should go to them.

When health service was created the work force generally didn't have a lot of women working paying into the scheme. In the 50s workforce began to change, growing amount of contributions. The explosion in population after WW11 eventually began to contribute increasing the pot. Of course demand on NHS grew too. Looking at the even bigger population in Britain now along with even bigger increase in female workers there has to have been a massive increase in the Nat Ins pot. But, again, expectations have grown along with scientific advances making increase in demand by the increase in population. It's an never ending circle. Yes, people live longer some needing a lot of modern medical support. At the other end of the scale people who would not have survived early life also need modern medical support. Please, I am not saying care in any way should not be given to young or old only highlighting it's not quite as clear as having people pay, it's what is done with all the money. Medicine has changed radically, how much are we as individuals prepared to pay to keep up with it?

Unfortunately the cut off point is no longer 60 as in your happy case .it’s 66 and going up .
The only people still working fulltime after 66 probably need the money and are not doing it for fun so no they shouldn’t pay ni.You shoukdnt make all pensioners pay as not all of us are sitting on final salary or public sector pensions

Well said! 👏

I’ve just got my state pension in July. I had 47 years worth of contributions. And my pension is just the same as someone who’s paid 35 years. Go take a hike…… what you are suggesting is ridiculous.

Grannygrumps1

I’ve just got my state pension in July. I had 47 years worth of contributions. And my pension is just the same as someone who’s paid 35 years. Go take a hike…… what you are suggesting is ridiculous.

Perfectly put

NO I have paid national insurance since the age of 15, and I would utterly resent paying it again. What was all the hard work in aid of if not to keep some of the money I paid into!! Do NOT write to the government and suggest we pay national insurance again when we have retired. I would resent it like mad!!!

I worked full time for 45 years, contributing 45 years full NI contributions. I retired at 60 with a work pension, I received my first state pension last month but do not qualify for the NEW full pension as I had a worked until my state pension age of 66, I get about £200 less per month than those with the state pension and pension credits, even though I paid in for 45 years and you only need 35 years to qualify for the full pension. So NO, I would object to paying the government any more of my hard earned cash to pay for those who contribute very little or nothing and end up with more than those of us who have paid in full.

Should read ….as I had not worked until my pension age of 66

My feeling is (and has been for years) is that if you're still earning then you should still be paying NI. I really don't understand why, when I'm getting a salary, suddenly my NI contributions stopped when I qualified for a pension. Makes no sense at all.

Bea65

maddyone totally agree with you...am unable to retire now at 66..and paid over the NI contributing years..but now have to pay tax albeit reduced work hours due to SP now payable so feel am taxed again...

I think you mean 66.

Paperbackwriter

My feeling is (and has been for years) is that if you're still earning then you should still be paying NI. I really don't understand why, when I'm getting a salary, suddenly my NI contributions stopped when I qualified for a pension. Makes no sense at all.

I've always said that pensioners whose income is over a certain threshold should pay a proportion of NI to be ringfenced for the NHS.

I do know it is not funded entirely from NHS contributions but from tax.

maddyone

People already have to work till 68 and pay NI now till they’re 68. I think they’ve paid enough during their lifetime.

Think you mean 66.

Pammie1

Bea65

maddyone totally agree with you...am unable to retire now at 66..and paid over the NI contributing years..but now have to pay tax albeit reduced work hours due to SP now payable so feel am taxed again...

I think you mean 66.

Sorry, wrong quote !!

IF we all paid towards healthcare the system would not be broken. I worked in the NHS before moving to Europe for 25 years...the system in France is the best I ever came across. The system is based on payments ..'top up' insurance called a Mutuelle, for which monthly payments are made (in the case of my late husband and I, for basic cover it was £182 euros a month for both ...depending on age it is either more or less. If you require additional services (ie physio, etc and specialist treatment, you can opt to pay a third higher tier.) Exceptions are : anyone with no income ....their medical requirements are covered by the state; All treatment for cancer is entirely free. Long term illnesses are also partially funded by the state ( ie my husband died eventually from illnesses related to his Parkinsons ...he was given a prescription from the doctor for a riser/recliner chair costing E850 ...entirely free. Also specialist food, visits from the doctor (AT HOME !!!!!) several times a week and she was on call if we needed her. I had to pay for his care home once he got too ill to safely stay at home, As I was not a French citizen this cost me roughly the same as the UK (3-4,000 a month) HAD I have been French, deductions would have been taken from my income to cover most care home fees as well (i e my neighbour's mother was in one, cost to her : E1,000 a month ...........YES I do think we should base the NHS on the French system ! E25 each visit to the doctor (refunded all but 2 Euros from the health insurer)....for every illness and operation I needed I paid NOTHING extra ...you get what you pay for ! Even all the years ago I worked in the NHS the organisation was top heavy with management. At the time, the private initiative was being discussed ...which never came to anything. NOW the government can afford to pay £5,000,000 at least a WEEK to support anyone illegally entering the UK and yet once again has refused to raise the cap on care home fees. Disgusting ! I guess they want the elderly to live in cardboard boxes on the streets along with the rest of the UK born homeless ...........

There are some very odd comments here including the OP's.
NI contributions are paid by the working population up til retirement age. However, if you are an employee, your employer continues to pay their element even if you have reached pension age yourself.
NI contributions are necessary to receive some state benefits including State Pension. And yes, the State Pension is regarded as a 'benefit'
Automatic Enrolment means that employees (and their employers) have to make contributions towards a pension plan which is in addition to your State Pension of course, as it seems to be accepted that the State Pension may not be sufficient.
Everyone will always pay tax if they 'earn' above the threshold, which means that you could be a 'pensioner' and still pay income tax.
Sounds like quite enough to me!

my understanding is that if you earn enough to pay NI then you also receive sick pay when off ill. Am I wrong?

I'm sorry DaisyAnne but I don't think you live in my world so my answer is a GREAT BIG NO, NO, NO, NO!!!

kjmpde

my understanding is that if you earn enough to pay NI then you also receive sick pay when off ill. Am I wrong?

No sick pay for the self employed.

If you're entitled to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) when you're off work sick, you can get £99.35 per week for up to 28 weeks.
Employers may well pay more.

Are the self-employed able to pay full NI contributions? Forgive me if I'm wrong (which I may well be), but I thought they paid much lower contributions to cover NHS and state pension, but not sick pay?

Yes. I do think we should continue to pay NI after we retire, even if it is at a lower rate. There should be no reason why this fund cannot be ring fenced so that it helps with improving care for the elderly. Do we really want to be waiting for hours in ambulances outside hospitals or unable to find a place in a Care Home, if necessary? This separate fund might also go towards establishing thresholds so that older people do not have to part with every penny they have should they be ill for many years. Yes, the very policy that has just been abandoned yet again by the Budget Statement

Hobbs1

I worked full time for 45 years, contributing 45 years full NI contributions. I retired at 60 with a work pension, I received my first state pension last month but do not qualify for the NEW full pension as I had a worked until my state pension age of 66, I get about £200 less per month than those with the state pension and pension credits, even though I paid in for 45 years and you only need 35 years to qualify for the full pension. So NO, I would object to paying the government any more of my hard earned cash to pay for those who contribute very little or nothing and end up with more than those of us who have paid in full.

The New State Pension basic is equal to the Old State Pension + Pension Credit. I get fed up with those whinging as if their full pension is less than those on the old pension system.

If you get less than the full amount, it is because, for some reason, you don't meet the criteria to get it. The same would have applied to someone on the old state pension. Were they not to meet the criteria, they would not get the full amount of their considerably lower pension.

Those on the OSP only get Pension Credit if their 'total weekly income' is under £182.60 per week. You are in exactly the same position. It sounds as if you are getting under this amount. If this is your total income, you can claim Pension Credit.

You have not been hard done by. The government changed the system to allow for longer life expectancy (all pensions work on that basis) and to ensure as many as possible get the larger amount, only available to those on the OSP by a means test.

I try to help as many people, who are eligible for benefits after the state pension age, as I can. I sometimes wonder how much damage such peevish comments as yours do to others who are entitled.

Nannapat1

There are some very odd comments here including the OP's.
NI contributions are paid by the working population up til retirement age. However, if you are an employee, your employer continues to pay their element even if you have reached pension age yourself.
NI contributions are necessary to receive some state benefits including State Pension. And yes, the State Pension is regarded as a 'benefit'
Automatic Enrolment means that employees (and their employers) have to make contributions towards a pension plan which is in addition to your State Pension of course, as it seems to be accepted that the State Pension may not be sufficient.
Everyone will always pay tax if they 'earn' above the threshold, which means that you could be a 'pensioner' and still pay income tax.
Sounds like quite enough to me!

What, exactly, did you find "odd" about the OP. You said it was "odd" but did not explain how or why. I think it would be only polite for you to do so.

Supergranuation

I'm sorry DaisyAnne but I don't think you live in my world so my answer is a GREAT BIG NO, NO, NO, NO!!!

Have you bothered to read the thread or do you just need somewhere to shout an opinion at others?

semperfidelis

Yes. I do think we should continue to pay NI after we retire, even if it is at a lower rate. There should be no reason why this fund cannot be ring fenced so that it helps with improving care for the elderly. Do we really want to be waiting for hours in ambulances outside hospitals or unable to find a place in a Care Home, if necessary? This separate fund might also go towards establishing thresholds so that older people do not have to part with every penny they have should they be ill for many years. Yes, the very policy that has just been abandoned yet again by the Budget Statement

This is not a million miles from what I suggested a little bit back semperfidelis. Having heard the reasoned discussion at the beginning of the thread I felt we should ALL pay an NHSI (National Health Insurance).

NI is a working life insurance ending at the end of work pension and benefits. NI could be reduced, as 20% of the money going to the National Health is currently paid from NI. That amount could then be paid by those of working age into a new NHI (so they are paying the same in total as they are now). The same amount could also be paid into NHI by those over SPA according to income (the only increase so far). In my previous post, I suggested that this might be around £533pa on an income of £30,000

They could also transfer the 80% paid to the NHS from general taxation to this fund, reducing the taxes it comes from and increasing the NHI.

You would then have a fund where all payments for NHI go, slightly increased by an OSPA payment. If that insurance payment needed to increase to meet the needs of the NHS, the government would have to have a conversation with the voters to explain why and how their money would be spent, e.g., to include Care costs paid for by us all over a lifetime.