The potential of no longer paying National Insurance.

growstuff

Doodledog I know pensioners have less control about increasing income, which is why I've written that there would need to be a long, transparent lead in. It would affect younger people, who will be affected one way or the other anyway because the current systems are flawed and unsustainable.

I know, which is why I pointed out that explaining would be better than half-cocked announcements.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to catastrophise either. Whilst I appreciate that many seem to think they are lying, I know for sure that a lot of women’s lives were ruined by the change to the pension age as it took them by surprise. If ‘something’ were announced now that would happen in ten years, say, what would someone in their 60s be able to do about it, let alone someone older? It may seem obvious that we would be given plenty of warning but it didn’t happen last time.

One of the most basic rules of public information giving is that you should anticipate the worries of the audience and assuage them (if possible) right at the start, so that they can listen to the rest of the information without it being blocked by the ‘noise’ of those worries, and to minimise speculation.

I keep saying that I don’t think anyone is interested in my spending habits, although they obviously form part of Big Data so could be sold. That doesn’t particularly bother me, but there are those who protect such information fiercely and they have a right to do so. That’s really not my concern though. Again, for the millionth time it is the fact that this represents ’creep’ in state powers, and could be used for nefarious purposes down the line. I see AI as exciting and likely to be beneficial to us all, but if we blindly allow it to snoop on us our freedoms could be even further eroded. I’m not happy with this government in that regard, but we don’t know what future ones might do, or with what motives. It could be even worse.

You are fat, and need an operation? Look! A bill was paid at an ice cream parlour- Denied!

The WI is now a proscribed organisation, as Mr Gove sees it as extremist, yet here is evidence of your subscription! - Jail!

40% of pensioners buy at least some food from the Tesco Finest range, and some even shop at Waitrose! Clearly they have too much money! Cut the state pension!

Oops! A printout of spending patterns, complete with graphs and charts has been left on a train, and it appears that on this occasion citizens are personally identifiable. Never mind. We are assured that only those with a level 3 qualification in statistics will be able to interpret them, and advise that nobody should worry about blackmail based on their internet use. Meanwhile there is a helpline available for those concerned about their wives finding out about the extent of their spending on certain websites.

Ridiculous? Maybe, for now.

Fgs Doodledog! You are becoming a conspiracy theorist!

I think there most likely are many British pensioners moving abroad and not telling the authorities because if pensioners live abroad, I believe their pensions are frozen at the level they were at at the time of their move. I’m not saying I agree with this, since if they’ve always paid taxes and NI in Britain all their lives, I’m unsure of the fairness of freezing their pensions. However perhaps some do play the system. I’ve heard of pensioners who maintain that they are living at the home of a relative and coming back to Britain for medical treatment because it’s expensive abroad.
We met a couple when we were in New Zealand. We chatted with them. They were British and emigrated to NZ as soon as they retired, but told us that they were about to return to Britain because now they were 80 and needed more medical attention and it’s too expensive in NZ. So they were going home. Is that working the system or since they spent their working lives in Britain paying taxes and NI, is that perfectly acceptable?
I don’t know.

Germanshepherdsmum

Fgs Doodledog! You are becoming a conspiracy theorist!

I could have predicted that response. 'Some people' don't understand irony. I deliberately chose 'examples' that were outside the box, in the hope of reducing the chances of someone patiently explaining why a more reasonable one wouldn't work, and hoped that it would be obvious that they were simply showing that wedges have thin ends that can grow to larger ones when they are in place.

WRT pensioners living abroad, I guess it's to stop people taking money outside of the UK economy, but I agree that it's not very fair to take people's money when they are working here, but deny them the benefits of that when they're not. It's particularly unfair if someone marries a partner from abroad - one of them is going to have to move countries, so why should their pension entitlements be halved?

I don't see why it might be wrong to move back to the UK after living abroad. Many people work abroad for a while then come home - I don't see why the morality of that would change when they become pensioners, as their pension is based on contributions made in this country.

It would be different if someone paid tax in NZ (or wherever) for years and then expected a UK pension when they came here, although as the UK pension is one of the lowest, I doubt there would be many people playing the system that way. They wouldn't get one anyway, I don't think. I know someone who moved abroad at about 25 and returned to the UK at 60 or so, fully expecting to get a state pension as a British citizen. It was denied, but I don't know what would have happened if they'd had no money of their own to live on. I assume that benefits would be payable in those circumstances?

You’re right DD people who come here to live who are older will be eligible to state benefits if they have no other income, but they cannot claim a state pension. It makes little difference, it’s just a change of name.
I don’t think SP is halved if you move abroad, I think that all cost of living increases are not paid to people who move abroad, so in fact, their pension gradually decreases in value.
Personally I dislike the idea of people, usually living in Europe as places such as NZ are too far away to do this, pretending they live in the UK by using a relative’s address, and coming back to use the NHS because their country of residence has a more expensive health system. I think that’s abuse to be honest.

There’s another way of looking at it. People who live abroad have paid into the UK system in order to be eligible for their UK pension. They cost the UK less when they live abroad, as dependence on services increases as you age, and in reality most probably don’t come back to the UK for their care. I wonder if anybody has done the equation?

I agree that pretending is dishonest, but I don't think that moving away is immoral. Coming back to use the NHS they have helped pay for is fair enough too, I think. They won't have contributed to the system in their new country, so why should they be able to use that?

People who move away are absolutely not immoral.
What I think is, not immoral, but definitely using the system, is when they go abroad to live but come back if diagnosed with a serious illness, but because no longer legally eligible for NHS care, they pretend to live at the address of a relative. If a person goes to live abroad, they need to be sure that they can afford to live in their chosen country. If medical insurance is required, then they should know that and buy it.
Of course they are eligible to claim and receive their pension wherever they live. I actually think it mean spirited of the government to deny pensioners who live abroad the cost of living rise.

Doodledog

I agree that pretending is dishonest, but I don't think that moving away is immoral. Coming back to use the NHS they have helped pay for is fair enough too, I think. They won't have contributed to the system in their new country, so why should they be able to use that?

Some people living in certain countries aren't eligible for state pension increases.

Doodledog

I agree that pretending is dishonest, but I don't think that moving away is immoral. Coming back to use the NHS they have helped pay for is fair enough too, I think. They won't have contributed to the system in their new country, so why should they be able to use that?

It doesn't matter what you think. The fact is that (with certain exceptions) the eligibility for using the NHS include residency. Campaign to change the law if you don't like it, but it can't just be ignored if you don't like it.

pably15

At the moment state pension is classed as a benefit, when I inquired about carers allowance, I found out that if a person gets state pension, they can't get carers allowance, because you can't get 2 benefits. after paying N I stamp all your working life.
just another way of keeping money off people.

The theory with carer's allowance is that it's compensation for not being able to work as a result of caring responsibilities. Pensioners aren't expected to work, so don't need compensation.

growstuff

Doodledog

I agree that pretending is dishonest, but I don't think that moving away is immoral. Coming back to use the NHS they have helped pay for is fair enough too, I think. They won't have contributed to the system in their new country, so why should they be able to use that?

Some people living in certain countries aren't eligible for state pension increases.

I know.

And I know it doesn't matter what I think (thanks for pointing that out). I was responding to maddie's saying that she wasn't sure what she felt about it by giving my opinion. You know, conversation. Discussion. I'm not remotely bothered whether people choose to live abroad or not, so if it's ok I won't be campaigning. Jeez.

The rules are, if you live out of the country for two years, you are no longer eligible to receive NHS care. People who move abroad, including pensioners, know this. That is why some use a relative’s address. In any case, they no longer live here, so have no address here.

My grandson, who has lived in New Zealand for less than three years, and is a British citizen with no other citizenship, desperately needs his tonsils out and grommits in both ears because his hearing is quite seriously affected. He is not eligible to have this treatment on the NHS in the UK, even though he has only been out of the country for two and a half years and the intention is to return. The waiting lists in New Zealand are long, much like here. He would have to wait for two years and all the time his learning is being affected. With this in mind, my husband and I have offered to pay for his surgery to be done privately. It will be done in the Easter school holidays. We are in the lucky position of being able to afford to do this.

I wonder what the logic is of that? I suppose there is no minimum number of contributions to qualify for NHS care, so no maximum to keep you in the system. It does seem tough that someone who has paid in from 15 to 65 then retires loses the right to use it, but maybe it's seen as swings and roundabouts.

I hope your grandson's op goes well, maddie. Is he having it done here or in NZ?

Thank you Doodle.
In NZ, no point in adding fares to the cost as well. They’re coming home at Christmas for a holiday providing our daughter’s ex agrees.
And we’ve just spent six weeks out there with them. We keep in close touch.

Doodledog

I wonder what the logic is of that? I suppose there is no minimum number of contributions to qualify for NHS care, so no maximum to keep you in the system. It does seem tough that someone who has paid in from 15 to 65 then retires loses the right to use it, but maybe it's seen as swings and roundabouts.

I hope your grandson's op goes well, maddie. Is he having it done here or in NZ?

Contact your MP and ask that question.

Whatever the reason, that's the law and people can't just ignore a law because they don't agree with it.

I've been thinking about why HMRC might want access to pensioners' bank accounts and I can think of quite a few.

As an example, most people seem to think that people (whether they're pensioners or not) shouldn't be able to hide or squirrel away assets in non-UK accounts. I've lost count of the calls to target non-doms and some others.

I don't know whether people know how expensive it is to investigate people like Michelle Mone. In her case, there are two issues: squirreling money away and allegations of fraud. There is no way in the world that HMRC or the National Crime Agency would use its resources to micro-manage the accounts of the vast majority of pensioners. However, technology can flag up concerns automatically and save HMRC billions of pounds on dead end investigations.

maddyone

The rules are, if you live out of the country for two years, you are no longer eligible to receive NHS care. People who move abroad, including pensioners, know this. That is why some use a relative’s address. In any case, they no longer live here, so have no address here.

My grandson, who has lived in New Zealand for less than three years, and is a British citizen with no other citizenship, desperately needs his tonsils out and grommits in both ears because his hearing is quite seriously affected. He is not eligible to have this treatment on the NHS in the UK, even though he has only been out of the country for two and a half years and the intention is to return. The waiting lists in New Zealand are long, much like here. He would have to wait for two years and all the time his learning is being affected. With this in mind, my husband and I have offered to pay for his surgery to be done privately. It will be done in the Easter school holidays. We are in the lucky position of being able to afford to do this.

People are supposed to de-register with their GP, if they're going to spend more than three months abroad.

Doodledog

growstuff

Doodledog

I agree that pretending is dishonest, but I don't think that moving away is immoral. Coming back to use the NHS they have helped pay for is fair enough too, I think. They won't have contributed to the system in their new country, so why should they be able to use that?

Some people living in certain countries aren't eligible for state pension increases.

I know.

And I know it doesn't matter what I think (thanks for pointing that out). I was responding to maddie's saying that she wasn't sure what she felt about it by giving my opinion. You know, conversation. Discussion. I'm not remotely bothered whether people choose to live abroad or not, so if it's ok I won't be campaigning. Jeez.

Not sure of your point. Of course moving abroad isn't immoral Why would it be?

There’s no point at all in contacting our MP (apart from the fact that she doesn’t bother to answer letters) because I know the law and we as a family are not seeking any NHS treatment here for our grandchild. All visitors to the UK are eligible to have any emergency treatment that is needed on the NHS should such a situation arise when they are visiting us. I was comparing what we are doing as a family for a family member who hasn’t lived here for two and a half years, with pensioners who go to live abroad permanently but come back to get treatment and drugs on the NHS by registering their address as being at a relative’s house, and presumably not ever de registering with their GP.
I can see that they may have paid into the system whilst they were working, but when someone goes to live abroad, they need to consider all the costs and disadvantages as well as the advantages, and health care is something that should be very carefully considered and looked into before making that decision.
Actually I think this discussion has helped me make up my mind. I think now that the rule should apply to one and all and should be enforced. If that takes looking at where people are spending most of their money to confirm where they are living, so be it. No one is above the law, including pensioners who have paid taxes here but but choose to live abroad.

“Surely they pay tax at the same rate?
It's just that they don't pay NI.”

Pensioners have paid tax AND NI throughout our working lives - for many that is over 40 years! Surely we can be ‘let off’ paying NI in our aging years. We have contributed our fair share!

Even those who paid the married women’s stamp’? Was that ‘paying a fair share’?

LizzieDrip

“Surely they pay tax at the same rate?
It's just that they don't pay NI.”

Pensioners have paid tax AND NI throughout our working lives - for many that is over 40 years! Surely we can be ‘let off’ paying NI in our aging years. We have contributed our fair share!

No, I don't think they should be let off. Until relatively recently, NI was only a few percentage of gross income (and less for those who had opted out). Until the recent reduction, NI had increased to 13% of gross income once the threshold (quite low) had been reached. That's a significant deduction for those of working age. As the money ends up in the same place as income tax, it means people of working age are being taxed considerably more than those who no longer work.

The idea that NI is an insurance is meaningless these days. It no longer funds pensions, unemployment, ill health, all of which rely on billions of pounds from general taxation (or money creation - in case Maizie is reading).

No, people who no longer work haven't necessarily paid a fair share. The truth is that they're being subsidised by working age people. Obviously older people don't need to insure against unemployment (because they're not expected to work) and they's already receiving the pensions they contributed towards. However, healthcare cost about a sixth of national GDP and I really don't see why those who can afford it (whether that money is coming from earned or unearned income) should pay so much less towards it, based on age.

Whatever the reason, that's the law and people can't just ignore a law because they don't agree with it.
Who is suggesting that anyone should break the law?? I most certainly am not - I am simply questioning the logic of the law as it stands. Rather as you seem to be when you say the pensioners shouldn’t be ’let off’ paying NI. Are you going to write to your MP or campaign about that, or are you also just joining in a conversation with your thoughts on a situation?

Why are you so determined to be confrontational?

Quoting Martin Lewis: National Insurance is a Ponzi scheme.