Pension Age - should it stay at 66?

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119288476#Comment_119288476

Every politician in Europe would love not to have to bring home the bad news, but there is no way around it, pension age must go up and saving rates increased if you are to have any chance of a decent retirement. The alternative is that you will have to work long past 66 because the pension will be so poor you'll need to supplement it.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119283318#Comment_119283318

Right because every single report from every EU member state is wrong and somehow you if figured it all out..... This is a European wide problem and worse in a few countries where the demographics are even more negative. Politicians hate having to bring home the bad news, but there is no way to avoid this one but deal with it head on. This is a social problem, we either ensure everyone has a pension or when the time comes the have nots will vote for someone who will take yours away!

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289442#Comment_119289442

Will it apply to the politicians themselves?

No need to answer that.

spontindeed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289518#Comment_119289518

The problem is that the Government here is too selective and they keep targeting the same people all the time instead of being courageous by properly taxing public sector pensions and gratuities as well as probing the tax affairs of big corporations here for potential windfall back taxes. Everyone has to share the burden instead of the ordinary private sector worker. I look at the new taxes Government already introduced in the last five years for example: Tyre charge (Denis Naughten introduced this charge which is passed onto customers), Sugar Tax, NOx surcharge, now they're trying to impose a Broadcasting Charge.

This Government has been out of touch with people for at least 20 years and young working couples couldn't procreate because they cannot find affordable accommodation as well as the fact that they have to compete with newcomers for jobs because of the Government's divisive visa liberalization policy in addition to the shortage of accommodation due to the immigration pressure. So they just stay at home with their parents instead. All this while big corporations here are allowed too much say in public policy which tends to favor the corporate interests.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289605#Comment_119289605

TDs work pension age has been reformed already, it is now the same as the State pension age.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119287326#Comment_119287326

Your statement is false.

Most (not all) current public servants will receive the State Pension, and so any increase in the State pension age does affect them.

NB: as pointed out below, due to the Supp Pension, any increase in the State Pension age will not have a negative impact on most PS.

salonfire

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291182#Comment_119291182

That's not true, there'll be a supplementary pension for public sector workers so that they can retire on full pensions.

Do you honestly think public sector workers will allow the government to reduce their pension for a few years?

Geuze

(1) Pre 1995 PS typically don't receive the SPC, so aren't affected by changing the SPC age

(2) PS hired after April 1995 - can retire and receive work pension from age 60, but won't receive SPC until pension age.

Subject to certain conditions, a Supp pension may be payable until SPC kicks in. Yes, you are correct, fair play, I had missed that.

(3) PS hired after 01.04.2004 - can retire and receive work pension from age 65, but won't receive SPC until pension age.

I'm guessing these can also possibly receive the Supp pension for a year, from 65 to 66? Again, I missed that, you are correct.

(4) PS hired after 01.01.2013 = Single PS scheme - can retire at 66

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290841#Comment_119290841

Yes of course because it could not be possible for the elected representatives to actually represent the views of the voters since your view of the world would not stack up.

spontindeed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291406#Comment_119291406

The Government should have retroactively included ALL pre-1995 public sector workers in those pension changes - every one of them. As always, our Government haven't got the courage to do what other European Countries did. Here, our Government surrendered to the public sector in order to buy industrial peace when for example in Greece, the Greek Government mandated "civil mobilization measures" on all of their public sector to prevent them from going on strike or holding the Country to ransom (and it worked in the end). The Greek Government held the line and now the ordinary Greek people are enjoying the fruits of this tough love approach. There aren't as many public sector workers in Ireland to hold the Country to ransom anyway so the Government here could still technically introduce a tax on all public sector gratuities and public sector pensions and mandate "civil mobilization measures" on them. Ireland has a relatively small number of public sector number employees than most other EU Countries which makes it easy to bring about these reforms.

Also, our Government should probe multinational corporations for potential windfall back taxes over a 30 year legacy period. No need to increase PRSI on private sector employees (with the exception of employers earning over €110,000), or carbon tax or consumption taxes. If anything, consumption taxes like the 23% VAT rate needs to be permanently cut.

Sam Russell

What could be done by the Gov re PS pensions is to make any promotion entail a move to latest pension regime.

So a PS employee, who gets a promotion tomorrow gets the pension calculated on pension earned to date plus pension calculated from the future terms based on the contribution applicable from current earnings. Of course, a transition regime might be necessary.

Gusser09

What ever happened the pension reserve fund?

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293811#Comment_119293811

PS pension income is taxed, as normal.

Pension lump-sums are tax-free up to a certain amount, this applies to everybody, not just PS.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293956#Comment_119293956

Broadly speaking, it was used to recapitalise the banks.

In return, we owned/own BoI, AIB, EBS, and pTSB.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293980#Comment_119293980

So instead of trying to demonise Public Sector Workers as usual should they be looking at clawing the money back from where it really went. How profitable are these banks and where do the profits go to.

Geuze

The State has sold down its shareholding in BoI, and has received back more than it initially spent.

We own approx 70% of AIB, and the plan seems to be to slowly sell the shares.

We own all of pTSB.

Obviously, the shareholders are paid any dividends.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294021#Comment_119294021

So any profits or monies that come from this should be put back into the pension reserve fund rather than looking to crucify workers or make them work until they literally drop dead.

Geuze

https://www.ntma.ie/national-pensions-reserve-fund-nprf

Following the commencement of the relevant provisions of the NTMA (Amendment) Act 2014, the NPRF‘s investment mandate ended on 22 December 2014.

The assets of the National Pensions Reserve Fund (NPRF) became assets of the ISIF on the ISIF’s establishment (22 December 2014). For more information on the ISIF please click here.

The Annual Reports and other publications of the National Pensions Reserve Fund are available below.

ISIF:

https://isif.ie/

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294029#Comment_119294029

Many earners pay zero or very low effective direct tax rates.

My parents pay 8% approx on 50k approx.

What is true is that the 48.5% rate starts very soon, at 36/37k approx, that is a killer.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294003#Comment_119294003

Well, because of the huge debts, the banks made huge losses. These losses are offset against future profits. So where do the profits go?

To the shareholders. The AIB shareholding in AIB was reduced to 60% or so when the Gov sold some shares at a low price recently.

Gusser09

Could the government make the USC permanent and use that for pensions? I know that it was temporary but needs must.

Gumbo

Should be reduced back to 65.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294186#Comment_119294186

Anyone committing their working lives to State and Public Service should be eligible to retire on their pension after 40 years. I'd agree re 65. I think if you have 40 years done by 65 you should be able to retire on full State Pension.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294029#Comment_119294029

Problem is that even if the government does transfer all of the proceeds of the sale of the banks into the Social Insurance Fund, it still won't take too long for the fund to run dry - unless the age for the contributory state pension is increased.

spontindeed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293977#Comment_119293977

Pension gratuities of €100,000 to retiring public servants are tax free - this needs to change. It's also unaffordable for any Government. Just because a public sector employee works for 40 years shouldn't entitle them to €100,000. That's just wrong and unfair to everyone else. There also needs to be a proper public sector pension levy.

Pension gratuities don't apply to "everybody" either: most private sector employees don't get gratuities when they retire (unlike the public sector). I would tax the private sector gratuities of high net worth individuals or those who earn over €110,000 a year. Also, the pension age for everyone should be 65 like before. Micheal Martin's reference to PRSI last week is really about trying to go after the easy targets in order to prop-up the public sector. If he thinks that voters like ourselves (who btw vastly outnumber the public sector) will allow this to pass, he's in for a big disappointment.

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119280734#Comment_119280734

So many untruths in one post is impressive.

The European General Court has already ruled in favour of Apple, and stated that the money is Apple's, not Ireland's nor indeed any other EU country's.

The appeal to the ECJ is being made by the European Commission against this judgement - you've gotten your assertions completely arseways on this.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294325#Comment_119294325

Many PS already pay 6.5% superannuation and 10% PRD/ASC on wages over 34k - are you saying their pension contributions should be higher?

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294325#Comment_119294325

PS get pension benefits as follows:

(1) lump-sum

(2) pension

(3) survivor's benefits

Are you suggesting some or all of these benefits be cut?

Bear in mind the employer and employee signed a contract regarding these benefits.

spontindeed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119294945#Comment_119294945

Public sector contracts can be changed in the public interest via executive powers of the Government. A legal precedent has already been set. It just takes courage and political will.

Lump-sums are gratuities. Gratuities of €100,000 to retiring public servants is wrong and un-affordable so it's only fair they should be taxed or cut.

Ireland's public sector pensions deficit is over €200 billion and it's not officially recorded in the Irish Government's sovereign debt because the Irish Government wants to portray the illusion that it is fiscally prudent whilst spoiling the privileged public sector and at the same time imposing new taxes on ordinary people to prop-up the increased cost of the public sector. If the Government want taxes - they can get it from Apple or other big multinational corporations who got sweetheart tax deals. Look at the effective tax rate of 0.005% that Apple paid here, the next Government needs to immediately withdraw from the Apple tax appeal and agree with the European Commission to take control of the money or maybe to request a fresh review with the ECJ given that there may be fresh grounds to consider a review of the first appeal. Even if Apple wins the appeal, the Government could technically still impose other back taxes on it from other years. Either way, Varadkar's Government will have to explain to their constituents why they decided to impose new taxes on people while kicking the €13 billion Apple tax away. I'm sure voters will punish them terribly for this.

Geuze

It is false to say that Apple pay 0.005% CT here.

Here are the facts, read the two links below:

https://economic-incentives.blogspot.com/2016/03/apple-sales-internationalby-numbers.html

https://economic-incentives.blogspot.com/2018/01/what-apple-did-next.html

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-p2vIHawmXo0/VvCiXORvKGI/AAAAAAAAZt8/Yjcu8ENLaAY/s1600-h/ASI%252520Branch%252520Outcomes%25255B4%25255D.png

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-p2vIHawmXo0/VvCiXORvKGI/AAAAAAAAZt8/Yjcu8ENLaAY/s1600-h/ASI%252520Branch%252520Outcomes%25255B4%25255D.png

Apple pay about 13% CT on the profits of their Irish branch.