Too rich for pensions? Return to the fold and dignity in retirement.

There is a school of thought that is brilliantly articulated in this post

The argument is set out below by Jo and Nova Wealth

From April 2027, unused pension assets are expected to fall inside the inheritance tax net on death. For deaths after age 75, your pension could be hit by a triple whammy:

🔴 40% inheritance tax.

🔴 Loss of the Residence Nil Rate Band RNRB for net estates of £2m+ (at a rate of £1 for every £2 of assets).

🔴 45% income tax when your beneficiaries withdraw this money.

This isn’t a headline rate though, but it can easily apply to wealth for many families with reasonably-sized pensions and other savings, a modest family home, and adult children as beneficiaries.

The decade long rule of “leave your pensions until last” is no longer going to be automatically optimal for many. Drawing on pensions earlier, and paying some income tax throughout retirement, may now materially reduce the total lifetime tax paid by families.

As ever, this is a planning issue, not a product one – so you should seek robust and well-considered advice, that models your full financial future. (Tax rules are subject to change, outcomes depend on individual circumstances, seek proper professional advice).


Too rich for pensions?

I know many rich people who have swapped DB pensions for DC pots so that they can have wealth to pass between generations.

For the very richest, this may prove a horrendously expensive mistake and if I had been advised to do this by an adviser , I would have asked if the chances of the beneficial tax rules that surround wealth in a SIPP wrapper could withstand the arrival of a Labour Government.

Along with VAT on private education fees, the IHT on unspent DC pension pots is most hated by those with excess money to their needs. Both education and retirement income can be “bought out of” so exclusivity is achieved.

The Labour Government has raised the bar.  There is a possibility that a future Government might reverse the tax increase- but I doubt it will happen. Because there really is no public outcry against these taxes (in the way that other tax rises have been shouted out – even inheritance tax on farms). Labour’s popular taxation increases prove resilient under right-wing parliaments.

The message is to make the state education system better, our health system the NHS and our pension system delivered by a few funds and by the tax payer. You can of course live outside education, health and pensions but you must recognise there is a high price to pay for exclusivity.


Pensions should bring us together

Although occupational DB pensions had pernicious executive sections, they were fundamentally collaborative and collective in investment.

I expect pensions will return to these two “C’s” with CDC where , were the rich to stop whingeing for a moment, they’d see that their better health will give them more by way of pension, simply because rich people live longer.

CDC pensions are not exclusive, they are inclusive of the boss and the the meanest paid, they all share in the deferred pay offered by what is a mutual endeavour.

It may not be possible for the rich and old to use CDC and they may choose instead to use an annuity. Either way, they will join a mortality pool that will include all types of “lives” living all kinds of lifestyles.

Here there is a democracy that is set against the right wing individuality of Conservative and Reform and covers Reform, Liberal and Labour politics. It also covers smaller parties like Hilary Salt’s (fighting for a parliamentary seat in Manchester).

I would ask those who are fed up that their pension’s wealth is facing ruinous tax to consider what Hilary had to say as she retired from a lifetime as a pension’s actuary

The link doesn’t work but I think you will have got the gist by now!

About henry tapper

Founder of the Pension PlayPen,, partner of Stella, father of Olly . I am the Pension Plowman
This entry was posted in pensions. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Too rich for pensions? Return to the fold and dignity in retirement.

  1. John Mather says:

    Which segment of the market are you addressing?

    A note on the comparison: USA v the U.K., the wealthiest 10% of households had wealth of £1,200,500 or more, while the least wealthy 10% had £16,500 or less , per ONS data. A key difference is that the U.K. bottom decile still holds some positive wealth (mostly physical assets like cars and possessions), whereas in the U.S. the bottom decile is typically in net negative territory. The Gini coefficient for total household wealth in Great Britain was 0.59

    The 5th Decile has £100,000 to £150,000 of total wealth which indicates that more than half the population can not achieve comfortable retirement at £40,000 pa in today’s terms.

    A40 year old would need to have £150,000 today in pensions and to contribute 20% to a pension to retire at age 67 and fund performance would need to be close to 8% a year.( all adjusted for 3% inflation.)

    Success in the DC market is quite challenging and your tax subsidised population more than 60% of the population.

    I wish you every success with CDC but faith in collectives based on history I am yet to be convinced for the segment my clients are in. (9th and 10th decile)

  2. It’s perspective isn’t it? For very many people “reasonably-sized pensions” and ” a modest family home” would be unimaginable riches. “those who are fed up that their pension’s wealth is facing ruinous tax” aren’t likely to join the bottom of the pile while their children will still end up with a hugely better starting place in life than the 43% of children in lone-parent families living in poverty.

Leave a Reply to John MatherCancel reply