From: "Tim" 
Newsgroups: uk.finance
Subject: Re: Pension rules, pre or post A Day?
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:40:09 +0100

> |> |> |> Stickems. wrote:
> | > | > | > > My providers says that the pension and the tax
> | > | > | > > free cash has to be based on final remuneration
> | > | > | > > if I backdate my pension to maturity in 2003.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > |  wrote
> | > | > | > Are they effectively talking about the
> | > | > | > 'scheme retirement age' under the plan ?
> | > | > |
> | > | > "Tim" wrote
> | > | > | Why would that matter at all?
> | > | > | You can retire either before or after the 'scheme
> | > | > | retirement after the 'scheme retirement age'...
> | > | > |
> | > | > |  wrote
> | > | > | > You may need to ammend this on the scheme
> | > | > | > rules if you have now passed that date.
> | > | > |
> | > | > "Tim" wrote
> | > | > | Why?  How would that help?...
> | > | > |
> | > | > | AIUI, the OP is talking about making his effective date
> | > | > | of retirement in 2003 - then the missing pension payments
> | > | > | would be paid now in one big lump.  Surely that would
> | > | > | be based on the law applicable in 2003?  He wouldn't
> | > | > | be "retiring now", he'll be saying "I retired back in 2003,
> | > | > | now pay me the pension I've missed in the meantime!"
> | > | >
> | > | "Stickems." wrote
> | > | > The changes made earlier this year are retrospective, aren't they?
> | > |
> | > "Tim" wrote
> | > | How do you mean?
> | > | Do you think that someone who had overfunded under
> | > | the old rules and therefore had to pay extra tax when
> | > | they retired, say in 2003, will get that tax refunded
> | > | now if there was no overfunding on the new rules?
> | >
> | "Stickems." wrote
> | > The old laws are no more. The new rules should be applied.
> |
> "Tim" wrote
> | Of course, from April this year onwards.  But
> | it was the *old* rules back in 2003, wasn't it?
> |
> | Do you think the new rules should be applied
> | retrospectively to someone who retired back in 2003?
>
"Stickems." wrote
> Yes, if they haven't taken any
> benefits by deferring their pension.

If they are still "deferred" then they have not "retired"...

What are you trying to achieve? - To have "retired"
in 2003, and so receive all missing payments from
between 2003 & now, or to "retire" now after deferment?

You say you want to "backdate ... to maturity
in 2003", but then you say that you are
"deferring" the pension.  Well - which is it?

"Stickems." wrote
> The tax office think as I do.

And how do you (/"they") think?