Payroll/Benefits/Taxes Q&A

Status
Not open for further replies.

PavlosA

Member
Joined
29 Jul 2011
Messages
75
Hi all

I'm being offered lots of generous help on these here forums, so as thanks, I'm offering my services in the realm of payroll knowledge.

So if anyone ever has any questions relating to compensation and benefits, ask away. I won't claim to know everything, because the world of the Income Tax (Earnings & Pensions) Act 2003 is almost as complex as the world of journey routeings...

I also have knowledge of self employment, pensions, state benefits etc.

Pavlos MCIPPdip
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
9 Apr 2011
Messages
278
Location
Over there
I hope you can tell me where is the fairness in a country where my wife, who is 10 months younger than me, will not be eligible to receive her state pension until 12 months after I receive mine?

It is purely a side effect of her birth date and the fact that the pension age of 66 for women has been brought forward yet again. Remember that less than 10 years ago most women received the pension at 60.

No wonder the government needs to fill the media with selfish petrol heads. It has several bits of nasty news it would prefer to keep out of the headlines.
 

Barn

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Messages
1,425
I hope you can tell me where is the fairness in a country where my wife, who is 10 months younger than me, will not be eligible to receive her state pension until 12 months after I receive mine?

It is purely a side effect of her birth date and the fact that the pension age of 66 for women has been brought forward yet again. Remember that less than 10 years ago most women received the pension at 60.

No wonder the government needs to fill the media with selfish petrol heads. It has several bits of nasty news it would prefer to keep out of the headlines.
Bit of a harsh response! Did he say he was anything to do with the government?


 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,597
I hope you can tell me where is the fairness in a country where my wife, who is 10 months younger than me, will not be eligible to receive her state pension until 12 months after I receive mine?

It is purely a side effect of her birth date and the fact that the pension age of 66 for women has been brought forward yet again. Remember that less than 10 years ago most women received the pension at 60.

No wonder the government needs to fill the media with selfish petrol heads. It has several bits of nasty news it would prefer to keep out of the headlines.

What the bit of nasty news that the previous govt brought in with regards to pension age.

Of course, you are fully aware of the facts surrounding the state pension and how it is becoming more and more unaffordable due to the fact that we are living longer and im sure you would be equally upset if people turned round and said you would have to pay even more to retire at 60/65 rather than later./


But hey, dont let me stop you in the middle of your well thought out rant which obviously took in all economic factors before you pushed keys on your keyboard.!!
 
Joined
9 Apr 2011
Messages
278
Location
Over there
What the bit of nasty news that the previous govt brought in with regards to pension age.

Of course, you are fully aware of the facts surrounding the state pension and how it is becoming more and more unaffordable due to the fact that we are living longer and im sure you would be equally upset if people turned round and said you would have to pay even more to retire at 60/65 rather than later./


But hey, dont let me stop you in the middle of your well thought out rant which obviously took in all economic factors before you pushed keys on your keyboard.!!

Sadly, you are wrong on all points; except for the fact that raising the pension age to 66 was brought in by the previous government.

However, that was phased in over a decent period so that women born between June 1950 and 1955 received a pension date which was incrementally later depending on their birthday between those dates. This was for the rise from 60 to 65 years which everyone accepted grudgingly because it equalised the pension age at 65 by 2020. This has been set in stone for many years - no problem with that.

Then it was decided to raise pension age to 66 for people born after that cut off date. This had no affect on the women who had already fallen into the incremental increase period.

However, now the 66 date has been brought forward to 2018 which affects those women who already had been given an incremental date (the 60-65 group) and adds yet another year onto what was already an altered date.


And as for paying more in order to retire at the same or a later age, I think almost everyone has had to do that whether they like it or not.

But that was not my point.
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,454
Location
Birmingham
There is always going to be an arbitrary cut off date. Sure it's annoying but surely it was enough to grant yourselves far better pensions than someone entering the workplace today would get?
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,597
Sadly, you are wrong on all points; except for the fact that raising the pension age to 66 was brought in by the previous government.

However, that was phased in over a decent period so that women born between June 1950 and 1955 received a pension date which was incrementally later depending on their birthday between those dates. This was for the rise from 60 to 65 years which everyone accepted grudgingly because it equalised the pension age at 65 by 2020. This has been set in stone for many years - no problem with that.

Then it was decided to raise pension age to 66 for people born after that cut off date. This had no affect on the women who had already fallen into the incremental increase period.

However, now the 66 date has been brought forward to 2018 which affects those women who already had been given an incremental date (the 60-65 group) and adds yet another year onto what was already an altered date.


And as for paying more in order to retire at the same or a later age, I think almost everyone has had to do that whether they like it or not.

But that was not my point.
Oh im sorry so phasing it in was alright but bringing it forward so its more affordable isnt?

what a crock of ****.

You know im right you just hate to admit it. people last longer = people take more money out the system.

if you think thats wrong then fair play to you. Happy days. go on strike.
 

richw

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
9,028
Location
Liskeard
Isn't this now descending into fantasy land?

How can you possibly say that the state pension will be any better or worse now than in 2060?
I will be surprised if there still is a state pension in 2060 as we know it now, work until health dictates otherwise, at which point there will be a medical based pension benefit, or of course your own private pension. I'm 24 and pay a private pension, my friends laugh they think its waste of money, we will see who's laughing when i hit 65 and get my private pension!

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk
 

Ascot

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2005
Messages
3,389
Location
Birmingham, UK
You know im right you just hate to admit it. people last longer = people take more money out the system.

if you think thats wrong then fair play to you. Happy days. go on strike
Ouch, put the claws back Margaret Hamilton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

carriageline

Established Member
Joined
11 Jan 2012
Messages
1,834
Hi mate

Firstly thanks for offering your help!

Just a quick one. At my current job, my hours are always varied (Telecomms technician, so depends how long each job takes etc.), obliviously my boss deals with the tax etc so I haven't got a clue. He has offered me a load of work on "price" which will last just over a month, and working it out I will earn about £5000-6000 before tax.

Now my question is, how is the tax worked out from this? May sound really stupid, but for that month, would I get taxed the same amount for someone who earns that amount every month? I dont think so as tax is worked out on your yearly income right?

So how would mine be worked out? My wages are always different every month, so I don't know what my yearly wage is until the year is up.

If anyone could help I would greatly appreciate it, thanks alot

Jamie
 

PavlosA

Member
Joined
29 Jul 2011
Messages
75
Hi mate

Firstly thanks for offering your help!

Just a quick one. At my current job, my hours are always varied (Telecomms technician, so depends how long each job takes etc.), obliviously my boss deals with the tax etc so I haven't got a clue. He has offered me a load of work on "price" which will last just over a month, and working it out I will earn about £5000-6000 before tax.

Now my question is, how is the tax worked out from this? May sound really stupid, but for that month, would I get taxed the same amount for someone who earns that amount every month? I dont think so as tax is worked out on your yearly income right?

So how would mine be worked out? My wages are always different every month, so I don't know what my yearly wage is until the year is up.

If anyone could help I would greatly appreciate it, thanks alot

Jamie
Hi Jamie

The answer would depend on a couple of factors. I assume you get a payslip with every payment you receive, detailing gross pay and statutory deductions - PAYE/NI etc? Does that show what tax code is being used?

Can I also assume you are 'employed'? The suggestion that you are being 'offered' work, rather than told what to do, might suggest otherwise.

If you are being paid as an employee, then you are correct in that you have an annual tax allowance, and tax is calculated over the whole year. However, the actual income tax charge on your payment will depend on if you are on a cumulative tax code, or a non-cumulative code ('month 1').
 
Joined
9 Apr 2011
Messages
278
Location
Over there
Oh im sorry so phasing it in was alright but bringing it forward so its more affordable isnt?

what a crock of ****.

You know im right you just hate to admit it. people last longer = people take more money out the system.

if you think thats wrong then fair play to you. Happy days. go on strike.
Yeah, right. Whatever you say.

I was not aware that I was communicating with the world's most intelligent person.

I do apologise for doubting you in any way.

Maybe when you are three years from a pension and they tell you that you must work another three extra you might just begin to understand.

But I very much doubt it.
 

carriageline

Established Member
Joined
11 Jan 2012
Messages
1,834
Hi again

Thanks ever so much for your detailed reply!!! I am employeed, I'm just being
Offered work on a price per job, as opposed to £/per hour, better for me and my boss as work is completed quicker!!

I'm not sure on my tax code, I need see my pay slips as my boss has them over in Italy. My tax code last August was 747L.

Don't know If this makes a difference, I normally earn 800-1000 before tax. How would it work out if I was to earn 6000? Would they just charge me the highest rate tax band, then the following months would be lower? As it sort of works it self out, or would I have to get a rebate at the end of the year for the difference?

Thanks again so much

Jamie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top