You might also be interested in
Replies (5)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
The fact is ....
“We should be making provisions for ourselves for retirement, but we haven’t been. Auto enrolment is about reversing that… We need to give people a nudge to start saving for their retirement,” he said.
... the government have been taking 20% + of salaries from everyone for years with the promise we would have pensions and healthcare, but it has been squandered - so it is they not us who have not been making provision for our retirement, we thought we had, by naively trusting the government to keep its promise - the government has acted no better than Maxwell for decades!
Past performance isn't a guide to the future!
If we simply react to failure by blocking progress, nothing much would improve. I agree with your assessment of the past 20 years but not with your objection to auto-enrolment.“We should be making provisions for ourselves for retirement, but we haven’t been. Auto enrolment is about reversing that… We need to give people a nudge to start saving for their retirement,” he said.
... the government have been taking 20% + of salaries from everyone for years with the promise we would have pensions and healthcare, but it has been squandered - so it is they not us who have not been making provision for our retirement, we thought we had, by naively trusting the government to keep its promise - the government has acted no better than Maxwell for decades!
I don't say we don't ...
... need to do something, yes, we have been royally shafted by those we trusted to look after us but that doesn't change the fact there in no money left and we need to redress that.
My objection to auto-enrolment is that it is a [***] piece of legislation, implemented in the most [***]-eyed ham-fisted and costly way to business possible - and laughably those who need it most, those on low income don't get opted in, and if they do opt in get no contribution from the empoyer.
The mature answer should have been everyone in regardless, those earning less than LEL employer pays all the contributions, they get paid over to NEST by default unless employers chooses an alternative, and at the end of the tax year employee gets a statement of contributions which they can keep in nest or move to an approved fund of their choosing.
Simple, cheap and easy - job done - instead of this complete load of b*llocks we are left dealing with and that way we wouldn't have the software house, IFA's, middleware providers etc.ripping people off by preying on the confusion and fear they have nurtured to go with it.
In a sane world
The state would have put some of the NI contributions into a ring-fenced state fund, which the worker should be able to move to / between different companies in the private sector if they feel there is they can get a better return there.
The advantage with such a system is that the employer doesn't have to do anything different to what they are already doing and all employees would be enrolled (I am sure AE will eventually be compulsory for all workers, in any case).
Employees and employers NI would have to rise, just as employees and employers have to pay with AE.
What we have with the current system is an unnecessarily complex system and a regulator that will be overwhelmed by penalty appeals from employers of home helps, nannies, gardeners and micro employers who were unaware that AE actually applied to them. And in 40 years time, you will have lots of retirees with lots of piddly little pension pots funded from minimal contributions that just give them a bit of pocket money.
I did not know you could do this
My blogs will also appear on my WordPress site.
https://www.xero.com/blog/2016/02/auto-enrolment-compliance/
They are many other examples that have been posted this week by the great and the good.