『QA59 - Listener Questions, Episode 59』のカバーアート

QA59 - Listener Questions, Episode 59

QA59 - Listener Questions, Episode 59

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る
In this Meaningful Money Q&A episode, Pete Matthew and Roger Weeks answer listener questions on planning for mini-retirements, changing career into financial planning, accessing pensions with a guaranteed annuity rate, and whether to take tax-free cash from a defined benefit pension. They also discuss how to manage inherited money for children approaching financial independence, including ISAs, Junior SIPPs, university costs and future house deposits. Finally, they look at saving and investing alongside the NHS Pension, including using a Stocks and Shares ISA, SIPP contributions and higher-rate tax relief. A practical UK personal finance discussion covering pensions, retirement planning, investing, student loans and long-term wealth building. Shownotes: https://meaningfulmoney.tv/QA59 07:17 Question 1 Hi guys, Financial infrastructure and policy in the UK is built around to support (and likely encourage/enforce) the "standard" life of consistently working for 40 years and then stopping altogether. State and private pensions accessible around age 60, Lifetime ISAS, compounding growth of stocks etc. For various reasons, my wife and I (both 32) don't want to do this. We are in the fortunate position where we can take months or years off at a time and plan to do this several times throughout our lives. We know this means our earning potential and growth will be lower and that we may not end up with as large a pension as we could have. But we may also end up having some sort of income until we're much older. Question: what if anything can people do with today's accounts/tax advantages/schemes to enable this type of lifestyle? Hypothetical question: what type of infrastructure could the government introduce to enable this? How about a "pension" you can take at any time up to some cap per year and only for X years in a row? Given fewer jobs now require physical use of our bodies (and hence 60 may no longer be a necessary stopping point), could we see more people "working" off and on until 70 or 80? Tom 15:36 Question 2 Hi Pete and Roger First of all, thank you for the valuable conversations you bring to listeners. I'm a 32-year-old with a strong interest in personal finance and investing, and I would describe myself as financially literate and proactive in managing my own money. I currently feel I've been underestimating my potential and would like to pivot into financial services. I'm considering self-funding qualifications such as the LP2 (Financial Services – General Route) as a starting point, followed by the RQF Level 4 Diploma in Financial Planning. Do you think starting this pathway at 32 is realistic, or have I left it too late to successfully transition into the industry? Thanks, Darren. G 19:36 Question 3 Hello Pete and Roger, Firstly, I very much enjoy listening to your podcast whilst doing my weekly walks. I currently live in Australia and will be returning to the UK in 6 months to live near my family and will be turning 55 at the same time. My question is: I have a Defined Contribution pension, valued at 70K with a GAR. I am legally required to get IFA before I can drawdown, UFPLS, lump sum etc. There appears to be an exception to this mandatory requirement if I take an annuity. Is this correct? If it is, would this also apply to a fixed term annuity? Secondly, what options do I have to access my pension if no financial advisor is keen to take me on as a client and sign the 'advice taken' form that is required by my pension provider. My provider (Royal London) has said that the advice doesn't have to be positive or negative to what I want to do, I just have to show that I at least went through the procedure. Thanks for your help. Regards Brett 27:08 Question 4 Dear Pete and Rog, Thank you so much for the wealth of wisdom you share with us all - it has helped my family towards a more secure and planned future. I'm not an expert but as the future recipient of a few small DB pensions I have a question. You often infer Defined Benefit pensions are "solid gold", implying they should be preserved at all costs. I want to challenge your strong preference to avoid taking the 25% tax free cash (Pension Commencement Lump Sum (PCLS)). Isn't it "dangerous" to not clarify the commutation rate more explicitly? On one hand, with a poor commutation rate isn't the member effectively "selling" inflation-linked, guaranteed income far too cheaply? On the other, with an attractive commutation, by taking the 25% tax-free cash "off the table," a member can: 1. Eliminate mortality risk: If they die early, that cash stays with the family; the DB income disappears. 2. Manage Tax Drag: Using the PCLS to bridge to state pension age can keep a retiree in the basic rate band rather than being pushed into higher rates by a full DB payout. 3. Seek Outperformance: While DB is index-linked, a well-allocated ISA can historically outperform inflation over the long term. Why do you treat the PCLS as a "loss" of...
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません