Checked ya pension pot lately?

Shirley Shammel

Central Defender
Just seen, the us have put in 1.8 trillion dollars to support business
Boeing went up 25%

I doubt anyone would let you transfer atm.
Pension funds are in turmoil and doubt they could give you an accurate buy out, with bonds etc being virtually worthless
Not true. Transfer values have also been going up for defined benefit pensions.
 

offmenut

Striker
Not true. Transfer values have also been going up for defined benefit pensions.
That's what I'm saying.
Interest rates are so low and bonds more or less worthless, that the cetv would have to be huge atm.
It really puts db pension schemes untenable.
Be great to transfer now, just that with bonds being close to negative and interest rates at 0.1% the cetv would need to be massive, so not sure what the trustees could offer, if they could offer anything at all atm.
Here
 

Shirley Shammel

Central Defender
That's what I'm saying.
Interest rates are so low and bonds more or less worthless, that the cetv would have to be huge atm.
It really puts db pension schemes untenable.

Here
You said they won’t let you transfer. They will. I’ve got two this week.
 
Last edited:

offmenut

Striker
What makes you think that?
Sorry, worthless for returns.
They are low risk and so you won't lose much, compared to losing 30% on stock market shares, but you would still be close to negative returns.
You said they won’t let you transfer. They will. I’ve got two this week.
At our place it's all on hold.
The cetv now would have to be far greater than they were a week ago, and I'd assume the fund had decreased by about 30-40%, so its too volatile to get an accurate cetv.
If you're doing 2 this week maybe they were from figures before the drop in interest rate to 0.1% and the reduction in bonds, and the accurate cetv since that happened would be greater?
In what way ?
Most companies want to get rid anyway.
This is a massive excuse to.
Most pension funds are in a black hole which had just increased with a drop in funds of about 30% minimum
After this covid19 is finished, we will probably be in recession, and trustees of funds would say the only wsy to keep the fund going is for companies to put far more money than they can afford into the pension fund.

My company's paying about 30 odd percent of wages atm, and to survive will more than likely need to take a pension holiday, when in actual fact they would need to put in, say, something stupid like 50 - 70% of wages to bridge the defecit
 
Last edited:

Shirley Shammel

Central Defender
Sorry, worthless for returns.
They are low risk and so you won't lose much, compared to losing 30% on stock market shares, but you would still be close to negative returns.

At our place it's all on hold.
The cetv now would have to be far greater than they were a week ago, and I'd assume the fund had decreased by about 30-40%, so its too volatile to get an accurate cetv.
If you're doing 2 this week maybe they were from figures before the drop in interest rate to 0.1% and the reduction in bonds, and the accurate cetv since that happened would be greater?

Most companies want to get rid anyway.
This is a massive excuse to.
Most pension funds are in a black hole which had just increased with a drop in funds of about 30% minimum
After this covid19 is finished, we will probably be in recession, and trustees of funds would say the only wsy to keep the fund going is for companies to put far more money than they can afford into the pension fund.

My company's paying about 30 odd percent of wages atm, and to survive will more than likely need to take a pension holiday, when in actual fact they would need to put in, say, something stupid like 50 - 70% of wages to bridge the defecit
None of this makes any sense. Do you know how they are calculated?
 

offmenut

Striker
None of this makes any sense. Do you know how they are calculated?
The cetv is calculated by the amount of money needed by the fund to produce your pension at retirement age.
Lots of pension funds are in bonds which are so low now, some bonds are negative, that returns will have fallen. This would increase the cetv as you'd need more money invested in these bonds to produce the funds at retirement age.
Most funds, especially ones which have closed schemes to new employees, (which are most funds) put large amounts of the fund in gilts, which give a greater degree of certainty on the fund. An Inc in the rate of interest brings a higher return on the gilt, meaning less had to be invested.
When the rate of interest is so low, ie 0.1%, and the foreseeable future doesn't seem to think that we will see an Inc in this, as the economy will need stimulating for many yrs imo to bring it out of recession /depression, far more needs to be invested to produce the fund for when the employee retires.
So the cetv will be far higher.

Is this not correct?
How did you think the cetv was calculated?
 
Last edited:

Fletch

Striker
You obviously know more than me , in a nutshell I was under impression the CETV on offer was basically the amount needed to guarantee your annual pension , via an annuity, for X number of years, if you could access your final salary pension at a younger age ie 50 rather than say 60, then the CETV would be higher .
Thing is very few people buy an annuity now and use flexible drawdown instead
 
Sorry, worthless for returns.
They are low risk and so you won't lose much, compared to losing 30% on stock market shares, but you would still be close to negative returns.
US 30 year treasuries should be the epitome of a low volatility investment. The most solid, reliable, boring vehicle out there. The yield started in March at 1.65%, it dropped to under 1% on March 9th, increased to 1.78% on March 19th and was back to 1.33% on March 23rd. You could have made a double digit positive return trading a US 30 year treasury over two this month. These are not normal times.
 

Longy

Striker
You obviously know more than me , in a nutshell I was under impression the CETV on offer was basically the amount needed to guarantee your annual pension , via an annuity, for X number of years, if you could access your final salary pension at a younger age ie 50 rather than say 60, then the CETV would be higher .
Thing is very few people buy an annuity now and use flexible drawdown instead
Some company’s will offer more to get the liability off their books.
 

offmenut

Striker
You obviously know more than me , in a nutshell I was under impression the CETV on offer was basically the amount needed to guarantee your annual pension , via an annuity, for X number of years, if you could access your final salary pension at a younger age ie 50 rather than say 60, then the CETV would be higher .
Thing is very few people buy an annuity now and use flexible drawdown instead
That's exactly it mate. That's what I said.

The TV value would have nothing to do getting it early.
If you left the pension, you couldn't drawdown untill 55 (or 57 after 2027)
 

offmenut

Striker
Some company’s will offer more to get the liability off their books.
Most companies.
Doubt its worth doing otherwise.
Our company gave us a 25% pay rise, plus our pension contributions didn't have to be paid anymore (6%) so in effect a 31% pay rise.
US 30 year treasuries should be the epitome of a low volatility investment. The most solid, reliable, boring vehicle out there. The yield started in March at 1.65%, it dropped to under 1% on March 9th, increased to 1.78% on March 19th and was back to 1.33% on March 23rd. You could have made a double digit positive return trading a US 30 year treasury over two this month. These are not normal times.
But for pension funds who arent traders, the rate of return on bonds /gilts is lower than the rate of inflation.
Especially with 200bn of quantative easing now too, and maybe more to come, presumably Inc inflation.
It's the lowest it will have ever been for them, Inc black holes in pension funds and it should be Inc TV values, though our trustees say the market is too volatile to give an accurate TV value
Our thoughts are the fund is absolutely fucked. It had a big black hole before. Now it's gonna be fucking huge.
Dont really know the way out of it, but it's worrying for all in it.
Since when? My transfer value was higher 15 months ago than it was 3 months ago and that was with an alleged bonus to take it
The TV value now should be the highest its ever been, as bonds and gilts and the rofi are the lowest they have ever been.

3 mnth ago before all this virus, the cetv would have been lower as markets were strong and the rate of return on bonds/gilts would have improved over 15 mnth ago.

Your company may not offer a cetv now as the fund could be drastically in trouble, with markets too volatile
 
Last edited:

Longy

Striker
Most companies.
Doubt its worth doing otherwise.
Our company gave us a 25% pay rise, plus our pension contributions didn't have to be paid anymore (6%) so in effect a 31% pay rise.
Depends on your circumstances. If you’re lucky enough to have an IHT problem, you might be better off getting your DB pension out, living off your assets & being able to pass the pot on outside your estate. Having a shit load of cash & an income coming it might not be efficient, especially if you bring in more than you spend.
 

Matt Hopkins

Full Back
The TV value now should be the highest its ever been, as bonds and gilts and the rofi are the lowest they have ever been.

3 mnth ago before all this virus, the cetv would have been lower as markets were strong and the rate of return on bonds/gilts would have improved over 15 mnth ago.

Your company may not offer a cetv now as the fund could be drastically in trouble, with markets too volatile
I was advised that I should leave it where it was when I had the higher quote so I'm guessing it would have to be through the roof now anyway for it to go ahead.
As an aside I'm hearing tales of people who have DB pensions which are going to pay approx £20k p.a. @55 but are considering transferring out. I don't know the ins and outs of pensions but I'd be taking the £20k and wouldn't even entertain a transfer. Or am I missing something?
 
though our trustees say the market is too volatile to give an accurate TV value

Our thoughts are the fund is absolutely fucked. It had a big black hole before. Now it's gonna be fucking huge.

Your company may not offer a cetv now as the fund could be drastically in trouble, with markets too volatile
The important bits are in bold. It's impossible to value anything accurately currently due to the volatility which was the point I was trying to make and even assets perceived as 'safe' such as a 30 year treasury exhibiting extreme volatility.
 

offmenut

Striker
I was advised that I should leave it where it was when I had the higher quote so I'm guessing it would have to be through the roof now anyway for it to go ahead.
As an aside I'm hearing tales of people who have DB pensions which are going to pay approx £20k p.a. @55 but are considering transferring out. I don't know the ins and outs of pensions but I'd be taking the £20k and wouldn't even entertain a transfer. Or am I missing something?
You'd need, I think, about 400k to get annuity of 20k a Yr (iirc it's about 200k for 10k a Yr), bear in mind this is at 65 retirement age.

55 would need a lot more, obviously over an extra 100k.

If you were 55 they may offer about 650k as an incentive to get you off their liabilities, for example.
If you were younger than 55 it would be less.

You then have to think if you like the risk.
Would 650k give you more than 20k a Yr in interest (bearing in mind with inflation your pension would increase with inflation too)
This is the sort of figure minimum you would want, imo.
Besring in mind no lump sum also.
 
Last edited:

Matt Hopkins

Full Back
You'd need, I think, about 400k to get annuity of 20k a Yr (iirc it's about 200k for 10k a Yr), bear in mind this is at 65 retirement age.

55 would need a lot more, obviously over an extra 100k.

If you were 55 they may offer about 650k as an incentive to get you off their liabilities, for example.
If you were younger than 55 it would be less.

You then have to think if you like the risk.
Would 650k give you more than 20k a Yr in interest (bearing in mind with inflation your pension would increase with inflation too)
This is the sort of figure minimum you would want, imo.
Besring in mind no lump sum also.
I deliberately didn't mention the CETV amounts to see if someone would come up with a rough figure, mainly because I couldn't believe a shopfloor worker in a manufacturing company could achieve such a pot, and you are pretty damn close. Totally agree with the do you like risk comment. I'm not risk averse but would take the DB. By the way the figures aren't mine they're from a mate who works at the unmentioned company. If I was able to get that I'd be away at 55 which incidentally is 2 years today. So happy birthday to me :lol:
 

Top