Hi all . Was there an executive summary ?9
I have just been looking at the BMA website where they give some worked examples . A senior Consultant with a merit award of £6,000 in one year could trigger a tax increase of £6000 x 40 % =£ 2400. Plus a pension increase in value related annual allowance tax charge of another £ 11,000 - so a pay increase of £6000 results in a tax charge of £13,400 - a marginal tax rate of 220 %. My own conclusion of Government policy is that it is designed solely to recirculate money back to the Treasury coffers , whilst all collateral damage to other Government departments is completely ignored. Sir Steve Webb former pensions minister has said - " rather than tinkering with the NHS pension scheme, the Treasury should abolish the ludicrous and capricious system of tapering annual allowances for tax relief"
This article does contain some typos. Since Summer 2016 and the adoption of the Meldrum reforms, GPC UK meets just twice per annum , in March and September .During my recent time on GPC UK there was no pre GPC dinner. However two colleagues very kindly sought out a venue and invited other GPC members who arrived in London in time to join them for a meal .The venue changed continually and would be in a pub or a restaurant somewhere. The exchange of ideas at this pre GPC meeting was so important , that frequently , London based GPC members would also attend because they recognised its value for networking. Nobody was forced to attend this evening meal. Typically , about 15 to 20 Doctors would meet. Since the Meldrum reforms GPC England now also meets four times per annum. I hope that this adds balance to a very important article.
We are overhauling this protectionist approach to create an open, competitive and fair market which will encourage the best technology companies to create digital solutions that work across primary care and social care. This "new "approach by the Health Secretary seems all do do with ideology and marketisation of health care and its provision.
This is an intolerable story about an appalling organisation the CQC that , so far at least , we do not have to put up with in Wales . Organisations now regularly use the ‘ our staff will not be subject to bullying whilst carrying out their duties’ - ignoring the bullying effect that their staff have on others . I hope that Dr Beerstecher and his practice staff can survive this . I wonder what the patient practice group has to say ?
"Government announces new , recurrent annual tax charges on your pension savings before you get to draw a single penny ."
That is a more truthful headline.
It would read well in the Daily Mail.
I agree with truthfinder that no-one has the resource to pay a tax on theoretical income that they have not yet even received.
To understand the thinking and ultimate goals of the treasury side in this pension debate is almost futile. The application of Annual Allowance and lifetime allowance rules to individual workers is impossibly complicated. Few predicted the drop in LTA from 1.25 to 1 million .I have today read that 245,000 NHS workers have opted out of their NHS pension scheme since 2015. I think that the total NHS worker numbers are 1.4 million. Does Hammond have a plan for our scheme to implode - then hand the problem on to a future chancellor . We have all met working colleagues who have been told by their accountant - in the next tax year you must work less , earn less , because that way you will bring home more money to run your home and family. Hammond must have access to a large future proofed tax spreadsheet - that is telling him things that we are not privy to.
My favourite home visit was on a Saturday at midday . On arrival , her husband apologised that his wife had gone out . She was now in the hairdressers three miles away . The hairdressers was - next door to my surgery !
It is possible that Jeremy Hunt can only communicate effectively to his cabinet colleagues - via the media. Perhaps this is his method of bidding to try and make more money available to the NHS.
Agree with PC. HMRC regulations allow for pension inflationary growth at September 16 CPI rate . Then NHS pension regulations apply pension inflationary uplift at September 17 rate . It defies all logic that the uplift and the tax allowable inflationary growth - are not based on the same CPI figure . But then different Government departments don, t talk to each other do they .
In my opinion , some of the terminology in this article is misleading. Check out GOV.UK ; An individual with a Threshold Income of £ 110,000 or less for a tax year - is not subject to the tapered annual charge regardless of the level of their adjusted income for that year . That means that anyone with a threshold income of over £ 110,000 MAY be subject to the annual tax charge .The test is called the Adjusted Income. Add in the increased value of ones pension pot , minus the usual start of year adjustment. If that increase of pension revaluation is more than £ 40,000 - onto of a threshold income of £ 110,000 - it will add up to £ 150,000 and will trigger the annual allowance tax charge. So in my opinion , one possible plan for avoiding this latest pension tax problem - is to keep Threshold income below £ 110,000 . That would avoid the problem of this unfair Annual Allowance pension tax charge irrespective of pension pot growth in that tax year.
The erosion of pension protection and introduction of a system that will cause double taxation - on the way in and on the way out - has been one of the most enormous recent social changes. Social in its inevitable consequence for those workers caught up in it. The chancellor of course dismissed any worries as only affecting 1 % of the working population. So that makes it alright then as 99% of workers won,t have to pay.We must assume that the Govt has calculated the likely number of workers who will finish early - as a price well worth paying .If that is correct - then we are all meant to retire early.
Keep up the good work Dr Cundy . I am looking forwards to your next instalment of this long running saga.
The last posting has included 4 examples of inappropriate questions in an exam that is meant to be aimed at returning GP,s.
Are there more examples of these questions to further illustrate the point ?
Dr Jonathan Stuart Jones
Sessional General Practitioner
In my involvement in early discussions twenty years ago we focussed on formative assessment - improvement through education . Sadly the balance after Shipman swung rapidly towards summative assessment - control via regulation. In the early days thirty hours of activity was plenty. The big breakthrough came when the college et al moved the goalposts to fifty credits that then became fifty hours of activity . All to be written up . Another fifty hours .Lots of educational concepts with unfamiliar buzz word titles and everyone and his dog allowed to put their pet project into appraisal / revalidation and made compulsory. In my opinion , a visionary project that started life by supporting doctors development and ongoing education has turned into - a complete mess. Why have we allowed this to happen ?