Make this pension mistake and lose £36,000!

Rachel Wait
by Lovemoney Staff Rachel Wait on 13 August 2009  |  Comments 20 comments

Make this mistake with your pension before you retire and you could lose £36,000 or more.

When you think about retirement, what do you imagine? Kicking back and making the most of your free time, doing a spot of travelling, spending more time with your family, pottering about in the garden?

Whatever your plans, if you want a comfortable retirement, you'll need to ensure you've got enough money to support this lifestyle. If you don't have enough, your retirement plans may just disappear out of the window.

While preparing for your retirement might seem logical, sadly, more and more of us are starting to sacrifice our pension pots - threatening our retirement plans. In fact, according to Prudential, over the past five years, more than one in ten people have reduced the amount they pay into their pension or have stopped contributing to it altogether.

Prudential reckons this decision to stop paying into a pension could mean a rise in pensioner poverty in years to come, as the number of people who expect to rely on state pensions and their own savings is expected to rise by 27% in the next 10 years, compared with 22% of those retiring this year.

Why you should keep on contributing

When times are tough, it can be particularly tempting to cut contributions to your pension, or, if you haven't yet started a pension, to put it off for a bit longer.

But delaying your pension in any way can seriously affect how much money you have when you come to retire.

The chart below shows how much money you could lose out on if you decided to delay starting your pension for a few years.

Age at start of pension

Projected fund (£) at retirement

Difference (compared to starting aged 30)

30

£135,930

-

35

£96,690

£39,240

40

£67,260

£68,670

45

£45,200

£90,730

These figures show an estimated pension fund, based on the individual shown starting a pension and paying £100 per month and retiring at age 65.*

Source: Prudential

By delaying your pension by just five years - starting aged 35 instead of 30 - you'll lose out on a hefty £39,240! Now if you ask me, that's a lot of money to be sacrificing.

If you postpone your pension even longer, the difference will be even greater. So by starting your pension at 40 instead of 30, you'd lose out on £68,670 and if you delayed your pension until you're 45, you'd sacrifice a whopping £90,730!

The reason you'd lose out on so much money is simply because pensions need time to grow. Thanks to the miracle of compounding, the earlier you start your pension, the longer your investment has to grow and the bigger your pension pot will be when you retire. If you don't believe me, take a look at How to double your pension.

Even if you have already started your pension and think you can afford to forgo your contributions for a few years and make up for it later on - think again.

The chart below shows how much money you could lose out on if you took a five year break:

Age at start of pension

Age when take five year break

Fund value at retirement  with break

Fund value at retirement without break

Difference

20

25

£336,000

£404,000

£68,000

25

30

£237,000

£285,000

£48,000

30

35

£162,000

£198,000

£36,000

These figures assume an investment of £100 per month, retirement age of 65, and a growth rate of 7% per annum less an annual management charge of 1%. Assumes inflation rises at 3% a year.

Source: Prudential

This chart clearly shows that simply taking a five year pension break can significantly lower the amount of money you'll have in your pension pot by the time you come to retire.

At the very least, you'd lose a whopping £36,000.

Even if you think you can add extra funding to your pension pot later on to make up for this, you'll struggle. And that's simply because that investment will have less time to grow.

The earlier you take a pension break - and the longer you take it for - the harder it will be to make up for that loss and the more damage you'll do to your pension pot.

Tax relief

Pensions are also one of the few things in life that allow you to benefit from tax relief. So this is another reason not to sacrifice your pension. You're getting 'free' money from the Government!

If you're a non-taxpayer or basic rate taxpayer, you'll benefit from tax relief of 20%. This means that every £80 you pay into your pension will be boosted to £100. If you're a higher rate taxpayer, you can claim back 40% of tax relief - so every £60 you pay in will be increased to £100.

Don't throw this opportunity away!

The stock market

Of course, if you have a share-based pension fund, chances are you've been feeling a little peeved following the dire performance of the stock market over the past year or so.

That said, the FTSE 100 is slowly starting to make a recovery and although we're not out of the woods yet, things are looking up.

In fact, I would argue that now is a great time to be investing in your pension - particularly if your retirement is still a long way off. Regularly contributing to your pension while share prices are still pretty cheap means you'll be able to buy more shares for your money. These shares are then poised to take off in value when the market picks up again - hopefully over the next few years. And that means more profit for you.

It's worth keeping in mind that if you cancel or delay your pension payments now, and the stock market does recover, not only will you have missed out on buying shares at a low price, but you will have also lost out on a tasty return from the growth of these shares. And when you finally do start investing again, if prices are high, you'll get a lot less for your money.

Our sister site, Fool.co.uk, offers some of the best investment advice in the country. Take a look.

Alternative cut backs

If you're struggling to find enough spare cash to invest in your pension each month, or even start a pension in the first place, one of the best things you can do is start to budget. By working out what your outgoings and earnings are, you'll be able to see whether you can make any cutbacks elsewhere - such as eating out less often or cancelling your gym membership. You can then put this extra cash towards your pension.

So while stopping your pension contributions might seem like the logical thing to do when there are other bills to pay, avoid doing so if you can. What might seem like the best option now, could turn out to be a big mistake later on in life.

Don't forget to check out our prepare to become a pensioner goal.

*Figures are purely illustrative and assume a growth rate of 7% per annum less an annual management charge of 1%. Assumes inflation rises at 3% a year. Based on a retirement age of 65 and a level £100 monthly contribution into a unit linked fund.

Apologies for the initial incorrect figures in this piece and thanks to dd for helping us to correct this mistake.

More: Why you should transfer your pension | How to pick your first pension

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (20)

  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    Hi Rachel,

    Some of the figures in the "five year break" table from Prudential look a little suspect -- how come the fund at retirement is the same (£188K) when paying (a) from age 20 to 25 and 30 to 65, or (b) from age 25 to 65?

    That would mean that paying for the five years between age 25 and 30 gives the same fund as paying between age 20 and 25 - so you could leave the saving for 5 years and get the same outcome!

    [I think that all figures without the break look OK, but those with the break are perhaps wrong?]

    Some of the figures can be checked here:-

    http://calc-calc-calc.net/get/calc/Saving-Fund/v1/?pay=100&int=5.93&t=35

    dd

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Donna Ferguson
    Love rating 130
    Donna Ferguson said

    Hi Dd, thanks for raising that question. As far as I know, they are accurate, but I agree, it does seem a little suspect. I've asked Prudential to look into your query and come back to me as soon as possible.

    All the best, Donna (Acting editor of lovemoney.com)

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • alucarDrM
    Love rating 1
    alucarDrM said

    Pensions are also one of the few things in life that allow you to benefit from tax relief.

    No - pensions give you tax-deferral, not tax relief.

    Excepting the 25% lump sum, assuming of course that's still around when the time comes to retire, you get no benefit from the tax status of a pension fund, compared to (say) an ISA funded with post-tax income invested in exactly the same funds.

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MrRee
    Love rating 66
    MrRee said

    Pensions - don't talk to me about Pensions!!!

    I had a great Pension, my payments into it have increased 6% and there is talk of needing to pay more! My Lump Sum promised now cannot be delivered, the retirement age has increased from 60 to 65 .... pathetic!

    Plough your money into something else when you are young - like a Ferrari or Fine Art ..... will probably serve you just as well come re-sale time!

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Donna Ferguson
    Love rating 130
    Donna Ferguson said

    Just to say, dd, you were right and for some reason the actuary at Prudential failed to take into account a realistic growth over those five years, even though you wouldn't be contributing. Anyway, they've recalculated the figures for us and the table has now been updated, so they should be accurate.

    Thanks again and sorry for any confusion.

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    Thanks Donna.

    The new figures look much closer to what I was expecting, but I'm still unsure how they have done an adjustment for "Inflation of 3% a year assumed and taken into account."

    Do you know what they mean by this?

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Donna Ferguson
    Love rating 130
    Donna Ferguson said

    Sorry that's not very clear is it? It means that, in their calculations, they've assumed that inflation is 3% a year.

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    It doesn't look like they've actually used the inflation assumption in the calcs, though!

    The figures seem to be the fund at retirement in terms of money at that time (for example, not adjusted to "today's money" by inflation at all).

    I just wondered what they'd actually done with the 3% assumption...

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Donna Ferguson
    Love rating 130
    Donna Ferguson said

    I see. OK, I will try to get an answer for you on Monday. :)

    Report on 14 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    Thanks! :))

    Report on 15 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    Donna - have you had chance to get back to Prudential for an answer?

    Thanks.

    Report on 17 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Donna Ferguson
    Love rating 130
    Donna Ferguson said

    We working on it :)

    Report on 17 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Rachel Wait
    Love rating 17
    Rachel Wait said

    Hi dd

    I've just been speaking to Prudential and you're absolutely right - the figures don't take inflation into account after all (although they were supposed to). I've been assured that the correct figures will be sent over to me tomorrow morning so hopefully they will be on the site soon afterwards.

    Many thanks again for pointing this out.

    Rachel

    Report on 17 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • billyboy121
    Love rating 18
    billyboy121 said

    Oh dear Prudential are my pension provider. There goes my retirement!

    Report on 18 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    Hi Donna, Rachel

    I noticed new figures in the "five year break" table from Prudential ;)

    I think they now allow for 3% increases each year on the £100 monthly payment, instead of keeping it level (so £100 twelve times, then £103 twelve times and so on).

    They still seem to be in terms of money at retirement (ie in 35 to 45 years time), instead of in terms of "todays money". I find it difficult to think about what an extra £36,000 might buy in 35 years time, so I prefer to think in terms of "todays money". At an inflation rate of 3% a year, £36,000 in 35 years time will buy the same as just under £13,000 will today.

    £68,000 in 45 years will buy the same as just under £18,000 will today.

    So I think the five year break has the effect of reducing the retirement fund by around £13,000 to £18,000 in terms of todays money. That's from not paying around £6,000 during those 5 years (again in todays money).

    Report on 18 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LastChip
    Love rating 92
    LastChip said

    Here we have a classic article proving pensions are a waste of space.

    You have a major provider (Prudential), who can't get their basic sums correct. And I've had personal experience of that with another provider, who took four attempts to get my fund value correct and a further five attempts to get the annuity rate correct! It's endemic in the industry, so watch out.

    That's not to mention the effect inflation has on all those hard earned pension contributions, or the pathetic annuity rates, or the effect a personal pension will have on tax credits, or ....

    You get the point. There are simply too many variables that you have no control over.

    You cannot say what £68,000 will buy in 45 years time. At best, it's an educated guess, but economists can't predict next year with any accuracy, so 45 years? Forget it!

    As I've said repeatedly, save for retirement, but unless you earn a significant salary, stay away from pensions.

    All you Fool writers, who I am convinced believe you are doing the right thing; I wish you well. But when you come to retire and realise the futility of it all, remember my words.

    Keep control of your cash.

    Report on 25 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    LastChip said: "You cannot say what £68,000 will buy in 45 years time."

    True, but based on the assumed inflation rate in the example (of 3% per year), you can. If inflation actually turns out to be higher, then you'd save even more each month in future and you'd have even more than £68,000 at retirement. Conversely, if inflation turns out to be lower, then you'd save less and end up with less than £68,000 at retirement.

    Effectively, you start by assuming that you save £100 each month in todays money (so payments increase at 3% if inflation is 3%, and increase at 5% if inflation is 5%, etc). Next assume a reasonable real growth rate (i.e. after inflation) each year - just under 3% per year in the above example. Then whatever the fund gets to be at retirement (it'll be £68,000 if inflation averages 3% per year), that'll be the same as just under £18,000 in todays money.

    Report on 25 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LastChip
    Love rating 92
    LastChip said

    I can assure you dd, I don't need lessons in basic arithmetic.

    However, you seem to be missing my point entirely.

    What I'm saying is, with all the variables in play, not to mention the biggest one of all - government interference, you cannot predict with any accuracy, 45 years out.

    You can make all the assumptions you want, but they mean nothing.

    Report on 25 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dd
    Love rating 8
    dd said

    LastChip, you seem to be missing my point...

    I agree that you cannot predict the actual extra fund at retirement with any reasonable level of accuracy (quoted as £68,000 in the article, but that'll only be true if the assumptions come true).

    What I'm saying is that you can predict more closely the extra fund in terms of today's money. That'll likely be around £18,000 in today's money, whether future inflation is 3% and the extra fund gets to £68,000, -or- if future inflation is higher than 3% and the extra fund gets to more than £68,000, -or- even if inflation is less than 3% and the extra fund comes out lower than £68,000.

    Report on 26 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Richard28
    Love rating 2
    Richard28 said

    I couldn't agree more, however, on losing my job earlier this year, I have had to revise my budget, and unfortunately there are even more pressing financial concerns that need addressing like, council tax, energy bills, mortgage, water rates, etc. and frankly after that little lot I have had to sacrifice the "future" for the "now".

    Report on 21 October 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Provider & account name AER/Gross Interest paid Apply
now

Derbyshire BS
Derbyshire NetSaver Issue 11

1.70% /
1.70%
Yearly Apply

Nationwide BS
MySave Online Plus

1.70% /
1.69%
Monthly Apply

ICICI Bank UK
HiSAVE SuperSavings Online Account

1.75% /
1.74%
Monthly Apply
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV3