#pensions expert

[willsandtrusts]

Free Financial Webinars on Wills, Pensions and Investments | Wills & Trusts Wealth

Join our free webinars for expert financial insights on wills, pensions, and investments. Learn from industry experts David Batchelor, Alison Parker, and Dean Hobbs. Get practical advice and speak one-on-one with financial specialists from the comfort of your home. Secure your financial future with Wills & Trusts Wealth Management.

[thirukochi]

How Does NPS Investment Help Save Taxes?

Securing your retirement is crucial, but did you know you can also save taxes while planning for it? The National Pension System (NPS) in India is designed not only to build a retirement corpus but also to offer substantial tax benefits to investors.

Understanding NPS

The National Pension System (NPS) is a voluntary retirement savings scheme where individuals can invest regularly during their working years to build a retirement fund. It is regulated by the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) and offers features tailored to promote long-term savings. If you wish to invest, reach out to professionals offering NPS investment services in Cochin.

Key Features of NPS

Subscriber Accounts: Each NPS subscriber receives a unique Permanent Retirement Account Number (PRAN), which remains with them throughout their career, providing portability across jobs and locations.

Investment Flexibility: Investors can choose from multiple Pension Fund Managers (PFMs) offering various investment strategies. This flexibility allows investors to select an asset allocation mix that aligns with their risk tolerance and financial goals.

Tier System: NPS operates through two tiers:

Tier I: This tier is the primary retirement savings account with restricted withdrawal options before retirement.

Tier II: A voluntary savings account with higher liquidity, allowing withdrawals akin to a regular savings account.

Government Contribution: Government employees benefit from an additional contribution of up to 14% of their salary from the Government of India towards their NPS corpus.

Auto-Choice Option: For investors who prefer a hands-off approach, NPS offers an auto-choice option. This feature automatically allocates investments across asset classes based on the investor's age.

Tax Benefits of NPS Investment

Investing in NPS offers significant tax advantages, making it a preferred choice for retirement planning:

Tax Deduction under Section 80C: Contributions towards Tier I NPS accounts qualify for a tax deduction of up to Rs. 1.5 lakh per year under the Section 80C of Income Tax Act.

Additional Tax Deduction under Section 80CCD(1B): Beyond the Section 80C limit, salaried individuals and self-employed can claim an additional deduction of up to Rs. 50,000 per year for contributions to NPS under Section 80CCD(1B). This increases the total potential deduction to Rs. 2 lakh per year.

How NPS Investments Help Save Taxes

By contributing to NPS:

Reduced Taxable Income: Contributions to NPS reduce your taxable income for the year in which they are made. This lowers your overall tax liability.

Enhanced Deductions: The combined deductions under Sections 80C and 80CCD(1B) allow you to optimize your tax savings, potentially reducing the amount of tax payable significantly.

Additional Considerations

Tax Implications on Withdrawal: While contributions to NPS offer tax benefits, a portion of the accumulated corpus withdrawn at retirement is taxable. However, the tax-efficient structure of NPS ensures that the benefits of tax deferral during the accumulation phase outweigh the tax implications at withdrawal.

Long-term Commitment: NPS is designed for long-term savings and retirement planning. Withdrawal options are limited before retirement age, encouraging investors to stay committed to their retirement goals.

Conclusion

The National Pension System (NPS) not only serves as a robust retirement planning tool but also provides substantial tax benefits to investors. By leveraging the deductions available under Sections 80C and 80CCD(1B), individuals can effectively manage their tax liabilities while building a secure financial future through NPS. Thirukochi Financial Services can guide you through the best NPS investment plan in Kochi. However, it's essential to assess your financial goals, risk appetite, and retirement needs before committing to NPS, ensuring it aligns with your long-term financial strategy.

[yatesdonna67]

ESG Investment

Socially responsible investment with a special focus on ESG investment Switzerland is a smart way to avoid companies, which have a higher risk of investment. Sustainable investment methods have always outperformed conventional strategies in investing. This is a great way to invest in alignment with the good for society and still profit.

[swarajfinpro236]

Discover financial success with Swaraj FinPro, your trusted Mutual Fund Expert in Jabalpur. Our expert advisors in the heart of the city are dedicated to crafting personalized investment strategies that align with your goals. Let us guide you towards a prosperous financial future. Your journey to wealth starts here!

For More Information :- https://swarajfinpro.com/

[techminsolutions]

EPFO to Launch Online Joint Option Form Soon for Higher EPS Pension: Deadline Looming for Eligible Employees

The Employees’ Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) has said that it will soon have a way for employees and their employers to declare online that they want higher pensions. This will be done through the EPFO portal. The action follows the Supreme Court’s decision on November 4, 2022, and is in accordance with the direction contained in paragraphs 44(iii) and (iv) read with paragraph 44(v) of the…

[satorimoney]

I’m a pensions expert – women miss out on £1,000s in support due to simple mistake, how to avoid it

I’m a pensions expert – women miss out on £1,000s in support due to simple mistake, how to avoid it

WOMEN are being urged to check for a simple mistake that could leave them thousands of pounds out of pocket.When a couple divorce, they will usually agree on some sort of financial settlement, especially if children ar Read Full Text

[operatirotasimoney]

I’m a pensions expert – women miss out on £1,000s in support due to simple mistake, how to avoid it

I’m a pensions expert – women miss out on £1,000s in support due to simple mistake, how to avoid it

WOMEN are being urged to check for a simple mistake that could leave them thousands of pounds out of pocket.When a couple divorce, they will usually agree on some sort of financial settlement, especially if children ar Read Full Text

[moneyalphanews]

I’m a pension expert – exact amounts you need to save in your 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s to retire a millionaire

I’m a pension expert – exact amounts you need to save in your 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s to retire a millionaire

MANY of us dream of living life to the fullest when we stop working, yet have no idea if we’re putting away enough money.You’ll need to save a decent amount of cash to get close to a co Read Full Text

[phantomrose96]

I've mentioned this thing in tags before but I've decided fuck it, it should be its own post.

I've seen this sentiment lumped into Eat the Rich posts which goes like "if you're worth more than $1 million I think you should die" and I think tumblr users need to know this is not the Eat the Rich statement they think it is.

Someone being worth $1 million doesn't mean what you think it means.

A 71-year-old widow who bought a single-family 2,000 sqft home in Somerville Massachusetts with her husband 40 years ago to raise their family in, who now lives in this home all alone because her children are grown and her husband is dead, is--without a shadow of a doubt--worth more than $1 million. Maybe even $1.5 or $2 million. And it's because of her home equity, because that's what single family homes go for these days in that area.

The 71-year-old widow may be living pension check to pension check, because her millionaire status can only be dipped into if she's removed from her home and sells it. And if it's the home she's loved for 40 years, where she simply wants to live out the rest of her time peacefully in, I wouldn't put her to the guillotine for that.

Maybe that comes off as an extreme example, like that's just an outlier of the "we hate millionaires" agenda. But I don't think it truly is. I'll scale back and tell you the median U.S. home price right now is about $430,000. And that's just median. Half of them are more expensive than that.

The statement "I think people should be able to afford to buy and own the homes they live in" is, I would desperately hope, not a radical statement to anyone on Tumblr. I think that's a pretty well-received idea. So someone who's done that, who's bought their home and worked many years to pay off the mortgage and now owns it fully, is worth close to half a million dollars on average. Many of them more than that, as many areas rapidly gentrify and drive up housing worth.

Statement 2: "I think people deserve to have a retirement fund which would comfortably support them through end of life." Too radical for anyone? I hope not. And I won't pretend to be an expert on how much retirement money is ideal. I'm sure it varies with cost of living in places. But considering this is money which, ideally, should support someone for the remaining 10-20 years of life (money which may be necessary to cover the absolutely crippling medical costs of end-of-life treatment) I'd bet it's well into the many hundreds of thousands. Even if someone was simply living off $30k/year of take home money and just making that work, then 15 years of retirement, costing $30k/year, plus maybe $50k+ of end-of-life medical costs... That's at least $500k.

Which is all to say, if you show me someone approaching retirement age who's "worth" $1 million dollars, my hope would be that their house is paid off and their retirement fund is comfortable. I'd be happy for them. I would want this for them.

Even that may not be true, though. Someone "worth" $1 million maybe owns a paid-off house which has rapidly appreciated to being worth $900k, and their $100k in retirement is something they're trying to stretch through end of life. Maybe someone worth $1 million owns a house which has ballooned to $1.1 million, and they're in fact $100k in debt.

And the fact that SO many Americans will never even meet this bar is significantly more appalling to me than the existence of people worth more than $1 million. "I own my home and can retire comfortably" is a bar we want every American to meet. I want more millionaires who are millionaires because they meet these criteria.

If Nana Somerville's house burns down tomorrow, she'll have lost everything. If a billionaire were to similarly lose $1 million of worth, he would not feel it. That's a fickle day at the stock market. That's Tuesday. That's the rich which desperately needs to be eaten.

[allthecanadianpolitics]

For weeks, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been accusing NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh of supporting the government until February so he can become eligible for his MP pension. But experts estimate the size of Poilievre's own pension at more than three times that of Singh's pension. A calculation of Poilievre's House of Commons pension indicates that he could draw more than $230,000 annually once he turns 65. That figure could grow considerably if Poilievre becomes prime minister following the next federal election. If Singh qualifies for his pension, he could draw more than $66,000 annually starting at age 65, the same estimates suggest.

Continue Reading

Tagging: @newsfromstolenland

[thirukochi]

Why is it Important to Find the Best Mutual Fund Distributor in Cochin?

Thirukochi Financial Services stands out as the best mutual fund distributor in Cochin, offering expert guidance and a wide range of mutual funds to help clients achieve their financial goals, investors can access personalized advice, diversified portfolios, and superior customer service. For more information, visit https://www.thirukochi.co.in/

[copperbadge]

I went to the library this afternoon, intending to get a study room and do some work on the novel, but I got distracted and ended up spending the two hours working on a short story instead.

Georgie has said that Michaelis hired her after she rescued his friend's child from a kidnapping, and it was suggested to me recently that the friend could be Oliver McAllister, Michaelis's old school mate from Pirates of the Riviera. I was skeptical because the timing didn't quite work out, but I couldn't stop thinking about the idea, so I decided to try making it work.

And let me tell you, these messy bitches.

In 2015, Michaelis is deep in his Kingbot 3000 phase so he doesn't have to Have Feelings, and Gregory has coerced him into taking a vacation by threatening a coup. Meanwhile, Olly is fresh from his second divorce, from a woman who just tried to kidnap their child. Georgie is the most together person in the room and she's an unemployed twentysomething who just beat three men unconscious to prevent said kidnapping.

And the most amusing part to me is that because of how I set it up, Michaelis is just trying to be friendly but inadvertently keeps coming across like he's trying to seduce Georgie. Which also makes Georgie joking about trying to marry him for his money in Royals/Ramblers even funnier.

"Ma'am, the police would like to take a statement," Lael said to Georgie.

"I can have Lael find you a lawyer if you want," Michaelis added. She gave him a sardonic look. 

"All right, let's get it over with," she sighed. "There goes my visit to the Musee D'Orsay."

"We'll give you the room. Olly, why don't you go in with your boy, so the police can speak with you if needed. Lael and I will be at the cafe next door when you've finished."

Georgie nodded, but he stopped as he passed her and put a hand on her arm.

"Come see us when you're done," he said quietly, ducking his head so the police at the doorway couldn't see their faces. "And cancel your job interview in London."

"Excuse me?" she asked.

"Stay in Paris. You can see the museum this weekend. The palace will cover your lodging and food."

"I...don't want to offend," she said slowly, "but I'm not -- " 

"I'm not flirting with you," he said, realizing belatedly how it might seem to her, and taking his hand from her arm. She looked faintly relieved. "I'm going to spend the time you're giving a statement assembling a job offer for you with my security office. Any young woman who can spot a kidnapping before it happens and soundly beat three grown men should not be leaving Askazer-Shivadlakia to do a job she hates in London. Now, regardless of that, and I say this as a concerned friend, not as king or employer: be honest and helpful with the police, but...economical."

"Just the facts?" she asked. 

"Exactly." He gave her an approving nod and followed Lael out. They were silent in the hallway and lobby, until they stepped out into the street and Lael exhaled.

"That was impressive," he said. "Young lady has a great right hook."

"She's certainly very alert," Michaelis agreed.

"It's been a long time since I've seen someone throw a punch like that."

"Say it and you're fired," Michaelis said good-naturedly. He'd known Lael since the head of security had been a young palace aide during Michaelis's first days as king -- if still years older than the king himself -- and he knew what was coming. 

"Not since our last trip to Galia," Lael said, voice full of relish. "That time a young hothead punched Duke Tomas in the face."

"Utterly fired. I've found your replacement. I'm putting you out to pasture with no pension." 

"You think she'd make a good successor to me?" Lael asked. He was joking but, simultaneously, he was not -- they were both getting older, and Lael was as aware as Michaelis that when a new king was elected in a few years, whoever it was, they would need someone younger, someone who could more easily keep up with them. 

"You tell me," Michaelis said. "You're the expert." 

"Oh, I've been fired, clearly my opinion isn't wanted," Lael said, as they settled into a table at the cafe, Lael with his back to the wall, eyes always scanning behind Michaelis. There had never, at least as far as Michaelis knew, been an attempt on his life, but he'd become used to never getting direct eye contact in public from the man whose job it was, after all, to watch his back. 

"Fine, I withdraw your firing. I suspect purely on her ability to sass me, she is your equal if not your better," he added, as the waitress approached. He ordered coffee and pastries briskly, then turned back to Lael. 

"Well, it's difficult to tell on two minutes' acquaintance," Lael replied, "but actions do speak louder than words." 

"Agreed. Perhaps a contingent offer? She has a law degree; she could likely earn more than we could offer her for a job like yours, but I think she's looking for the right job, not the right pay. Say three months of probation with guaranteed six months of pay to ensure she takes it, and a firm permanent offer at the end if you approve? Conditions non-negotiable but a bit of wiggle room in the salary, I think." 

Lael considered it, then nodded. "I suppose it's paranoia to imagine she might have arranged all this to get into the Palace employ."

"As what, a spy? I love a thriller novel, Lael, but they are fiction," Michaelis replied, amused.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Only weeks after arriving in the Iraqi capital, Paul Bremer, a retired diplomat with absolutely no Middle East experience, exercised his extraordinary authority, akin to that of a colonial viceroy, as head of the new Coalition Provisional Authority and eradicated the previous Iraqi government with two strokes of his pen. With no clear plans for what might follow, he issued Order Number 1 on his fifth day in office, decreeing a sweeping purge of all senior Iraqi officials previously affiliated with the ruling Baath Party. “By nightfall,” warned the CIA chief of station, “you’ll have driven some 30,000 to 50,000 Baathists underground. And in six months you’ll really regret this.” Imperiously waving away what he called “a sea of bitching and moaning,” Bremer plunged ahead, forcing at least 85,000 Iraqi officials out of office. US commander Ricardo Sanchez would later call this policy decision “a catastrophic failure.” Ignoring both White House instructions and military advice, Bremer soon issued Order Number 2, aimed at “dissolving Saddam’s military and intelligence structures to emphasize that we mean business.” With that second stroke of his pen summarily dismissing 335,00 police and 385,000 soldiers without salary, severance pay, or pensions, Bremer created a vast cadre of what the US Army’s official war history would call “seasoned military men who suddenly had no livelihood.” As Bremer’s two orders “sent shockwaves throughout the country,” there were angry anti-American demonstrations and “violent confrontations” between Iraqi ex-soldiers and coalition forces. Those demobilized former soldiers also included countless trained experts with access to cached military munitions and knowledge of how to build lethal improvised explosive devices, or IEDs. Three days after Bremer’s Order Number 2, a US Army private died when the first of these new weapons exploded under his vehicle. Over the next ten years, IEDs would kill 3,100 US servicemen and wound 33,000 more, including 1,800 amputations—forcing the Pentagon to spend $75 billion to prevent fatalities from a weapon as cheap as a pizza. “Orders 1 and 2 led to a far more sweeping implosion [of the Iraqi state] than US leaders intended,” the US Army’s official war history later reported, “after which factions of all kinds, including extremist militants, rushed to fill the void.”

Alfred W. McCoy, To Govern the Globe: World Orders and Catastrophic Change

[saintmeghanmarkle]

Comment in the Standard: How dare Montecito millionaire Prince Harry demand our tax money to cover his legal costs

This subject matter cannot be covered too much for my taste.

Emphasis and comments by me:

Prince Harry’s latest court defeat in his rightly unsuccessful bid to overturn the decision to refuse him guaranteed Met police protection after he pulled out of royal duties might seem like a trivial battle over legal fees.

But in fact the duke’s failed attempt to pass 50 to 60 per cent of the costs incurred by the Home Office in fighting his unmerited claim tells us much about the preening prince and his selfish disregard for virtually anyone other than himself, his equally self-obsessed wife, Meghan Markle, and his children. [No one else matters of course. It is all about them.]

That’s because when the Duke of Sussex, as he still wants to be called despite ditching his royal role, wasted yet more of the High Court’s time in arguing for the taxpayer to fund at least half of the hundreds of thousands of pounds that the Home Office was forced to spend on the case, what he was really doing was trying to pass on a large chunk of the bill to ordinary taxpayers. [Sponging off others is quite on brand.

That’s right: instead of having the decency to accept that he’d have to pay up when he lost, the Montecito multimillionaire, for whom the legal expenses will be loose change, wanted taxes paid by everyone ranging from people on the minimum wage to bus drivers, cleaners and pensioners to cover his costs. It’s frankly contemptible. [Does he think it is his birthright to have the peasants pay for his temper tantrums?]

It's notable too that yesterday’s costs order by the High Court judge, Sir Peter Lane, reveals that Harry, who is so protective of his own privacy (when it suits him), managed to breach a confidentiality agreement made as part of the litigation by emailing “certain information” that was meant to be secret to one his lawyers and the MP Johnny Mercer. The prince might have apologised for the error, but the costs order refers to the “seriousness of the breach” and it was at best a sloppy mistake that added to the Home Office costs that he was trying to avoid. [What were you up to Harold?]

Harry’s whole case was, of course, misconceived from the start and it’s worth recapping why.

He asserted that the decision in 2020 by security experts on the Government’s Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, that he should no longer receive publicly-funded police protection in Britain because of his move abroad should be overturned.

The supposed reasons were that the committee had allegedly failed to take into account the impact of a successful attack on the prince and had also acted unreasonably, unfairly and with a lack of transparency.

It was nonsense for the prince to think that he knew better than a panel of experts informed by the latest security advice from the police and intelligence agencies. [This man has a very high opinion of himself.] The High Court unsurprisingly dismissed Harry’s claim on all grounds, finding that there was no reason to overturn the Ravec panel’s decision. It had in fact left open the possibility of occasional police protection for the prince when in Britain, if there was evidence in future of a sufficient threat to his safety.

An attempt by the prince to persuade the courts that a later offer by him to pay for police protection should have been accepted was also rebuffed. Yet another judge dragged into Harry’s interminable litigation ruled it would be wrong to allow the wealthy to receive a service from the limited pool of specialist Met protection officers that a less affluent person could not afford.

That too was the correct and inevitable decision. Police protection officers are highly skilled specialists, trained at significant public expense, who exist only in restricted numbers and who are required to safeguard those facing the highest risks such as working royals, Cabinet ministers and prime ministers current and former, not others like Harry wanting the comfort blanket of protection they don’t need.

In short, every argument put forward by Harry was flawed and rejected by the courts. It’s a sign of his delusion that even the succession of earlier rebuffs from the judiciary didn’t stop him basing his attempt to get off a big chunk of the Home Office’s costs in fighting the litigation on the fantasy claim that he’d achieved “partial success” in his legal action. [He learns nothing from his experiences.]

Maybe that was how Harry viewed it. After he all, he told the world in his biography Spare that “there's just as much truth in what I remember and how I remember it as there is in so-called objective facts”.

But it simply wasn’t true, as yesterday’s High Court costs order reminded him.

It pointed out that Harry had “comprehensively lost” and that there was “no merit” in his claim of partial victory with his judicial review argument failing “on all of the pleaded grounds.” [Harold is a big loser.]

It was the obvious outcome from the start and the claim should never have been brought. His inevitable defeat was deserved and now it’s time for the penny-pinching prince to pay up.

👉 How dare Montecito millionaire Prince Harry demand our tax money to cover his legal costs | Evening Standard (archive.ph)

post link

author: Von_und_zu_

submitted: April 17, 2024 at 10:53AM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit

disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.

[techminsolutions]

Understanding India's New Tax Regime: Benefits for Earners Above Rs 15 Lakhs

In the past few years, India’s tax laws have changed a lot. These changes were made to make the system easier to understand and to offer lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. According to Nitin Gupta, head of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the new tax regime, which is now the default option, is expected to provide numerous benefits to individuals earning more than Rs 15 lakhs. In this…

[damnesdelamer]

On the picket line the other day, I saw a former lecturer of mine, and we got talking. Part of the whole dispute we in UCU are involved in is around the fact that Higher Education as a sector has over £40 billion in reserves nationwide, and many universities have chosen to dump that into vanity projects like shiny new buildings (many of which are both exorbitantly expensive and also not fit-for-purpose), rather than invest in staff during the biggest cost of living crisis in living memory.

My former lecturer, a staunch liberal, intimated that £40 billion seems like a lot, so who knows if that money even exists. So I told him, here’s what I do know: three years ago, my managers, who were responsible for allocating a £5 million bid of government funding, ignored the advice of me and another expert on practical teaching equipment, and chose instead to spend more on products from existing contracts. This could be seen as corruption, but technically I think it’s just laziness. But it also amounts to a mutual agreement among university management and external contractors and suppliers to continue to profit off government funds, rather than invest in staff.

Over the last ten years, workers across Higher Education are being paid 25% less in real terms, due to stagnating wages, due to inflation, due to increased cost of living. This is to say nothing of the fallout from covid, or the arguably substantial decline in education standards new students receive (in spite of all the money dumped into new buildings and equipment).

Meanwhile, my institution’s student intake has nearly doubled in the past five years, which both means greater workload and, in theory, greater revenue. But who sees that money? Not me, nor even the lecturers who make twice as much as me, but you can bet that money is going somewhere.

Initially we had no offer of increased pay, then we went on strike and got an offer of 3% (again, in the face of a loss of 25% over the last decade in real terms), and then 5%. These ‘offers’ have been overwhelmingly rejected by UCU members, in part because they prove that that money does exist, and is available for our employers to give us our due. But more importantly, this is not just about pay, and the problems of workloads, pensions, mismanagement, and discrimination, which sparked the current strikes, won’t be solved by throwing money at them.

Nevertheless, slowly but surely, we are making advances. Industrial action works. Support the Unions and support the strikes!

Solidarity forever.