Reader's submission: Will extra purchasing power be an issue for AOW pensioners after 17 March?
There will be parliamentary elections again on 17 March. And after 10 years of Rutte cs and thanks to Corona, it becomes clear how much Dutch society has been cut to pieces.
Was nothing possible in the past decade, neither for education, not for farmers or builders, nor for the police and judiciary (destruction of access to justice for the underprivileged), and certainly not for health care (as a result of which hospitals are now filling up and regular care has to be scaled down), suddenly billions and billions of euros can be conjured out of a top hat to keep things afloat. And Rutte stands there, looks at it and laughs up his sleeve, because he as the sublime crisis manager and his VVD are doing well. The minimum wage also suffered: only a few cents at a time, on 1 January and 1 July, only an extremely minimal increase was possible. And with that the AOW amounts.
On PlusOnline I came across the positions of the political parties with regard to their AOW position. Elections to the House of Representatives: this is what the political parties say about AOW and pensions | Plus Online
In their attempts to please voters, both the state pension and the minimum wage are suddenly the subject of discussion when it comes to promises to increase the amounts of both. The SP even talks about 25% more AOW. And all parties are committed to a guaranteed permanent link between the minimum wage and state pension. Can we finally hope for some more purchasing power now that indexation of our occupational pensions has become completely unthinkable for years to come, now that the entire economy worldwide has been thrown back to pre-2010 levels for years and years?
If the minimum wage and state pension are raised, that will be extra welcome for those who live in Thailand with a small pension of their own. Because Thailand is also affected by economic setbacks and its inhabitants also pay the costs in the long run (text prepared by my husband).
Submitted by Elaine
Mark Rutte comes to Peter at the gates of heaven and asks if he can enter. “Yes” Peter replies and Mark enters and looks around. “It looks nice here, but can I also look into hell?”
Petrus opens a large door, Mark looks indignant. “It is very beautiful there, the sun is shining, and all beautiful naked women, full of beer and food. Mark asks if he can go there.
“Yes, you can, but there is no way back,” Peter replies.
Mark chooses hell.
After a few days Mark calls Petrus and very angrily shouts through the phone: "It's a big mess here, all fire and water, and it's definitely not what you showed me!" says Mark
“Ah no”, Peter replies, “that was during the election campaign!”
Eline, during election time there are suddenly mountains of gold. That was no different in the past. 'We will do this and we will do that…' is not something that comes off the air, but when the coalition is forged, those promises prove to be untenable. I won't believe it until I see it on my pension and AOW statement. Not so!
It has always been that way and nothing will change in the future.
Especially now that we have no fewer than 89 (political?) parties.
Ladders for frogs more important than purchasing power for old age pensioners.
Good luck everyone, quack.
Ralph
Do not worry. There will be no need to recalculate the household budget after 17/3. The money has run out, so nothing will change, at least not for the better. Rutte has already made an advance on the future and committed a lot of money to the EU. In addition, the government will receive considerably less tax in the next 5 years, since many companies have already disappeared or are about to disappear.
I haven't received the 1000 euros from Rutte yet, or are there people who have already received it?
Well elections, It is of course the same as applying for a job or a position. If you get that job, you will be good for another 4 years. And then maybe waiting money. So you promise the people who can help you get that job golden mountains. Because what's going to happen. The minimum wages may go up SP wants to 14 euros per hour. If you work 7,5 hours a day, this is 7,5x14x21,5 = 2.275,50 euros gross/month Christmas bonus and holiday money are added to this. So Broto/year = 2275,50×12=27.090+8%of27.090+4%of27.090=27.090+2.167,20+1.083,60 = Total 30.340,80 euros Your AOW will then be 70% of rounded 30.340, -=21.238/12=1.769.83 euros/month including trade money. This is for a single person. The Gross amount of 1.769,83 is reduced through taxation. I can imagine that people with a high supplementary pension will therefore be taxed more heavily. After all, the money has to come from somewhere.
Regards Anthony
Minimum wage to 14 euros is a utopia, which is not or very difficult to realize.
A few reasons that come to mind, there will undoubtedly be more.
All wages will have to be increased, especially those who are now just over 14 euros, who have had to do some training or something to get to that salary.
Taxes will have to be increased drastically, because all social benefits are linked to the minimum wage.
Due to the high labor costs, even more companies will move to low-wage countries.
Nice to complain about the state pension and purchasing power and economy, well the corona has no influence at all in the long term and other than only 1 beer less per year. Or, as is common in Japan, you can continue to work well until you are over 90 years old, because the elderly there find a retired life of 30 years or more and then doing nothing not blissful and many go or continue to work part-time there to earn some extra money. as a contribution to society as well as not to deteriorate mentally.
Remember that the AOW is a privilege compared to most other countries: people get spoiled in the Netherlands and want more and more. And then even the AOW and supplementary pension are not enough and go look for a country where the pensioners get more.
AOW is not a favour. We have paid dearly for it for years.
A privilege if you compare it with other countries, we have arranged this well in the Netherlands and thanks to the principle of solidarity, everyone contributes to it and then receives the state pension from the state pension age.
The AOW is a pay-as-you-go system and NOT a pension (only popularly known). You pay AOW for the elderly who are currently enjoying AOW.
Incidentally, the AOW contributions of workers do not cover the AOW amount that must be paid out monthly. So money from the treasury has to be added to pay everyone AOW. Has something to do with aging and dejuvenation.
Kinda easy to reason like that. For decades we have heard AOW and Pension together should be 70% (was 80%). We therefore pay and count for this throughout our working lives.
Then the government squeezes us where it can. Agreements and arrangements that would be long-term are temporarily limited (mortgage interest deduction as an example) or even stopped (VUT Life-Course as an example).
We can see from the AOW and pension agreement that the elderly are in any case facing an even longer uncertain financial period (no indexation, cuts, etc.)
Agree that we don't have it that bad, but with these caveats.
Ger Korat, we are now going to become more Catholic than the Pope. I paid for it all my life and I also had to pay state pension on my shift allowance, so can I get something in return.
Yes, fine, but if there are people who think that the AOW should only go up a bit, a red light will come on for me. As soon as those receiving state pension start calling for an increase, this means that all working people will have to pay more state pension contributions on their income, while current state pensioners themselves paid a lower premium. It must remain fair so everyone pays the same.
No, that's not true. The AOW is increasingly being taxed, which means that working people pay less premiums, but that the first tax brackets are rising. Ultimately, everyone contributes to their own AOW benefit later. This principle arising from solidarity is one of the forces on which Dutch society is based, and which is not the case in Thailand. In Japan, 80-year-olds have been asked to continue working. Those people cannot combine a foreign place name with their first name.
Never heard of indexation Get Korat. Wages are also going up, so state pension must grow along with it. If you measure it against each other, we paid just as much premium, so that kite does not apply.
Doesn't the Dutchman himself judge the fact who will rule him or her for the next 4 years?
Constantly commenting on a government, even though many don't even bother to vote themselves, will never work.
In the newly chosen country of residence, where according to many, everything is suddenly so much better, they can only dream of this choice opportunity.
Here, without any other possibility, the same one takes the seat every time to tell the people where the hare has to go.
Every attempt by an opposition, which wanted to come to power because a majority had decided so, was usually put in the way of all kinds of stones, by accusing them of so-called mistakes or even corruption, to remove them from the political scene.
Unlike the minimum wage, the AOW is a social insurance that must be paid by the working Netherlands, of which a government is at most the administrator.
Any increase must ultimately be raised by working people in the Netherlands, and not by a government so many often misunderstand.
In European comparison with other countries, the Netherlands is still fairly highly regarded with its AOW old-age provision, although many may think otherwise.
A facility that benefits an ever-increasing group of elderly people, while an ever-smaller group of young people have to work and pay for it.
As you probably remember: all taxes go into the Great Common Pot, from which all Common Expenses are paid again, called: the National Treasury. In case of shortage, the state tries to borrow, in case of surplus to lower the national debt (so that we can borrow money NOW to survive the corona crisis).
So tell; from what must the increased old age pension be paid, in other words: where cutbacks or which taxes increased?. Borrow even more insanely, so at the expense of our (great-grand) children.,. unfortunately…
( Ditto, from which much higher healthcare and other costs should have been paid, to be ready for something like this once every 100 years.
In 1954, the AOW was intended to provide the elderly with what they needed at the prevailing cost of living there. It is high time that those costs were looked at: in a lower-cost country, the state pension should also be adjusted.
AOW has simply been destroyed since Rutte 1, 2 and 3, I went to Thailand because Rutte no longer allows me to work as a self-employed person. According to him, the self-employed paid too little tax. Now I am in Thailand and was told that I will receive my state pension when I am 65, but at the last minute people of my age were also mentioned, you have to wait a while. Rutte has not taken into account what these people have planned for their retirement.
My annuity has been screwed up by Rutte 1, 2 and 3. People outside Europe are not allowed to withdraw their savings in the normal way, but have to withdraw everything in a year and pay a lot of taxes, in collaboration with the Dutch Bank. See on google many people have withdrawn their money in 1 year and paid a lot of taxes, due to Rutte's mistakes / lies.
Not only people living outside Europe have been cheated by him, but also people with child benefits, some have had to sell their house and others have divorced because they could no longer cope with the problems. Rutte also said there will be an Eleven Cities Tour, what did he get involved in?
And much more.
Regards Jack
Jack what you say about the annuity is only partly correct. Indeed, I also found out a few years ago that annuities for people outside the EU seem to be something terribly difficult for insurance companies. So my conclusion was that there is no point in waiting for it and I immediately had it paid out. That is no problem and was arranged in no time. However, the insurance company then withholds tax at the highest rate. However, you can largely just reclaim this and it was also quickly refunded. On balance, I didn't think it was unreasonable how much I had to pay; because I had deducted the premium at the highest rate in NL at the time, I enjoyed a larger deduction than what I ultimately had to pay net.
Completely agree with Ger, the Dutch are spoiled lamenters.
Has Eline ever asked a random Thai how much his AOW/pension is??? And with regard to the filling up of hospitals and the associated cuts in healthcare: has it been noticed that there is a pandemic going on that no one - including Rutte et al. - was prepared for?
Stop complaining and accept that you live in Thailand and can enjoy the climate, culture and food.
And Herbert you continue to live in the past with those 1000 euros from Rutte??? You are probably still annoyed by Kok's penny, get a life and live now.
JCMan, when are we going to wake up? It's not about whether the cook's quarter comes to the surface and whether we owe Pinocchio's promise of 1000 euros, it's more about the fact that lies are being lied to by the more highly intelligent men who do it as they do. to say that they are better and more developed than those with less education. We have chosen them to work for us, paid for with the tax money of the less educated citizen, but the opposite is where they work against us, we allow ourselves to be lied to and deceived and that underdeveloped crowd also falls for it. I'm having a great time here and enjoying it, but don't tell me I'm not alive, you better wake up first and live with your eyes open
If you can write about an "underdeveloped mob" while that is reality, it says more about not being able to accept that same reality. That is called democracy and a good that is lived with open eyes.
Two years ago, we had a varied group of acquaintances and some of their friends visiting my home during Christmas.
It was an international group, so to speak, from Australia to Sweden via the USA and even Canada.
When the pension and the age at which and the balance came up, they all laughed at me.
Jan Beute.
Because you had too much or too little? Did they talk about the pension or the AOW? Also compared to how much they paid for it and how many years and hours they worked for it?
Because you can only pass judgment if there is also a level playing field.
Well, Jan Beute, then you may have saved less than those foreigners. If you stick to the tailor-made approach that the Dutch government devises for you, you will have a measured national old-age provision (AOW) and pensions that are neatly regulated by law and from which the government (ABP) or because of coverage shortfalls.
But I have met Dutch people in Thailand who 'have to make do' with provisions of between 5.000 and 10.000 euros per month, net, and they laugh at your foreigners. It is exactly what Theiweert means: don't compare apples with pears.
Dear Erik, I have saved more in my working life than those foreigners present at the time.
I have been living here in Thailand since I was 53 years old on my own funds and not on any benefit.
What mattered then, they retired earlier, some even before they turned 65, Janneman could wait until 66 years and a few months.
And many who come after me will have to wait even longer before they receive state pension.
Go and find out what a German, a Swede and a Norwegian get paid monthly only in state pension, so I'm not talking about any extra company pensions.
Jan Beute.
I would like to add that only my AOW that I receive annually, as evidenced by my 2020 annual statement from the SVB, is an amount of 9738 euros before payroll tax.
My company pension is considerably more.
And that for a working life from the age of 16 to the age of 53 in the Netherlands and after that I also voluntarily continued to pay AOW premiums for 10 years while living in Thailand.
I am officially married to a Thai who has never lived or worked in the Netherlands.
I have built up a total of 92 percent AOW rights.
That is why I only get half in my situation of what married or cohabiting couples would get in Holland.
If you only had to live on this amount and then certainly nowadays in Thailand you can shake it.
Can you understand that they laugh at you.
Jan Beute.
Dear Jan, If, as you say, you have been living in Thailand since you were 53 years old, and you still customarily started counting for the AOW at the age of 15, then you have never accrued 92% AOW, but exactly 76% (38X After all, 2%) gives 76% and not 92%.
All this, and the fact that you are married to someone who does not earn a state pension, makes saving
and a company pension, of course urgently needed.
Additionally, sorry you have paid voluntarily for 10 years, so it should not be 92%, but 96% (48 years x 2%) gives 96%
Indeed John you are right 96% is correct, I have paid voluntarily for 10 years.
But due to the amendment of the law regarding the increased state pension age, the cabinet has not given the opportunity to extend the voluntary continued payment from 10 to say 12 years for people like me.
And to think, I know people who don't think the voluntary premium payment is necessary, they will soon come home from a rude awakening. I have known two Dutch people who have benefited from this, they died here in Thailand before the age of 65.
And have saved the voluntary premium payment, but never wore anything.
Jan Beute.
I can only speak for Germany, and most of them there are just jealous of the Dutch old-age pension provision.
By most, I understand the ordinary worker who only comes to a so-called Altersrente with hard work, which on average is not much more than an AOW.
Many women who were unable to work while raising their children sometimes do not receive more than 600 Euros per month, and at the most come to a minimum wage due to a so-called social disturbance.
In the big cities you see a lot of these elderly people, collecting empty bottles so that they have a little extra from the deposit.
In large social markets, these people are often provided with foodstuffs that are well past their expiration date, so that they can no longer be sold in normal trade.
By comparison, in the Netherlands, every RESIDENT, regardless of whether he has worked or not, receives at least an AOW, often a company pension, and if he was healthy and industrious, had every opportunity to save extra for his old age.
Most complainants in the Netherlands have their shopping trolley overflowing with things in the supermarket, of which they need no more than 70% to live well.
Living their whole life in whirlwind, not skipping a party or holiday, and later blaming the government that they can no longer afford this lazy country life.
How is it possible that 40 billion was saved by the Dutch population. And then complain about state pension. Perhaps they could have saved for a pension supplement themselves?
I don't understand that 70% pension compared to your salary when you work.
Briefly outline my situation..
I worked in education for 41 years.. so supplementary pension comes from ABP.
At the age of 49 I decided to resign for 1 day, with surrender of salary and further pension accrual.
My younger brother died at the age of 62 and this tick made me decide to stop working at the age of 63 and to use my ABP pot(s) until I reach the state pension age.
I am now 67 and have also had state pension since June 2020
My Salary was 2100 euros net at the time of stopping
My ABP benefit started at that time and amounted to 2150 euros net until I received my state pension
Now I have about 1200 euros AOW and 1100 euros ABP = together 2300 euros net.
Where is that 70%???
I don't think I've taken a step backwards except for a 13th month and holiday pay.
I am satisfied with what I have and can even save a little bit every month from that income.
You won't hear me complain.
After all, you live by what you spend.
and if that is more than you receive, there will automatically be a hole in your budget.
I follow politics globally, but know that my voice is a drop in the ocean.
Nevertheless, I have always voted since I was 18,
and now my ballot paper is already on its way to The Hague.
Ferdinand, I have 42 years of government service behind me. That 70% has, to my knowledge, never been legally established as a guarantee. In the past, however, with regard to ABP pension, the – also published – starting point was that at 40 years of retirement, together with the AOW, you would end up at 70% gross of your last income. The net percentage was even higher.
That percentage was also used as a 'norm' by a number of other pension funds.
Hi Cornelius,
I remember the strong reactions of my management when I decided to work one day less, because I was stealing my wallet, and my pension would be drastically lower because I only worked 80% and therefore had less accrual... ( Considering when the average salary calculation came into the picture for 70% pension instead of the final salary) in retrospect it turns out not to be too bad as you can read.
Well-being and happiness are important to me and if you have enough income to live on why would you need more?
I totally agree with that view! I was able to retire at the age of 58 on the basis of a scheme whereby I could use early retirement with 42 years of service. Received the offer, asked for a day to think it over - I had no plans in that direction myself at the time - and decided to do it. A step I have never regretted; I've been enjoying my freedom for 17 years now!
For the sake of convenience, I did not care about all the sour comments above and this morning with a few cups of deliciously steaming coffee I delved further into the matter. I came across the following:
in these harsh corona times and because of the elections, all political parties agree that the level of the minimum wage in 2021 is not decent enough to run a household. With a full working week at €10,80 per month, your monthly wage is €1684. An average wage is €2623. That hurts a lot, I thought.
According to Statistics Netherlands, 2,4% of people with a job cannot make ends meet. 441.000 workers receive the minimum wage. 180.000 people are working poor.
But all this aside, because Eline's entry is about purchasing power after March 17. The question is whether if the minimum wage is raised, will it remain linked to the state pension?
This is what politicians say:
GroenLinks, SP and PvdA want an increase of almost 30 percent to 14 euros per hour, plus retention of the link.
The ChristenUnie only wants an increase of at least 10 percent, maintaining the link, and gradual taxation.
D66 also wants an increase in the minimum wage of 10 percent and perhaps 20 percent, but they do not need a direct link to the state pension.
The VVD now also thinks an increase is useful, but only the AOW and WAO will go up, not the ABW.
The CDA initially thought it would raise the minimum wage by 10 percent. But Wopke Hoekstra wants to focus on tax reduction and higher wages in general. The link between wages and benefits will be maintained.
Finally, 50Plus, which wants to see the minimum wage indexed every year, including the associated benefits.
What are the costs?
The CPB calculated that an increase of 10 percent hardly harms employment. But the increase plus link will cost the government €6,3 billion. Half of this will flow back into the state treasury through more VAT and income taxes. Without a link, raising the minimum wage by 10 percent will cost €400 million.