1-20 of 1,717 results for subject:"Lump sum payments"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.529 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.006 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Lump sum payments"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Lump sum payments" OR subject_t:"Lump-sum payments" OR subject_ses:91904
Type
House
Session
More
Year
More
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
Motion to consider. Agreed to on question.
Motion to consider. Agreed to on question.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the 12-month limit on capital disregard applied to Armed Forces Compensation Scheme lump sum payments in Universal Credit on injured veterans and their families with caring responsibilities when a personal...
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the 12-month limit on capital disregard applied to Armed Forces Compensation Scheme lump sum payments in Universal Credit on injured veterans and their families with caring responsibilities when a personal...
Lump sum compensation payments under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme are treated as personal injury capital and are disregarded for 12 months, reflecting longstanding rules across means-tested benefits and allowing time to protect funds intended to meet long-term needs. Where payments are placed into a trust or annuity, they are disregarded indefinitely, meaning the system already provides a mechanism to protect compensation in the long term.
Carers who provide unpaid care for at least 35 hours per week for a severely disabled person may get a carer element as part of their Universal Credit award. DWP is working with the Ministry of Defence to strengthen guidance and improve awareness, ensuring individuals understand their options to protect compensation at the point of award.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment her Department has made of the potential merits of amending the definition of a charitable lump sum death benefit so that people with dependents do not face barriers to donating to charity from their pension.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment her Department has made of the potential merits of amending the definition of a charitable lump sum death benefit so that people with dependents do not face barriers to donating to charity from their pension.
At Autumn Budget 2024, the Government announced that unused pension funds and death benefits payable from a pension will form part of a person’s estate for inheritance tax purposes from 6 April 2027.
Where at least 10% of a person’s net estate is left to a qualifying charity, their estate is taxed at a reduced rate of inheritance tax of 36% instead of 40%. When considering this, the pension will fall within the general component of the estate. This component includes the deceased’s free estate and from 6 April 2027 will also include any unused pension funds and death benefits (called notional pension property). Any notional pension property that is paid to a qualifying charity will count toward the charitable giving conditions for the general component Further guidance can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax- manual/ihtm45003. Guidance will be updated before the changes are implemented in April 2027.
Charity Lump Sum Death Benefits can be paid free of Income Tax. These lump sums are deliberately limited to money purchase arrangements where the deceased member had no dependants. These rules are not changing as this ensures that pension funds are used to support dependants where they exist, while allowing schemes to pay out benefits where there is no other beneficiary.
Lords consideration of Commons reasons and amendments. Lords amendments 1, 5, 6 and 13 not insisted on. Lords amendments 15 to 24, 27, 30 to 34, 36, 38 to 42, 83 and 88 insisted on and Commons amendments 88A to 88C disagreed to on division (219 to 144). Lords amendments 26 and 37 not insisted on and Lords amendments 37B and 37C in lieu agreed to on division (216 to 148). Lords amendment 35 not insisted on and Lords amendment 35B in lieu agreed to on division (211 to 150). Lords amendment 43 not insisted on. Lords amendments 77 and 85 insisted on on division (162 to 151). Lords amendments 78 and 86 not insisted on. Lords amendments 79 and 87 not insisted on. Bill returned to the Commons with reasons and amendments.
Lords consideration of Commons reasons and amendments. Lords amendments 1, 5, 6 and 13 not insisted on. Lords amendments 15 to 24, 27, 30 to 34, 36, 38 to 42, 83 and 88 insisted on and Commons amendments 88A to 88C disagreed to on division (219 to 144). Lords amendments...
Moved by
Lord Katz
Moved by
Lord Katz
My Lords, in moving Motion A, I will also speak to Motions B, B1 and C. The Commons have disagreed with Amendment 1 on the grounds that it could introduce,
rather than mitigate, risks that the provision in Clause 2 could be used in unintended ways. Amendment 1 would place...
My Lords, in moving Motion A, I will also speak to Motions B, B1 and C. The Commons have disagreed with Amendment 1 on the grounds that it could introduce,
rather than mitigate, risks that the provision in Clause 2 could be used in unintended ways. Amendment 1 would place...
My Lords, in speaking to Motion B1, I welcome that the Government have committed to a review of Regulation 64A of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 2013. That is an important and necessary step, and their further commitments today are most welcome.
However, if the GAD review is to be...
My Lords, in speaking to Motion B1, I welcome that the Government have committed to a review of Regulation 64A of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 2013. That is an important and necessary step, and their further commitments today are most welcome.
However, if the GAD review is to be...
My Lords, I thank the Minister for explaining things in great detail from the Government’s perspective.
I will speak to Motion B1, which the Minister said has already been met. The Local Government Pension Scheme already has mechanisms to review and amend employer pension contributions and funding practices; for instance, under...
My Lords, I thank the Minister for explaining things in great detail from the Government’s perspective.
I will speak to Motion B1, which the Minister said has already been met. The Local Government Pension Scheme already has mechanisms to review and amend employer pension contributions and funding practices; for instance, under...
Motions D and D1 are the opening Motions of the next group.
Motions D and D1 are the opening Motions of the next group.
Have they been moved?
Have they been moved?
Not yet.
Not yet.
It says “D1” on the Order Paper.
It says “D1” on the Order Paper.
It is in the second group.
It is in the second group.
I see. I am sorry. Forgive me, I was going on to the next group.
On Motion B1, we will abstain rather than vote against it, because we think that these things are already in process, if dealt with properly.
I see. I am sorry. Forgive me, I was going on to the next group.
On Motion B1, we will abstain rather than vote against it, because we think that these things are already in process, if dealt with properly.
I am glad that, for once, our debate on the LGPS has been short and sweet. I thank both opposition Front Benches for their engagement on this issue. I am glad that the noble Viscount, Lord Younger, recognised that there has been movement. We understand the importance attached to the...
I am glad that, for once, our debate on the LGPS has been short and sweet. I thank both opposition Front Benches for their engagement on this issue. I am glad that the noble Viscount, Lord Younger, recognised that there has been movement. We understand the importance attached to the...
Moved by
Lord Katz
Moved by
Lord Katz
I have already spoken to Motion B. I beg to move.
I have already spoken to Motion B. I beg to move.
Moved by
Lord Katz
Moved by
Lord Katz