Veteran Claims

gunner no one should really accept the new pension . no reason I can see except those that cant control their money . you take the buyout and invest it . you should be able to get 4% easy but I figure more . 4% will give you more every month than the monthly pension . yup they will tax that but consider rates will and in fact are going up in 4-5 years time I predict ya will be able to turn 8 points on the dollar more than doubling the monthly pension. that what you should do with your buyout or if ya don't the GOC will im sure . don't forget your TFSA this can minimise , eliminate or eventually eliminate your tax exposure . also whenever you pass on your entire principle can be passed on to whoever you wish .

just saying

propat

Gunner if you have a claim going forward on April 1 you still have the option of the lump sum. No one has had the option of the old pension since 2006.

If you have the choice of lump sum or the pension you have to factor in your age if your a lot older then lump sum might be better but if your in your early 20's then the pension will probably be better as you would receive more over the lifetime.

Yes Artie Simms, of course. But I’m confused as to why would anyone accept this new pension if it’s so much less than the prior pension/ lump sum? Thanks
Gunner

Gunner8 wrote:So if the new system is so much worse, will ppl be better off just keep taking the lump sum? The new PFL doesn’t have any benefit at all?

Gunner

I think each veteran will have to decide for themselves based on how disabled they are, do they ever see themselves being able to work again.? Do they have a wife.? Kids? How old are they? Etc.

So if the new system is so much worse, will ppl be better off just keep taking the lump sum? The new PFL doesn’t have any benefit at all?

Gunner

I completely agree propat, and at this point, their only hope, is that a future government will take the opportunity to "improve" the PFL, by increasing the new pension amounts, and reintroducing a CIAS style benefit.

bigrex you are right when strictly speaking on the pain and suffering . just want to point out the loss of the CIAS for the new PFL guys makes the new system worse still.

propat

Gunner, basically, what they are doing, is looking at how much money a NVC Veteran would have gotten, over their lifetime, if the PFL had been enacted in 2006, and then deducting the money that was already paid. So in the end, the amount of money received between NVC and PFL Veterans, of comparable age and level of disability, would be roughly the same.

Gunner8 wrote:So basically the pension act that there offering is not nearly as good as the old pension act was?
Also, you said all of us who got lump sums will also get a pension when this new act comes into effect in April. So that would mean we got a lump sum and a pension.
Then when people get claims after April they only get one or the other, so how is that fair really? And to the people who got pension from before 2006 and no lump sums, how is it fair to them?
Am I right in saying this will happen, or am I misunderstanding?

Gunner

I’m no good with math but from what I read, the vets injured before 2006 , the new PFL is “fair” to them, because monetarily they got the best deal of all, a relatively high monthly payment compared to any plan that came after it. Someone needs to go on the news with 3 charts showing 3 vets that are exactly the same in terms of injury,time served,family,,one injured before 06,one after 06 and one after April 1 2019,and show the media how much the Liberals have trimmed  the money an injured vet is supposed to live on until he dies.

So basically the pension act that there offering is not nearly as good as the old pension act was?
Also, you said all of us who got lump sums will also get a pension when this new act comes into effect in April. So that would mean we got a lump sum and a pension.
Then when people get claims after April they only get one or the other, so how is that fair really? And to the people who got pension from before 2006 and no lump sums, how is it fair to them?
Am I right in saying this will happen, or am I misunderstanding?

Gunner

Artie, from what I can gather, say if a veteran is assessed at 100%, and is getting a PFL of $1150, but passes away after only 5 years. So the Veteran will have received $69000 in monthly payments. So their surviving spouse, or dependant, would receive the balance of a 100% lump sum award, of roughly $290000. But if the Veteran passed away after 20 years, the spouse would only get $90000

Yes, PA stands for the Pension Act, from before 2006. And I think they made the new PFL pensions woefully inadequate on purpose, so even though most future Veterans will opt for the lump sum, especially for lower rated claims (under 30%), they can still claim that they fulfilled their campaign promise of reintroducing a lifelong pension.

Gunner8 wrote:What do u mean by PA pension and PL pension? Is PA the old pension format and PL the new one? If so, and the new pension is actually that bad, wouldn’t we just be Bette off taking lump sum payments?

Gunner

there is lots of talk of young and or mentally unstable vets blowing LSP in under a year, but the way I look at it, take the lump sum, you never know what tomorrow holds, I don’t even know if you take the PFL and you die, does your wife and kids still get the monthly payment?

What do u mean by PA pension and PL pension? Is PA the old pension format and PL the new one? If so, and the new pension is actually that bad, wouldn’t we just be Bette off taking lump sum payments?

Gunner

It all depends on how much your lump sum was, when it was paid, and how old you are. Even your gender would make a difference, on how much you get, going forward. The amounts are far less generous, than what is offered under the pension Act. For example, a 10% PA pension for a married Veteran is currently $329, plus money for each child under 19. Under the PFL, a 10% pension is only $115, regardless of marital status, or number of dependants. And if you have have a lump sum payment, it could reduce the pension to almost nothing. For example, if you are 50 years old, and owe $35000, after they do their calculations, they would reduce a $115 PFL pension, by roughly $97.