Unlocking Locked in Pension's ( LIF, LIRF, LIRA )

[August1991]

Not so August. There was no agreement on the part of the plan holder because the legislation forced plan holders to purchase a LIF. No choice is/was offered. Most retirees never live long enough to deplete the funds in their plan.

When these people were first employed, they understood that their pension would be paid out over time after retirement and not paid as a lump sum. Now, they want to have access to their pension savings in a lump sum and they want to change the tax effects of receiving this lump sum.

BillC (and people like him) wants to change the terms of a contract after signing it.

I have no objection to BillC putting pressure on the government to obtain what he wants. We live in a free society. But he is disingenuous when he describes himself as a "welder". He's a lobbyist.

What's wrong with retirees wanting access to the pension funds they accumulated during their working life in order to maintain a dignified lifestyle?

What's wrong with anyone at 65 in English Canada asking the CPP for all the money paid into the fund in one lump sum? After all, it's "their" money.

Life doesn't work that way.

But heck, in a world where the federal government can hand out $10 million to Maher Arar, I reckon BillC (and peopel like him) will just wear down the politicians and they'll eventually say yes. After all, the politicians are not spending their own money.

Edited January 24, 2009 by August1991

[Bill C]

Hi Bill, I read your link to the proposed legislation. As I read it, the bill is to allow transfer from a locked in fund to a RRIF. Wouldn't the RRIF not also be locked in? Nowhere did I see an unlocking provision which would provide access to the funds by the planholder. I may be wrong. Could you clarify?

Thanks and regards.

capricorn

Hi Capricorn ;

a RRIF is not a locked in fund . The reason that we are asking for the locked in fund to be transferred to a RRIF is that if it is transferred to anything else it would become taxable at the full rate of taxation .

If transferred to a RRIF the money can be withdrawn at the amount a person wants to take out and then be taxed at the appropriate rate. There is no set maximum amount limit you can withdraw on RRIF's as there is on locked in funds . There is a minimum set amount in RRIF's however . This is also being looked at.

The only other fund the money could be transferred to is a RRSP , but then if a person didn't have the required room the remainder of the funds would be taxed at the highest rate .

Regards Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi August 1991 ;

As I said read the forum and then spend a little bit of time studying the issue . You may be actually be able to learn something.

You obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about comparing CPP to a private locked in retirement account ,

Comparing CPP to a LIRA , LIF or LIRF is like trying to compare apples to grapefruit .

I am sorry I haven't more time o waste on you as you are obviously lonely and want some one to talk to you .

By the way I am neither a welder or a lobbyist now . I am Retire .

Bill C

[capricorn]

Hi Bill.

Thanks for the clarification and details. Now the bill makes more sense to me.

The only other fund the money could be transferred to is a RRSP , but then if a person didn't have the required room the remainder of the funds would be taxed at the highest rate .

But if the unlocked funds are transferred directly from the LIF into an RRSP account (i.e. in a direct RRSP transfer) would the maximum RRSP deduction even apply? The 25% unlocking in 2008 was set up to allow for that type of direct transfer which then allowed the planholder to structure his own RRSP portfolio and withdraw funds at his leisure. Once again, I may be misreading the facts.

Thanks.

capricorn

[August1991]

Hi August 1991 ;

As I said read the forum and then spend a little bit of time studying the issue . You may be actually be able to learn something.

I did Bill.

Many Canadians (such as myself) have paid alot of money into the CPP (or QPP). I want and need this money now. According to your logic BillC, Canadian governments should give to all Canadians - when requested - a lump sum (tax-free) for all their contributions to the State (CPP/QPP) pension scheme.

Unfortunately, the CPP/QPP is designed to collect money on a monthly basis and to pay out money on a monthly basis. It could not work if recipients suddenly asked now for a tax-free lump sum amount in lieu of all future monthly payments.

Yet, that's what you want BillC of your pension scheme.

----

BillC, you're fundamentally wrong, and sadly you don't understand why you're wrong. You want a special deal not available to the rest of us. Such State employees accepted the terms of their contract. Live with it.

Nevertheless BillC, I admire your stubborn lobbying skills. With such skills BillC, frankly, I think you should work for another special interest group. But if you choose such an occupation, I advise you to understand the opposing point of view.

Edited January 27, 2009 by August1991

[capricorn]

According to your logic BillC, Canadian governments should give to all Canadians - when requested - a lump sum (tax-free) for all their contributions to the State (CPP/QPP) pension scheme.

August, this is not all Canadians. We're talking retirees.

BillC, you're fundamentally wrong, and sadly you don't understand why you're wrong. You want a special deal not available to the rest of us.

A special deal is exactly what MPPs in Ontario gave themselves in 1999 when they voted to unlock 100% of their locked in pensions.

Mr Dalton McGuinty: So that Ontarians, who are paying very close attention to these proceedings here today, understand what we're talking about, everybody outside of this Legislature who's not part of the special group about to be the recipient of a special gift from this government has to be able to plead financial hardship. They've got to before the superintendent of financial services and they've got to get down on bended knee and plead for immediate access to their locked-in pension fund. There is no such requirement to be placed on MPPs. What you are doing here is giving yourself a right, a benefit, a privilege which is not to be enjoyed by any other Ontarian.

Mr Michael Bryant: But now they can turn to a bill that blatantly gives opportunities to members of provincial parliament that do not exist for the rest of the population. That is the height of the appearance of injustice and the height of hypocrisy.

Mr Michael A. Brown: Either everything should be an RRSP……..or everybody should be under the same rules on a LIRA, a locked-in retirement account. Tell me why we as MPPs need to be treated differently from anyone else in the province.

Ms Caroline Di Cocco: So there is one legislative change for the general population and then there is another for the MPPs.

Mr. Sean Conway: No one benefits from this change more than I do. It’s the wrong thing for me to support. I would go even further and say it’s immoral. If its good enough for Conway, Harris and Eves, it should be good enough for the guy or woman who worked for Acme Power Co. Lets say, a company that had a plan wound up.

Mr. Steve Peters: You are creating two classes in this province: one class the citizens of Ontario and the other class, about 61 politicians.

http://www2.carp.ca/article_display.cfm?documentid=2687

In Ontario, the precedent was set by MPPs, like it or not.

And looked at from another angle, unlocking these funds can only add to financial stimulus as retirees spend in their local economy. That can help local businesses.

August, I see your concerns. I just think the arguments for outweigh the arguments against. But if you're so against this, perhaps you should let the Ontario Liberals know your feelings.

[Bill C]

Hi Bill.

Thanks for the clarification and details. Now the bill makes more sense to me.

But if the unlocked funds are transferred directly from the LIF into an RRSP account (i.e. in a direct RRSP transfer) would the maximum RRSP deduction even apply? The 25% unlocking in 2008 was set up to allow for that type of direct transfer which then allowed the planholder to structure his own RRSP portfolio and withdraw funds at his leisure. Once again, I may be misreading the facts.

Thanks.

capricorn

Hi Capricorn ;

I was just looking at the PMB again and I do not see a provision for a transfer to a RRSP in it . It is just transferable into a RRIF upon retirement at age 55 or if a earlier retirement is allowed under the rules .

When the Conservatives set up this PMB they did it without consulting with us as to the wording like the NDP did when they set theirs up .

In Fact we did not here about it fore some time after it was tabled . It was the case of one thinking the other had informed us .

Regard Bill C

[capricorn]

Hi Bill,

Thanks for answering my question. It's much clearer now.

I see what you mean about not being informed on the status of the bill. I will be checking the Legislature's calendar periodically to track its progress.

capricorn

[Bill C]

February 2, 2009

To all the people that would like to see LIRA , LIRF , and LIF's Unlock 100% in Ontario .

Great news! The Ballot Day lottery was held today and Ted pulled number 17. That means that second reading of Bill 116 will be held on May 7, 2009, much earlier than expected. There is still a chance that the Liberals will prorogue the house which might affect the number of the Bill and could possibly move the date back a few weeks but all signs indicate that they won’t prorogue.

This is a grassroots cause for fairness, respect and economic benefit. It is a cause for which many of you have been struggling for several years. While Ted Chudleigh is personally dedicated to Bill 116’s passage, he is also acting as your representative as Ontarians so I encourage you to keep in touch with him through me so that we stay united and so that your voices do not get muffled by the usual politics. Your ideas are most welcome. Even if we disagree, our own healthy debate will strengthen our position leading up to May 7th.

Thanks again to all for your continued support. Together, I think we have a real chance for success!

Best regards to you and your families,

Ben Ellis

Executive Assistant to

Ted Chudleigh, MPP Halton

[email protected]

416-325-5747

PS . AS always we need your support in contacting your MPP's and Premier Dalton McGuinty and request of them to pass Bill 116.

There will be a site where you can download a petition . I will post it as soon as it is set up .

Regards Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

This is the site to download the petition if you wish .

www.tedchudleigh.com/petitions

The second reading will be on May 7th and then it will be debated.

We need all the help we can get to try and have this petition accepted by the majority of members from all party's . Mailing your MPP and Premier Dalton McGuinty and requesting of them to pass Bill 116 . The Bill to unlock LIRA , LIRF , and LIF pensions in Ontario .

We also need all of you to download the petition and print out copy's and get them signed ...

Please don't procrastinate and think the next person will do it . If everybody takes that attitude , We are then dead in the water .

If we want these pensions unlocked we have to show that there are a great number of people behind unlocking.

Have your family , children (( There is no age restriction )), friends , neighbors and whoever sign .

There is one restriction however . Only citizens from Ontario may sign , overthought you may hold a locked in pension under Ontario rules . In this case e-mail Premier McGuinty and protest .

If you get at least one petition signed ( Great ) if you can get a hundred . ( Absolutely Fantastic ) . What ever the number it will be a big help in reaching our goal for every retiree , being able to control their own finances in times of need and not have to pay the government a fee and beg for their own money (( This is not CPP or OAS ))

Please also pass this on to any contacts you have and also ask for their help .

We Can Do This !!!

The Petitions can be mailed to . Ted Chudleigh , Room 450 Legislative Building , Queen's Park , Toronto , Ontario , M7A 1A8

Or you can mail to me and I will bundle them up and send them on .

Bill Costello , 6 Chub Lake Road , Box 56 , Atikokan Ontario , p0t 1c0

We would like the petitions sent in by April 10th .

Take Care , Regards Bill Costello , The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders .

[Bill C]

Bill to Unlock Pensions to be Debated May 7th, 2009

MPP Chudleigh Seeks Fairness and Respect for Retirees

(Milton, ON – February 3, 2009) Today Halton MPP Ted Chudleigh announced that his

Private Member’s Bill 116, the Pension Benefits Amendment Act, will be read for the

Second time and debated on May 7th, 2009.

Bill 116 would allow retirees full access to locked-in funds (LIFs, LIRAs, LIRFs) at the

Age of 55. These funds are currently doled out in increments by the government and not

Fully paid out until the recipient is 90 years old. Too often, retirees pass away before

Receiving their hard-earned pensions.

“My Bill seeks respect for retirees first and foremost,” said Chudleigh. “Ontarians over

55 do not need the government to ration out their pensions like parents giving allowance

To their children. At the age of retirement, most Ontarians have raised families, bought

And sold homes, made investments and shown prudent and responsible management of

Their money and property. It’s time to start treating our seniors like adults.”

“An immediate unlocking of pension funds would also act as a timely stimulus to the

Economy,” added Chudleigh. “It would put money in the hands of the people and, while

I’m sure they won’t spend it all at once, I imagine they might use some of it on projects

And expenditures that would ease our provinces current economic trouble and create some

Well-needed jobs.”

Chudleigh has worked in concert with the Ontario Coaltion of Independent LIF Holders

(“The Coalition”) in understanding the issues and garnering public support. This

Province-wide group of activist citizens has been demanding changes to pension laws for

Many years.

“There have been several attempts to unlock pensions but so far the government has been

Reluctant to act,” said Coalition spokesman Bill Costello of Atikokan. “Yet we remain

Hopeful that Premier McGuinty and MPPs from all parties will finally see the light and

Vote for Mr. Chudleigh’s Bill 116 on May 7th. It is simply the right thing to do.”

The Coalition has begun a petition which calls on the Legislative Assembly to pass Bill

116 without delay. The petition can be downloaded at www.tedchudleigh.com/petitions

And sent to Chudleigh’s Queen’s Park office: Room 450, Legislative Building, Toronto,

Ontario, M7A 1A8.

-30-

For information contact:

Ben Ellis - 416-325-5747 or 905-878-1729

Bill Costello - 807-597-6882

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

The new Ontario Budget will be in early March . Susan Eng Vice President of Advocacy of CARP will be trying to convince the Finance Minister to unlock pensions for retire,s 100% in the upcoming budget

She can use all the support she can get behind her request .

Please E-Mail Finance Minister Dwight Duncan through the CARP E-Voice Mail and put some support behind Susan .

http://www.carp.ca/advocacy/index.cfm

Please also pass this on to all of your contacts .

Take Care , Regards , Bill C

[Bill C]

The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders

The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders is composed of a number of private citizens assembled from various regions in Ontario who's sole purpose is to lobby the government to unlock all "locked-in" pensions in our province.

We are primarily arguing two issues within one campaign.

The primary issue is that of fairness and equality under one law for all Ontario citizens, regardless of vocation and void of political favouritism.

The secondary issue is that of the unjust government control of Ontarians access to their personal locked-in pension assets. Assets that were generally derived from former employers "wound-up" defined benefit plans and employers defined contribution ‘DC’ plans.

Regarding the primary issue, the current rules and regulations set out in the Pension Benefits Act are discriminatory, as they’re not equally applied to all Ontarians. The MPPs pension assets, derived from their former wound-up pension plan in 1995, fall under the jurisdiction of the MPP's Pension Act. These are two separate acts for the same type of locked-in pensions.

Discrimination, where there are currently 61 MPPs, both former and present, that through an amendment to the MPP Pensions Act, contained within Bill 27 in 1999, exempted themselves from the highly restrictive and paternalistic legislation that governs all other Ontarians LIRA's, LIF's and LRIF's.

Regarding the secondary issue, the yearly maximum withdrawal limits for those who meet the minimum age requirement (usually 55) for access to their locked-in LIF and LRIF pensions is approximately 6.5%, increasing slightly year after year, until age 90. The aforementioned 61 MPP's will have 100% unrestricted access to the same type of pension-derived locked-in assets, at age 55, as compared to the rest of all other Ontarians who will have to wait till’ age 90 to see their last penny (1/2 of 1% ever make it – Stats Can 2007)!

Having a law on the books for 61 MPP's, regardless of when and how it was contrived, and a different law for an estimated million plus other Ontarians for the exact same type of pension assets is unconscionable and a blatant double standard for an equal and fair Ontario.

Our Coalition is dead set against such inequality and obvious discrimination. Discrimination and silence since 1999 that continues to percolate within the ruling Liberal party.

We are demanding fair and equal treatment and insist on being included in this exclusive group of 61 privileged Ontarians by receiving the same 100% access to our locked-in pensions.

For the past six years, Premiere Dalton McGuinty and his ministers have continued to ignore the pleas of Ontarians begging for full access to their locked-in pensions, while specific members within their party, continue to have full 100% access to their own former locked-in pensions.

In the Liberal budget back in March of 2007, Greg Sorbara introduced a one time 25% unlocking option to hopefully appease the holders of locked-in pensions. This was an insult to all Ontarians and continues to fly in the face of democracy, and equality under the premise of equality and one law for all.

In 2002, Saskatchewan listened to the will of their people and eliminated these restrictions, granting full 100% access to all locked-in pensions through legislation that applied to all their residents, and not just their provincial politicians. Their belief was that their residents knew best how and when to use their own private pension assets.

In December of 2006, Andrea Horwath of the NDP, introduced Bill 175 to unlock all locked-in pensions in Ontario receiving verbal support in the legislature from Bob Runciman of the PCs. The Liberal party ignored this bill and instead went on to pass a bill for themselves in two weeks, that essentially granted all MPPs a 35% pay raise as well as doubling their contributions to their own RRSP’s, while seniors with locked-in pensions were ignored.

In spite of the ruling Liberal party’s refusal to further unlock pensions, the trend towards full unlocking continues in other jurisdictions as the Federal government recently granted 50% access to all of their regulated locked-in pensions in their 2008 budget. As well, other provinces have increased their access to 50% and are on track to eventually follow Saskatchewan’s lead towards 100% access thus resulting in the elimination of huge unnecessary government bureaucracy and expense.

In October of 2008, Ted Chudleigh, of the PC party, introduced another similar private members Bill 116 to unlock all locked-in pensions in Ontario. It is scheduled for second reading some time in May of 2009, unless it gets scuttled and killed by the Liberal party again.

Our goal is to create an awareness of these issues within the general public. A public with either DC type pensions, LIFs or LRIFs, who for the most part have no idea about the restrictions they will face when they qualify to withdraw their hard earned locked-in pension assets. A public who further, have no idea of the conceived legislation that was created by former and currently seated select politicians, for politicians, leaving the rest of Ontario shackled and begging for equal access to their own pension money.

As our economy withers, generally so does the value of our pensions and thus the yearly withdrawal maximum that those millions of Ontarians count on for survival. The inability of the current legislation to address the overwhelming devaluation of locked-in pension assets, which will likely be with us for a number of years, is precisely the scenario where the current legislation fails, thus creating a proportionately significant reduction in a locked-in pensioners LIF or LRIF yearly payments – in simpler terms, a substantial pay cut.

We encourage you to contact your local MPP to voice your support for Ted Chudleigh’s Bill 116 to unlock pensions 100% for ALL Ontarians and not just the select few politicians as was done in 1999. Inform your provincial member of parliament that Ontario pensioners are quite capable of managing their own money, however they determine and see fit, and to put an end to this ridiculous paternalism over private pension money that isn’t theirs. It’s simply the right thing to do for so many various and personally distinctive reasons, especially in order to keep up with these turbulent and recessionary times.

Having to continue to increasingly pay for more and more services is bad enough as it is, but to now do it with a cut to LIF and LRIF pension income because of outdated, inflexible and complicated legislation, is just plain cruelty and ignorance to the hard-working founders and contributors to our province.

Obviously it wasn’t such a bad idea to some of our elected public servants back in ‘99.

Sincerely,

Grant Fleury

Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders

[Bill C]

PATERNALISTIC PAST TO A FLEXIBLE FUTURE?

Will Ontario Liberals seize the opportunity “To Move Into The Future” with the upcoming budget?

Or will they allow pension unfairness to continue, by allowing Ontario retirees to languish with outdated pension regulation.

Ontario’s recent Expert Commission on Pensions was confined to defined benefit pensions, which already enjoy the privilege of having the annual maximum limit of contributions being able to be topped up/exceeded and having a safety net provided by the Pension Benefit Guaranteed Fund. No wonder that it is slowly becoming evident that only the public sector can afford defined benefit pensions, as today’s grim economic reality is putting its costs beyond the affordability of private sector organizations.

Ignored by the Expert Commission, contribution pension holders do not have government guarantees or have the opportunity to exceed yearly allowable contributions during their working life. And a lot of these folks continue to be financially shackled with locked in pensions, restricting them from their own money.

Imagine their position during this market downturn, suffering from a yearly maximum dwindling withdrawal regulation, submitting and paying application fees to ask for more of their own money and facing the prospect of dying (average age 79 to 84) with about two thirds of their own money still inaccessible to them.

Originally well intentioned, current Ontario pension regulations governing locked in accounts remains mired in the past, with a “seventies and eighties” paternalistic pension mentality.

Whether Ontario moves into the future or remains mired in the past, will be answered in the upcoming Ontario Budget.

Bill Nafziger

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

Here is a transcrit of the discussion between Mr. Frank Klees ( Newmarket - Aurora PC Party ) and Hon. Minister Aileen Carroll . ( Minister Responsible for Seniors ) .

I question the title Hon. , but then that is just my opinion.

The first time I sent a letter to Ms. Carroll concerning the issue with locked in pensions . She was so kind to let me know that I was not in her constituency . I then wrote her another letter asking her if she was the Minister Responsible for Seniors , If so , was she not supposed to be responsible for all seniors in Ontario and again asked her to help correct the unjustness of locked in pensions .

I received no response . I am also aware of others of you that had the same problem with this minister when asking for her help in unlocking locked in pensions .

After reading her answer to Mr Klees even after he asked her the same question twice . This is what she came up with "I have not had an opportunity to speak to the Minister of Finance at the federal level; I leave that to my colleague in cabinet to do so. "

It is very obvious that the letters that were sent to her concerning locked in pensions were thrown in the garbage , She obviously never even looked at the issue .

If she had she would have known that there are a few hundred thousand Senior Retire's in Ontario that have locked in pensions under Ontario Provincial Rule . NOT Federal Rule ,

Just plain incompetent and she is being paid by us the tax payer to represent Seniors in Government .

If any of you would like to drop a letter to Minister Carroll and let her know that we are taking notes . Please feel free to do so .

Below is the Transcript and I think we owe the Progressive Conservative Party a big thanks for taking this issue on .

You all Take Care Bill C

Senior citizens

Mr. Frank Klees: To the Minister Responsible for Seniors: Seniors across the province are not immune to the economic downturn. They’ve worked hard to put aside funds in a retirement account and they’re counting on that income to pay their day-to-day living expenses.

Many of those retirement accounts are eroded. The income from those retirement accounts is considerably less than it has been. My question is this: Has the Minister Responsible for Seniors advocated with the Minister of Finance to allow seniors in this province to have access to 100% of their locked-in retirement accounts, and if not, why not?

Hon. M. Aileen Carroll: I can assure the honourable member that, the Seniors’ Secretariat being part of my portfolio, I am cognizant of the pressures of this economy on seniors in Ontario. I take every opportunity to convey to the Minister of Finance my concerns on issues such as elder abuse, and the fiscal impact as well. The property tax initiative, of course, was a response to that very dilemma, and it was done by this government in advance of the current economic malaise that we are now dealing with.

Be assured, honourable member, that I will continue to advocate on their behalf to the best of my ability.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Frank Klees: My question was very specific. Seniors from across the province are asking for the right to their own money. This is money that seniors have put aside through their hard work for the day that we now have, and that is when they are in need. This is their money. Under current legislation, they cannot access their own retirement funds. It will take an act of this Legislature to open up those locked-in retirement accounts.

I’d like to know from the minister, has she specifically made the request of the minister to include that measure in the next budget, and if she hasn’t, will she commit today that that will in fact be her request of the Minister of Finance on behalf of seniors across the province?

Hon. M. Aileen Carroll: As I assured the honourable member, I have and continue to convey my concerns and those of seniors in Ontario to the Minister of Finance. As the honourable member knows, we took measures to allow seniors more access in the budget of 2007. Unfortunately, the honourable member chose to vote against it.

There are indeed a number of aspects of this particular dilemma that belong in the federal domain. I have not had an opportunity to speak to the Minister of Finance at the federal level; I leave that to my colleague in cabinet to do so. But I can only assure the House and the member that many of the initiatives that we have taken are assisting these seniors in these turbulent times. I would look for his support when we bring in a very, very excellent budget in a couple of weeks’ time.

Edited March 13, 2009 by Bill C

[August1991]

Bill C,

You're my favourite lobbyist because you illustrate teh phenonomen so well. You may be an amateur and rather incompetent but you never give up.

In monarchist times (in Tsarist Russia), you would be called a petitioner. I think Americans still use this term.

In effect, you want the rest of us to pay a special compensation to you.

August, this is not all Canadians. We're talking retirees.

So? Edited March 14, 2009 by August1991

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

Here is a statement from Mr.Ernie Hardeman (Oxford ) that was read in the Legislature today . As Mr Hardeman says .

"In the budget on March 26, the McGuinty government has an opportunity to do the right thing and ensure that people who worked hard for their money have access to it when they need it."

I wont hold my breath as we have been asking them to unlock these pensions for the Seniors and Retire's of Ontario for the past 5 years . It appears that the Liberal Party is not concerned with the struggles of their seniors and those close to retirement wanting to bridge the gap to 65 when they lose their jobs in troubled times .

It seems that the McGuinty Liberals are only concerned about them selves and to hell with the older population.

As I have said in the previous letter we owe the Conservative Party a Thanks for taking up this issue of unlocking locked in pensions 100% for the 55 plus in Ontario .

Please pass this on to your contacts and also the previous letter .

Take Care , Regards Bill C

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford):

Imagine being a senior who is struggling to make ends meet, and being told by the government that even though you have money, you can’t use it. Imagine needing to repair your house or buy a new car, and being told by the government that you can’t spend your own money to do it.

That’s the situation that many seniors across the province are facing. They are owners of life income funds or locked-in retirement income funds. Both of these types of accounts severely restrict the amount of money that can be withdrawn. In fact, to access the account because of severe financial hardship, you have to apply and actually pay an application fee to try to get access to your own money.

Unlocking these pensions is a simple step the government can take to give people the flexibility they need to manage their own finances. Other provinces already allow significantly more flexibility on when people can withdraw money from these funds. Saskatchewan allows 100% to be withdrawn any time after the age of 55.

Like these other provinces, Ontario should recognize the importance of giving people access to their own money, and allow seniors to withdraw 100% of their life income funds or locked-in retirement income funds. These people worked hard to save for old age. Now that it has arrived, they should be entitled to access these savings.

This change wouldn’t cost the government anything. In fact, people who are finally making much-needed purchases will help the economy.

In the budget on March 26, the McGuinty government has an opportunity to do the right thing and ensure that people who worked hard for their money have access to it when they need it.

[Bill C]

Quote from Auguest1991 " Bill C,

You're my favourite lobbyist "

GEEEE Thanks . That means so much to me.

Take Care Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

The time is getting closer to hand in the petitions to unlock locked in pensions Bill 116 . We would like them sent in by April 10th .

If you haven't downloaded a petition yet . It can be downloaded at Ted Chudleigh's web site .

www.tedchudleigh.com/petitions

Please don't procrastinate and think the next person will do it . If everybody takes that attitude , We are then dead in the water .

If we want these pensions unlocked we have to show that there are a great number of people behind unlocking.

Have your family , children (( There is no age restriction )), friends , neighbors and whoever sign .

Please also pass this on to any contacts you have and also ask for their help .

We Can Do This !!!

The Petitions can be mailed to . Ted Chudleigh , Room 450 Legislative Building , Queen's Park , Toronto , Ontario , M7A 1A8

Or you can mail to me and I will bundle them up and send them on .

Bill Costello , 6 Chub Lake Road , Box 56 , Atikokan Ontario , p0t 1c0

With the economie the way it is there are more and more people everyday that are ending up in locked in pensions .

If these pensions were unlocked it just may help some people bridge their way into retirement instead of having to rely on social assistance .

Thank You and Take Care , Bill Costello , The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

Bellow is a press release that Susan Eng of CARP has sent out .

The Coalition of Independent LIF holders would like to Thank CARP for all the efforts they have put into have these pensions unlocked . We in the Coalition and also CARP will be continuing the fight to have these funds unlocked 100%

As Susan Eng has stated in her Press release that she is concerned with he GST/PST Harmonization .

I am also concerned .

The Liberals are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the Ontario Citizens again with a out and out tax grab . If they were sincere about helping business and the citizens of Ontario . Why did they not lower the PST to 5% it would have at least come close to leveling the field .

The way it stands . With the tax on Electricity and Heating and not taking into consideration the other items that will be taxed . The $1000 and the tax credits will be gobbled up pretty fast . I wish some of these people would have to spend 1 year in the boots of people that live in the north on the average income here and just see how far their credits go . Not saying that people in the GTA and all of Ontario will be any better off.

Bill C

March 26, 2009

CARP warns that proposal for $1,000 cheques diverts attention from potential tax grab but applauds major gain for retirees with locked in retirement funds

Toronto, Ontario: CARP warns that the proposal to send out $1,000 cheques diverts attention from potential tax grab but applauds major gain for retirees with locked in retirement funds.

GST/PST harmonization hides tax grab

People planning how they will spend their $1000 cheque from the provincial government will have to think twice. First not everyone gets the $1000. Families with 2 or more people, this includes single parents, will get the $1000. Single people, including those 65plus, only get $300 – and it’s spread over 3 payments.

The cut-off is $166,600 for families and $82,000 for singles – those with incomes above these amounts will not receive the transitional payments.

These payments were meant to soften the blow from the increase in Retail Sales Taxes due to the new combined tax now applying to goods and services that were not taxable provincially before harmonization. Based on government analysis of consumption patterns, people could be paying from $185 to $1000 more in sales taxes due to this change. The budget papers say that even after the $300/$1000 one time only payments have stopped, taxpayers will still be ahead but that depends on believing that businesses that stand to gain the most from this change will pass their savings through to consumers.

One huge flaw in this analysis is that some products like home heating oil- which is a major expense for most families, especially older Canadians, - is not much subject to competitive pressures.

“Instead of exempting essential products like home heating fuel, the government is leaving it to taxpayers to pressure businesses to pass through their savings,” said Susan Eng, Vice President, Advocacy, CARP. “Increasing sales taxes is no way to stimulate consumer spending and it in fact hurts those who have no choice but spend on necessities.”

Unlocking LIFs – increased from 25% to 50%

The good news for older Canadians who have locked in funds [LIFs] is that they will now be able to unlock up to 50% of their LIFs, up from the limit of 25%. CARP has called for full unlocking to allow people to access their own money, especially in these difficult economic times. In fact there could be more tax revenues as people spend on their immediate needs.

CARP has also called for the elimination of the fees payable when people get their fundes unlocked through financial hardship applications. Budget 2009 proposes to waive the fees – 2% of the amount withdrawn – minimum $200 to maximum of $600 –for 2 years only. CARP calls for a permanent elimination of these fees.

“It’s bad enough that people in dire financial circumstances can't get at their own money without a lot of bureaucracy – the fees were an unnecessary extra burden and should be eliminated permanently but CARP members will appreciate this temporary relief. It shows that the government is listening,” said Eng.

But CARP cautions that unlocking LIFs also mean that the funds are no longer creditor proof which is an important consideration in difficult economic times.

Pension reform proposals recognize need to protect retirees and broader access to pension plans

The proposals for pension reform are responsive to the calls for urgent reform and balancing the interests of employers and employees. For example the temporary funding relief requires the approval of plan beneficiaries which includes retirees, and greater limitations on contribution holidays. There is a nod to larger pension funds providing administrative support for smaller funds and mention of something approaching a universal pension plan which CARP has called for consistently as well as a pension summit to involve retirees in pension reform deliberations.

“The budget proposals acknowledge the urgent need for pension reform, including rebalancing the interest of employers and employees, protecting pensioners, considering a universal pension plan and involving retirees and other stakeholders in pension reform deliberations. CARP members who have become increasingly anxious about their retirement security will welcome these proposals,” added Eng

CARP is a national, non-partisan, non-profit organization committed to advocating for a New Vision of Aging for Canada, social change that will bring financial security, equitable access to health care and freedom from discrimination. CARP seeks to ensure that the marketplace serves the needs and expectations of our generation and provides value-added benefits, products and services to our members. Through our network of chapters across Canada, CARP is dedicated to building a sense of community and shared values among our members in support of CARP’s mission.

[capricorn]

Unlocking LIFs – increased from 25% to 50%

Hi Bill.

I expect anyone who withdrew 25% in 2008 will only be entitled to an additional 25%, not 50%. I'm not sure about this. A clarification will have to be made at some point.

[Bill C]

Hi Bill.

I expect anyone who withdrew 25% in 2008 will only be entitled to an additional 25%, not 50%. I'm not sure about this. A clarification will have to be made at some point.

Hi Capricorn ;

Yes I am pretty sure that is the way it will work . I am going to wait until FSCO puts the details up on their site before I contact them . I don't want to say anything until then to FSCO .

There could be a problem here that may have to be sorted out . If they only allow another 25% to members that have already unlocked . These members would be getting the short end of the stick compared too some one that hasn't reached the unlocking stage .

I will use$100,000. as a example . First unlocking of 25% = $25,000. Second unlocking of $75,000. = $18750

Short fall of $6250. This would be amplified by how much a person has in their fund .

A person who has not unlocked any yet would be able to unlock $50,000 . The person that has already unlocked should be able to unlock 33.333% to even it out

We will just have to wait and see what is up .

Regards Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody ;

I just thought I best let everybody know . Even though the McGuinty Government has opened up 50% unlocking of Ontario LIF's .

We are not letting up . We still need the petitions sent in supporting Ted's Private Members Bill 116 .

If we have a little bit of luck on our side we could get the Bill passed if McGuinty allows a free vote and we have the support of the Conservatives and NDP .

If not at least it will be a good launch into the next election and at that time I am sure the party that gets in will unlock these pensions fully with protection of RRIF's from creditors .

If the people of Ontario vote in this so called Premier again . Then all I can say is we deserve what we vote for .

Take Care Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi Bill.

I expect anyone who withdrew 25% in 2008 will only be entitled to an additional 25%, not 50%. I'm not sure about this. A clarification will have to be made at some point.

Hi ;

This has been clarified . The 25% unlocking comes into effect January 2010 . If a person has already withdrawn 25% from their new LIF they will be able to draw another 25% from the original amount they transfered into the LIF . This will result in 50% of the original amount transfered into the new LIF.

Example . $100,000 First 25% = $25,000 Second 25% = $100,000 - 25% = $25,000

Combined $ 50,000

If a person hasn't transferred into a New LIF because they are still employed . When they do transfer into a New LIF they will be intiteled to a 50% withdrawel

Regards Bill C

[Bill C]

Hi Everybody;

I would like to say a great big THANK YOU to all of you that sent in e-mails to the Premier and Finance Minister of Ontario as well as sending letters to the MPP's of all party's .

I would also like to say a BIG THANK YOU to Susan Eng and CARP for their continuing efforts in having these pensions unlocked .

I would also like to thank you for the time you have taken to go out and get petitions signed in support of Bill 116.

The petition will be read by various MPP's of the Conservative Party in the legislature starting shortly .

If you haven't sent in your petitions yet , you can send them in now. If you haven't yet got one filled out .

It is not too late . Better Late then never .

The petition can be found here . Http://www.tedchudleigh.com/petitions

Well We All have finally convinced the Liberal Government to unlock a additional 25%.

While this is a nice gesture and we are thankful this is not enough !!!!!

Why should Government be interfering in a persons own private pension savings ?? We do not need government telling us how we should set up our budget for retirement.

We in LIF pensions do not have the protection of company pension plans . We do not get Government Bail Outs .

We say how our money is invested the same as a person with a regular unlocked RRSP.

Why ???? Then should we be treated differently and have our money locked in ?

We make our own GAINS and SUFFER OUR OWN LOSSES . WE do this with no help from government .

Why then should Government be DICTATING how our money is spent during our retirement years .

LAST BUT NOT LEAST .

Why should WE and the TAX PAYER be shelling out millions of dollars to FSCO to regulate these funds.

It Just doesn't make sense . ANOTHER TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY BY GOVERNMENT !!!

Anyway . THANK YOU AGAIN for all the time you have put into this.

Bill C PS> This isn't over yet . We do not have 100% . More letters are needed to MPP's .