# Federal Budget 2016 - Good News for Vets?



## CampCricket (24 Mar 2016)

I know Trudeau promised to bring back the old pension... and I may be one of the few that isn't hollering for the previous system... I have been well looked after under the NVC... But that aside... I was happy to see what he was able to do for us... Especially the bump to the lump sum - and if I am reading it correctly... it looks like the bump will be retroactive to 2006 when they first started handing out awards.

For 2016 the 100% max level is $310,378.59
For 2017 Trudeau will bump that to $360,000
That's almost a 14% increase - if my math is still good. So am I correct in thinking that those of us already in receipt of an award with get a bump of around that 14% mark to align it with this new limit in 2017.

For those that haven't read the new budget - here is a copy and paste on the Veterans enhancements:

Financial Support for Veterans
Since the creation of the New Veterans Charter in 2006, the range of programs, services and benefits under the Charter have been gradually updated over time. However, veterans groups as well as the Veterans Ombudsman have noted that the Charter needs to be enhanced to meet the needs of modern-day veterans. Budget 2016 therefore proposes significant enhancements to financial benefits for modern-day veterans. The proposed investment includes:
•	Increasing the Disability Award (maximum increased to $360,000 in 2017) for injuries or illnesses caused or worsened by military service, and aligning it with other New Veterans Charter benefits by indexing it to inflation. Higher Awards would be paid retroactively to all veterans who have received an Award since the introduction of the New Veterans Charter in 2006. 
•	Expanding access to higher grades of the Permanent Impairment Allowance to better support veterans who have had their career options limited by a service-related illness or injury. The potential impact of the permanent and severe impairments on veterans' career advancement opportunities would be considered in determining the appropriate level of financial support. The benefit would also be renamed Career Impact Allowance to better reflect the intent of the program. 
•	Increasing the Earnings Loss Benefit to provide income replacement of 90 per cent of gross pre-release military salary for injured veterans participating in Veterans Affairs Canada's rehabilitation or vocational assistance program or with injuries preventing them from suitable and gainful employment. The indexation of this benefit would also no longer be capped at 2 per cent and would be allowed to keep pace with inflation. Finally, the calculation of the minimum benefit would be amended to be based on a senior private's salary instead of a basic corporal's salary. 
These measures represent a significant investment that would greatly improve income support to disabled veterans, including both veterans transitioning to the civilian workforce as well as those with injuries preventing them from suitable and gainful employment. In particular, these measures would ensure that disabled veterans who are unable to return to the workforce because of their injuries receive higher lifelong financial support.
In consultation with the veterans' community, the Government also understands there is a significant desire to better design veterans' financial support programs going forward—and that the Government should take the appropriate time to work with veterans to ensure programs meet the needs of those injured in the line of duty. 
Over the next year, the Government will work with the veterans' community to examine the best way to streamline and simplify the system of financial support programs currently offered by Veterans Affairs Canada and National Defence for veterans and their families. The overall objective of this work will be to ensure that the Government delivers programs and services in a way that is veterans-centric and facilitates a seamless and successful transition from military to civilian life.
Based on current projections of demand for the programs, the Government expects that $1.6 billion over five years, starting in 2016–17, would flow to veterans and their families in the form of higher direct payments. However, public sector accounting standards require that the present value of all increased future payments to eligible recipients be recognized up front when changes are made to veterans benefit plans. The budgetary expense associated with the increase in benefits for eligible recipients amounts to $5.6 billion over six years, starting in 2015–16.

http://www.budget.gc.ca/2016/docs/plan/ch5-en.html#_Toc446106788


----------



## RobA (24 Mar 2016)

"For 2016 the 100% max level is $310,378.59
For 2017 Trudeau will bump that to $360,000
That's almost a 14% increase - if my math is still good. So am I correct in thinking that those of us already in receipt of an award with get a bump of around that 14% mark to align it with this new limit in 2017."

I don't know that it's that simple. I hope not. In my case, I was pensioned at 100% , but it was in 2008, when the max was $260,000 (I assume it's been ticking up annually since then?).

So in my case, a 14% bump would pay me shy of $50,000, and bring my total paid to $310,000. Another vet who was paid off in more recent years would get significantly more, with the only difference being they were lucky enough to be hurt later then me.

This creates again more classes even within the NVC.

I'll wait to see what they plan on doing.


----------



## Brasidas (24 Mar 2016)

There were two promises that I noticed from Trudeau:
Lifelong pensions
Free education, including four years of university

Neither happened. I expect either legislation in the last five minutes of this session of parliament or a draft that they won't have yet voted in by the start of the next election campaign. I would be pleasantly surprised to be wrong.

At some point I get another few grand. Ok, I'll take it. Some more folks get the PIA, which almost no one qualified for. Folks who get thrown out get more money (probably?). Not seeing how the switch to a minimum of a "senior private's salary" is an improvement over that of a "basic corporal" given that the former is 4120 to the latter's 4714.

Is it terrible? No, its a small improvement. But pardon me if I don't stand up and applaud. Guys injured before me receive substantially more than I will.


----------



## Teager (24 Mar 2016)

Brasidas the math has been done and it works out to be a bit more by like $2000 a year at the Senior Pte's rank. It should also be noted that VAC calculates ELB based at the pay level at time of release where as SISIP calculates Res force at time of injury. All I see is a lot being pissed off that SISIP and ELB are once again unequal. I"m sure this will be brought up.

There's still 3 more budgets to go no where was it mentioned that all promises would be fulfilled in the first budget. The Minister has stated that the pension is still in the works and has been mentioned in the other thread the stakeholders asked to delay the pension a year to get everything worked out. 

Let's hope the next budget is more of what people are looking for.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (24 Mar 2016)

You guys are dreaming in technicolour if you think the gov't is going to come through on any future budget.


----------



## Occam (24 Mar 2016)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> You guys are dreaming in technicolour if you think the gov't is going to come through on any future budget.



You may want to familiarize yourself with the more recent posts at http://army.ca/forums/threads/121395.0.html before making such a dire prediction.


----------



## the 48th regulator (25 Mar 2016)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> You guys are dreaming in technicolour if you think the gov't is going to come through on any future budget.



Maybe you got stop wearing your blue coloured glasses.

The last Government did Eff all for us, so don't sit there and profess to know what will happen in the future.

Remember, the decade of decay is causing us problems to this day, and has the current government Elbows deep cleaning up that mess, before they can rush anything to appease Veterans.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Mar 2016)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> You guys are dreaming in technicolour if you think the gov't is going to come through on any future budget.


Well, we gave the last government 10 budgets to get it right, and they didn't quite, did they? ;D

That said, even though Team Blue didn't say it out loud, I'm guessing the going to full pension option's going to cost a *LOT* of money, meaning no party of _*any*_ colour's going to be able to get 'er done without some biiiiiiig cuts elsewhere.  I hope to be surprised, but ...


----------



## RobA (25 Mar 2016)

RobA said:
			
		

> "For 2016 the 100% max level is $310,378.59
> For 2017 Trudeau will bump that to $360,000
> That's almost a 14% increase - if my math is still good. So am I correct in thinking that those of us already in receipt of an award with get a bump of around that 14% mark to align it with this new limit in 2017."
> 
> ...



OK so just got off the phone with VAC, they say that all retroactive pay is also indexed to inflation, so, in my situation (260K in 2008, DA @ 100%) I should get something in the range of 100k. By comparison, someone who was awarded the same rating (100%) in 2016, they'll get a cheque for $50k, since they would have already been paid $310k.

Basically, everyone will be paid up to $360k in total, regardless of when you got your award.

Just in case anyone was in the same boat.

One thing I forgot to ask: does the fact that it doesn't go up until 2017 mean that we won't be paid until then? Anyone here hazard a guess?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Mar 2016)

They aren't closed on good Friday?


----------



## RobA (25 Mar 2016)

Sorry, when I said "just" I didn't mean literally just now. I spoke with them yesterday afternoon.


----------



## Capt Caveman (25 Mar 2016)

I have to say that I am very confused with all the banter about which system is better.  Can someone explain the difference with the old pension system vs the NVC.  I think I understand the NVC with a disability award up to a maximum of $310,000 (or so to be $360k) and several other allowances including a Permanent Impairment Allowance, a PIA supplement, Earnings Loss Benefit and the Canadian Forces Income Support Benefit.  Add to that the Disability Tax Credit and CPP Disability and it looks fairly substantial.  It appears, at least on the surface, that we are fairly well taken care of if the need arises.  So if this is what is available today, what would our ill and injured received before the new charter?  Can someone explain?


C.C.


----------



## Stoker (25 Mar 2016)

Capt Caveman said:
			
		

> I have to say that I am very confused with all the banter about which system is better.  Can someone explain the difference with the old pension system vs the NVC.  I think I understand the NVC with a disability award up to a maximum of $310,000 (or so to be $360k) and several other allowances including a Permanent Impairment Allowance, a PIA supplement, Earnings Loss Benefit and the Canadian Forces Income Support Benefit.  Add to that the Disability Tax Credit and CPP Disability and it looks fairly substantial.  It appears, at least on the surface, that we are fairly well taken care of if the need arises.  So if this is what is available today, what would our ill and injured received before the new charter?  Can someone explain?
> 
> 
> C.C.



In a nutshell if I received a lump sum for my hearing loss, say $25000. Under the old system I received a monthly payment say $500. If I live for the next 20 years I would be paid $120000. See the difference?


----------



## Dxhound (26 Mar 2016)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> In a nutshell if I received a lump sum for my hearing loss, say $25000. Under the old system I received a monthly payment say $500. If I live for the next 20 years I would be paid $120000. See the difference?



I saw the Budget 2016 and earlier comments on this thread, but this is still a bit confusing. 

What happens if I received a $40,000 lump sum payment for hearing loss back in 2012, no monthly payments as it was a lump sum payment. 

I also retired in 2013, and I received LTD monthly payments for another disability from SISIP for a period of 2 years after retirement.

Will my lump sum payment back in 2012 be bumped up, and for the mathematicians, bumped up to what approx, and also what would happen to my 2 years of LTD payments, will they also be bumped up.

And for the big question, do we wait for this to happen or do we have to apply and to whom or what do we apply.

Thanks for any assistance.


----------



## PuckChaser (26 Mar 2016)

There's no lifetime pensions. Don't worry about details for a program that doesn't exist. If they bring it back, they'll sort through those scenarios and have a plan.


----------



## Teager (26 Mar 2016)

So far no changes to SISIP. You can read the Bill in the other thread of the changes. http://army.ca/forums/threads/121395/post-1426107.html#msg1426107

_- mod edit to link directly to post referenced -_


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Mar 2016)

Are the increases and retroactive just for earnings loss and total disability.

If a guy got, say $20,000 for his knee ten years ago, is that getting topped up also?


----------



## PuckChaser (26 Mar 2016)

Looked like any disability award from NVC (2006+) will be topped up with a new 100% of $360k. Just take the percentage you got, apply it to new max, and subtract what you received already = retro payment. Keep in mind the new max wasn't applied until 2017, so I have a feeling they won't send cheques out until after that point, or even longer considering how many people they'll have to study sift through.


----------



## RobA (27 Mar 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Looked like any disability award from NVC (2006+) will be topped up with a new 100% of $360k. Just take the percentage you got, apply it to new max, and subtract what you received already = retro payment. Keep in mind the new max wasn't applied until 2017, so I have a feeling they won't send cheques out until after that point, or even longer considering how many people they'll have to study sift through.



This is what I was told by VAC the other day, but reading the actual bill kinda seems like not.

It says:

" If a member or a veteran who received, in whole or in part, a disability award under section 45, 47 or 48 of the Act before April 1, 2017 dies before that day, the Minister must pay, in accord­ance with section 55 of the Act, to a survivor or a person who was, at the time of the member’s or veteran’s death, a dependent child — if that survivor or person is alive on April 1, 2017 — an amount determined in accordance with the formula
A − B
where
A
is the amount set out in column 3 of Schedule 3 to the Act, as that Schedule read on April 1, 2017, that corresponds to the member’s or veteran’s extent of disability, as set out in column 2, for which the disability award was received, reduced — for every calendar year from 2016 until the year in which the disability award was received — by a percentage calculated in accordance with the method of calculating the percentages by which the amounts set out in Schedule 3 to the Act are periodically adjusted; and
B
is the amount of the disability award that was payable to the member or the veteran under subsection 52(1) of the Act."

The key part is the definition for A, specifically, you take the total in column 2 (in this case, let's day $360,000) and you "reduce it for every year in accordance with a method used to periodically make adjustments" which to me sounds like the inflation rate.

Which seems kinda shitty.

I got 100% in 2008 which was $260,000, and my cheque will likely be around $40,000. A vet at 100% in 2015 would have gotten $310,000, and their cheque will be around $50,000


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Mar 2016)

Even more detail, nobody is seeing retro payments until after 1 April 2017.


----------



## Pieman (28 Mar 2016)

> Finally, the calculation of the minimum benefit would be amended to be based on a senior private's salary instead of a basic corporal's salary.



I can see why they changed it, but still seems like it would be a kick to the gonads. How much drop in yearly pay between the two? I recall my Sapper level pay was quite a lot less than my Cpl pay in the end.  If one is injured I don't think the Earnings Loss Benefit would be of much help, especially for someone who is going through recovery and rehab.


----------



## PuckChaser (28 Mar 2016)

As of March 2013:

Private (3) is $4120 a month.
Corporal 5A (0) is $4714 a month.

$596 a month difference.


----------



## Teager (28 Mar 2016)

Interview with the Minister on the pensions and also Jody Mitics view/opinion.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=837734&playlistId=1.2835220&binId=1.810401&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1


----------



## Jed (29 Mar 2016)

Teager said:
			
		

> Interview with the Minister on the pensions and also Jody Mitics view/opinion.
> 
> http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=837734&playlistId=1.2835220&binId=1.810401&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1



I'm glad I had the fortitude to reload the video and hear Jody Mitic's response. It was excellent. He obviously has a lot more faith in the current Minister and government then I do.


----------



## Szczep (29 Mar 2016)

Great interview. Thanks to the reporter that she goes after Herr. He seems to avoid veterans and not updating about anything.
Love the shirt of Jody Mitic: "Spiritual Gangster".
Herr said, we fixed ELB. How?  What about LTD? is SISIP/Manulife part of it or just 'insurance mentality' approach?
VAC number instead of mil service number: dumb idea.
Steak holders?  is legion part of 'them'? They were there in 2006.
Pension: in 4 years they will promise that it is almost, almost done: reelect us and we will implement it.

Jody Mitic: thanks for representing veterans.  I hope he IS part of the 'steak holders'.
Cheers


----------



## jollyjacktar (29 Mar 2016)

Stake holder, not steak holder.  Unless a BBQ is involved.


----------



## BinRat55 (29 Mar 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Stake holder, not steak holder.  Unless a BBQ is involved.



Hee hee... mmmm steak!!


----------



## Teager (29 Mar 2016)

Saw this today made me laugh a bit.


----------



## CombatMacguyver (29 Mar 2016)

John Tescione said:
			
		

> Maybe you got stop wearing your blue coloured glasses.
> 
> The last Government did Eff all for us, so don't sit there and profess to know what will happen in the future.
> 
> Remember, the decade of decay is causing us problems to this day, and has the current government Elbows deep cleaning up that mess, before they can rush anything to appease Veterans.



A $400M reduction in the defence budget right-off-the-hop is a great start!  right?..... guys?

At least the last guys got us the Globemaster, the Leo II, and (eventually) the TAPV (when the VanDoos stop setting the trials on fire)

"decade of decay"?  That's what we're going to call that?  Sigh....


----------



## Szczep (29 Mar 2016)

Hi Gents,
'Steak' was intentional.  As one gent on veteranvoice.info  used the idea before me.  Credit owed to him.
I am glad it was noticed.


----------



## Rifleman62 (29 Mar 2016)

I enjoyed Jody's comparison of the Vet $60,000 pension verses Duceppe, the one time leader of the separatist party pension of $110,000/120,000. 

So a person who fights for Canada and gets severely injured finally gets $60,000 and a jerk who wants Canada to break up gets double. 

You trust the Liberals? They will hem and haw until the next election.


----------



## jollyjacktar (29 Mar 2016)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I enjoyed Jody's comparison of the Vet $60,000 pension verses Duceppe, the one time leader of the separatist party pension of $110,000/120,000.
> 
> So a person who fights for Canada and gets severely injured finally gets $60,000 and a jerk who wants Canada to break up gets double.
> 
> You trust the Liberals? They will hem and haw until the next election.



I agree with you there on the BS of someone who wants to destroy the country getting richly rewarded whereas a true servant of their fellow citizens gets the finger.


----------



## Brasidas (30 Mar 2016)

Teager said:
			
		

> Brasidas the math has been done and it works out to be a bit more by like $2000 a year at the Senior Pte's rank...



I'm still curious about this math. A basic Corporal makes more than a senior Private.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Mar 2016)

The quote from the NVC:



> (a) in the case of a veteran whose final release was from the regular force, the greater of the veteran’s monthly military salary at the time of release, adjusted until the benefit is payable, and the monthly military salary for a basic corporal in the standard pay group at the time the benefit is payable; and



The way the budget document words it, they said the minimum benefit is now senior private instead of basic Corporal. That means they've actually made a small cut, in that the minimum benefit will be 90% of pte(3) instead of 90% of Corporal(0). Not going to affect a lot of troops, but considering how Corporal is a mandatory promotion, it's a sneaky little cut that will only effect the very bottom end of the chain of command.


----------



## Teager (30 Mar 2016)

PuckChaser is correct it won't really effect many as VAC calculates your ELB at time of release.

The only issue I see if SISIP follows suit with the 90% is they still calculate LTD for reservists at time of injury. So in my case SISIP is giving me the 75% of a basic Corporal since I was a Pte at time of injury which means if they change I will get 90% Senior Pte pay at 90% but then once I am switched over to VAC ELB they will Calculate me at 90% of Cpl (4) Class C so my pay will increase again. That is if I'm correct in how all this is going to go down.


----------

