This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.
X
MM+cover+small+180914
Categories:Pensions

Poor pension choices could equate to 5 years of extra contributions

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Failing to get good deals on pension fees and annuities could mean an extra five years at work to get an equivalent pension, according to the National Association of Pensions Funds and the Pensions Policy Institute.

A report by the two organisations, published today, says poor choices on fees and annuities could cut pension income by up to 24 per cent. It says a man earning a median wage all through his life, starting at £20,000 at 25 years old, could retire three years earlier if he negotiated an occupational pension with a long-term charge of 0.3 per cent rather than paying the 1 to 1.5 per cent maximum fees charged through a stakeholder pension.

The NAPF bills itself as the “leading voice” of workplace pensions in the UK and is currently working on a project to increase transparency of pension charges.

The report adds that by failing to shop around for an annuity, a median earning man could reduce his pension income by 12 per cent, equivalent to an extra two years of contributions.

NAPF chief executive Joanne Segars says: “High charges can eat away at a savings pot and both workers and employers should try to keep them down. The annuity system can seem complicated but savers can help themselves by shopping around to get the best possible rate.

“People who do not get the best out of their pension could end up stuck at work for years longer than they planned. Getting a good deal on charges and annuities can mean the difference between enjoying retirement and spending years more at the desk.”

The report suggests retirement income can be trebled by paying into a pension from age 30 instead of 40, increasing employer and employee contributions each by 1 per cent, working for an extra year, paying lower charges and getting the best annuity on your whole pot rather than taking a tax free lump sum.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

The Money Marketing CPD Centre
Build your annual CPD - you can log and plan your CPD hours for free with The Money Marketing CPD Centre.

Taxbriefs Advantage
Advantage is a digital reference source giving unbiased, independent, answers to your technical queries. Subscribe to Taxbriefs Advantage.

Readers' comments (2)

  • these guys do themselves a disservice when they compare a price where fees are paid in addition vs a price where the fund charge includes the cost of advice.

    they also do themselves a disservice by comparing the corporate price with the individual retail price

    if they compared against 1%, which also includes commission the differential would be 15%, and if the fees are included i suspect the difference will be down to circa 5%

    So on a like for like basis a small scheme might result in an individual having to pay for 6 more months to get the same deal as if they were in a big scheme.

    But this isn't as headline grabbing as the stuff above

    very shabby or misinformed..either way poor

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why, of all bodies, is the NAPF wittering on about shopping around for an annuity instead of calling for the annuity trap to be scrapped altogether and replaced with a Secure Retirement Income Bond incorporating an insurance element against early fund burn-out?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick



Poll

Have you heard of cases of advised sales being disguised as execution-only?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments