View more on these topics

Budget 2011: Protection tax reform could hit premiums

The Government has revealed plans to remove protection business from the income minus expenses basic life insurance tax regime.

In its Budget document, the Treasury says: “The Government will introduce legislation to remove protection business from the income minus expenses life tax system designed to tax investment type business and align it with the tax treatment of other trading entities.”

The change will be effective from January 1, 2013.

HM Revenue & Customs has already consulted on the move.

Speaking at the Protection Review conference last July, Grant Thornton senior actuarial consultant Nigel Cooke predicted that if the proposal to remove protection business from the I-E regime were to go ahead, protection premiums could rise by up to 10 per cent.

He said: “If HMRC quite logically decides that pure protection should not be within the basic life insurance tax regime, it probably means that for a large number of insurance writers those premiums will rise by 5 to 10 per cent, before anybody adds insurance premium tax to that.”

But in a statement released today after the Budget announcement, Friends Provident says it believes the move will create a level playing field among insurers.

Friends Provident chief executive Trevor Matthews says: “This is good for consumers and positive for the protection industry. It will help to promote a more sustainable and stable competitive marketplace and preserve the value of business already written. I am delighted that the Government has taken this positive step.”

Under the current I-E structure, companies with large savings books can use their savings business to offset the expense of writing protection business, meaning they could offer lower premiums as a result.

With protection business removed from I-E scheme, Friends Provident argues that providers can price protection from an equal starting point.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Friend’s Prov means it’s good for them. How can a price increase be good for the consumer? What nonsense!

    And this at a time when people can’t be persuaded to buy enough protection.

    If people don’t protect themselves, they fall on the State.

  2. Why do FP believe it`s a good thing that clients will be charged more for protection & therefore, potentially, even less people will be covered – just because FP haven`t the ability to price effectively they seem to think it`s better to rectify this by disadvantaging the consumer – hardly TCF

Leave a comment