View more on these topics

Crossing the divide

One of the sharpest divisions of opinion among stakeholder pension providers appears to be in the area of with-profits. Some say categorically that with-profits is not feasible in stakeholder. At the other extreme, some not only offer it but have also selected it as their default fund. How can they all be right?

An interesting light is thrown on this subject by a paper being presented to the actuarial profession in February and March. It is entitled, Transparent With-Profits – Freedom With Publicity. A key paragraph of the paper is the following:

“It is not yet known how many companies will offer a with-profits option as part of their stakeholder pension range. The ringfenced nature of the fund means that all guarantee and short-term smoothing costs will need to be financed within the fund unless a company is prepared to support the fund from the inherited estate or from shareholders&#39 funds. Therefore, stakeholder with-profits may be offered only with low guarantees and limited smoothing, thus impairing two of the fundamental attractions of with-profits investment and making the with-profits option less attractive to investors.”

The implications of this paragraph are rather disturbing. If some offices are not only offering with-profits in their stakeholder but also selecting it as their default, they must be expecting that a lot of their stakeholder members will invest in with-profits.

Whichever fund a stakeholder provider selects as the default, the provider is effectively endorsing that fund as being broadly suitable for a wide range of stakeholder members. Yet the actuarial paper is using terms about with-profits under stakeholder which, to say the least, do not inspire such confidence.

It may be that this is all a matter of communication. Perhaps it is reasonable to offer with-profits under stakeholder because it still possesses some good features.

Examples might be participation in the general profits of the life office (but does that also make the stakeholder with-profits liable for unforeseen losses of the office?) or the ringfenced stakeholder with-profits fund may have had a gift of lots of capital from other sources within the life office. But do the donors of such capital know that they have made this gift? If they did know, would they be happy with their own generosity to others?

If the nature of with-profits in stakeholder is fundamentally different from the nature of other forms of with-profits, there is surely a massive obligation on the life office to explain fully and simply what this new form of with-profits actually is.

If they cannot do so when starting with a clean sheet, what hope is there for doing so with existing forms of with-profits which carry decades of historical baggage?

The Consumers&#39 Association is sceptical about with-profits in all its forms but in my view with-profits has served a very valuable purpose by allowing generations of savers to invest in equity markets while giving smoothing of returns and an element of capital guarantee.

It is not at all clear to me – and it would seem the authors of the actuarial paper share this view – that these with-profit advantages extend into stakeholder pensions.

It is very important for the success of stakeholder that it does not acquire a dubious reputation as a result of a muddle over the appropriateness of with-profits. It is easy to be smug and say that group personal pensions do not have the same problem over with-profits as stakeholder. That is true, as they continue to have access to established with-profits funds. But in the public perception, if stakeholder is tarnished, so too will be other forms of private pension.


&#39Public won&#39t be bored into buying&#39

Marketing guru Lucian Camp has berated this season&#39s Isa ad campaigns for their “dreadful dullness” and warns providers that people cannot be bored into choosing an Isa. Camp, director of marketing agency Camp Chipperfield Hill Murray, says Isa providers&#39 traditional reliance on intensive advertising in the first quarter of the year has resulted in boring […]

Catmark Isas clawed out of depolarisation

The FSA has excluded Catmarked Isas from phase one of its changes to polarisation. The FSA this week decided to push ahead with depolarisation of stakeholder and direct-offer products but not Catmarked Isas. It made the decision after listening to arguments from the Financial Services Consumer Panel and the industry which claimed the proposals could […]

The Occupational Pensions…

The Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority is launching a facility on its website to help employers find out if they need to set up a stakeholder scheme. At the website, employers can find out if they are exempt from having to offer staff access to a stakeholder pension. The website asks employers a series of […]

Johnson says no advice is needed for stakeholder

The Treasury has taken its toughest line yet against advice with a letter to Conservative MP John Randall from economic secretary Melanie Johnson saying stakeholder does not need advice. It has provoked a furious response from the industry who warn there is a risk of widespread misbuying. The move comes as the Treasury is about […]

Cricket - thumbnail

England vs Australia: pensions

Well, the cricket season is here, and England and Australia are stepping up to the wicket. Although we compete with each other in the sporting world, when it comes to pensions, Australia’s pension programme is held up as a model for our auto-enrolment initiative. Auto-enrolment was introduced because people weren’t saving enough into their pensions, and it is still early days but signs are positive. However, in Australia, saving into a pension is compulsory, and in fact employers are the ones who have to pay in. Employees in Australia can make additional contributions into their pensions, but they don’t have to. Should the onus be on the employer or employee to save? Well in the UK we think it’s both, but to get ‘adequate’ savings for retirement it’s the employee who has to pay more in.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    Why register with Money Marketing ?

    Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

    News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
    Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

    Money Marketing Events
    Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

    Research and insight
    Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

    Have your say
    Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

    Register now

    Having problems?

    Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

    Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm