View more on these topics

Experts rubbish drawdown charge cap proposal

Pensions experts say a proposed cap on charges levied on drawdown funds will not work because the concept of a default fund does not apply to the drawdown market.

In a consultation paper launched this week, the Labour-backed Independent Review of Retirement Income asked whether drawdown products should be subject to a charge cap.

The consultation, led by Pensions Institute director David Blake, aims to “evaluate the predictability and value for money of the lifelong retirement income” produced by defined contribution pension schemes.

There is a 0.75 per cent charges cap on the default funds of auto-enrolment schemes but this does not cover drawdown products.

Shadow pensions minister Gregg McClymont says: “I welcome the announcement by David Blake’s Independent Review of Retirement Income that they are studying the case for a new charge cap on pension products offered to savers by their pension provider to replace annuities.”

But AJ Bell technical resources manager Gareth James says: “A cap is only likely to have any chance of working in conjunction with a default fund. The question needs to be asked how appropriate a default fund is likely to be with drawdown options as flexible as those we will soon see.”

Old Mutual Wealth retirement planning expert Adrian Walker says introducing a cap “may be feasible” for workplace schemes, “depending on the demographics of that employer’s scheme”.

But for schemes open to individuals, he says: “To create a default fund simply to move inside a charge cap, there is a danger many people could end up in an environment where the default is not appropriate for them.”

Walker adds it would be “very difficult” for Sipp providers to create a default fund for all their clients.

Standard Life head of workplace strategy Jamie Jenkins says: “It seems a bit premature to discuss a charge cap with a market we don’t yet understand.”

He adds: “It’s quite different from auto-enrolment. We have a charge cap on auto-enrolment funds primarily because the Office of Fair Trading asserted there was a weak buy side in the market because individuals themselves do not choose schemes but that will be very different in the flexible retirement world. Most people will shop around from their scheme to choose a product that suits them.”

But Towers Watson senior consultant Will Aitken says: “If we’re saying people need protection when they’re building up a fund, it seems inconsistent to say they don’t need protection when their pot’s at its biggest. You can argue people going into drawdown know what they’re doing but we can’t assume that.”

The consultation closes on 20 February 2015.

Adviser views


Alistair Cunningham


Wingate Financial Planning

A 0.75 per cent charge on drawdown without the member seeing an adviser seems reasonable. However, drawdown is, by its nature, a complicated product. We would discourage anyone from going into drawdown without advice. It’s a lot harder to do damage by auto-enrolling somebody than by taking more out of your pot than you should.


Michael Basi

Managing director

Basi & Basi Financial Planning

Caps on charges can be useful but they can also promote a race to the bottom. We need some figures from the industry rather than putting a finger in the air. There are some very cheap drawdown products and when you set a cap, people are encouraged to hit it.



Axa Wealth scraps pension platform charges

Axa Wealth is to drop the annual charges on its pension and drawdown products available through the Elevate platform. The provider says regular annual fees will be removed for all new and existing customers from January next year. Currently savers pay £12 a quarter for Axa’s Pension Investment Account and £20 a quarter for its […]


Pensions Policy Institute deputy director to join USS

Pensions Policy Institute deputy director Mel Duffield is to leave the influential think-tank and join USS, the universities’ pension fund and one of the biggest in the UK. Duffield joined the PPI in September 2013 after previously working at the National Association of Pension Funds where she was head of research and strategic policy. It […]


Aviva to pay £2m compensation over misleading guarantee claims

Aviva is to pay over £2m compensation to 40,000 pension savers after they were misled over the existence of a capital guarantee within one of the firm’s funds. Investors in the Aviva Deposit Fund are to receive on average £55.26, meaning Aviva is paying out over £2m, as the provider admitted old marketing material implied […]


L&G restructures following John Pollock exit

Legal & General is to restructure its life and pensions and protection businesses following the retirement of L&G Assurance Society chief executive John Pollock. Group protection will move from the corporate to the insurance division, the corporate defined contribution pensions platform will move inside L&G Investment Management and the savings business will be split into […]

Benefits of using a probate bare trust

Have you ever wondered what happens to someone’s investment bond on their death if it is not written in trust? When someone dies it is essential to deal with their estate, which can be made up of their home, belongings, investment bonds and anything else they may have owned. But, it is not as simple […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. And once a 0.75% charge cap has been in place for a few years someone will say ‘hold on a 0.75% charge cap reduces peoples pension fund by X% at retirement lets reduce it o 0.50%’ and so on until they are demanding that providers pay the public for the privilege of having a pension with them.

  2. Why are we talking about a % charges cap rather than a decency limit?
    Why no MINIMUM charge either as without one you are cross subsidising which the F-pack said they didn’t want happening.

  3. I’d be happy to pay more than 0.75% for a plan that provided steady, consistent returns and helped me manage the rate of withdrawal.

Leave a comment