View more on these topics

Govt: Millions will benefit from greater transparency on fees

Magnifying-Glass-And-Text-Kindle-Contract-700x450.jpgThe Government has published guidance compelling occupational defined contribution pension schemes to publish information about the fees they charge more than 10 million savers across Britain.

The document for trustees and managers relates to the Occupational Pension Schemes (Administration and Disclosure) (Amendment) Regulations 2018.

The DWP says the plans, initially announced in the autumn last year, are to ensure savers receive good value for money, and that their pension meets their needs for retirement.

Starting from April 2018, savers within these occupational schemes will be able to access online information on their scheme charges and investment costs.

By the end of 2019, every occupational defined contribution pension scheme member can expect to receive an annual benefit statement from their provider.

This will come with a link to showing where they can obtain these details, and an illustration of the compounding effect of costs and charges and how their schemes assess the value for money of their pension funds.

The measures will also require schemes to give members information about where their contributions are invested, on request.

Failure to provide this information could cost occupational workplace pension scheme trustees up to £50,000.

Pensions minister Guy Opperman says: “Today is the final step on an important journey to building an open and transparent costs and charges system which supports consumers to make well informed decisions.

“Membership of workplace pension schemes is at an all-time high and it is right that people are able to access all of the information that they need about their scheme in a meaningful way.

He adds: “My priority as minister for pensions and financial inclusion is to ensure that all the new savers we are bringing in through automatic enrolment are able to engage with their options and understand the true value of their funds.

“These changes combined with future developments such as the pensions dashboard and formation of the single financial guidance body will do just that.”

Recommended

Magnifying-Glass-And-Text-Kindle-Contract-700x450.jpg
10

Transparency will ‘force down’ adviser fees

Costs transparency will eventually force advisers to lower what they can charge clients overall, to 1.5 per cent a year, according to Lang Cat principal Mark Polson. Polson believes regulations such as Mifid II will steadily increase pressure on advisers and make it harder for them to justify fees above 1.5 per cent. Speaking at […]

How to talk about fund fees with clients

The new European Mifid II regulations encouraging more transparency for investors have put a greater focus on the way advisers explain fund fees to clients. This week, Money Marketing talks to two advisers about their efforts to improve clarity at a time of change for the sector. How do you present fees to clients? Blue […]

Aviva-signage-building-2013-700.jpg
5

Aviva replatforming issues delay adviser payments

Problems with Aviva’s platform upgrade have meant some payments to advisers have failed to go through. Advisers have also complained to Money Marketing that there have been delays to income payments due to clients. Aviva has been beset with problems since it launched its new FNZ-powered platform on 23 January. This launch followed five-days of […]

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. Transparency is to be applauded BUT how precisely does it genuinely benefit people?

    e.g. If a Car costs X, if that cost is broken down, does the benefit of buying the car improve.

    Lets now assume there are costs to this transparency – how does the introduction of additional costs benefit individuals?

    Did the bundling of fund charges see a reduction in costs to invest or simply a rising of costs but greater transparency.

    For the avoidance of doubt, transparency is good – but I’m struggling to see any financial benefits for the investor – notably in a corporate scheme where they individually can’t vote with their feet.

    In summary – lets reduce the cost to invest.

Leave a comment