View more on these topics

Govt vetoes calls for ‘micro’ pension short service refunds

Steve Webb 480 NAPF 2012

The Government has decided not to allow short service refunds to continue for “micro” pension pots, despite industry concern about the costs associated with administering small funds.

Under existing rules, trust-based pension schemes are allowed to refund a member’s contributions if they stay with the employer for less than two years. If this happens, the employer also gets their contributions back.

The Government is currently looking at banning short service refunds, potentially as early as 2014. However, the Department for Work and Pensions had been considering introducing new rules which would have allowed both trust and contract-based schemes to refund micro pots.

An email sent by a DWP official, seen by Money Marketing, confirms pensions minister Steve Webb (pictured) will not legislate to allow refunds for micro pots. The Government has not provided a definition of a micro pot.

Aegon regulatory strategy manager Kate Smith says: “If you look at how we do refunds now, it is quite complex.

“We talked about the idea of extending the short service refunds rule to all pensions, including contract-based, if it was a micro pot.

“From an administration point of view it would have been incredibly expensive and complex.

“The Government has decided it is too expensive and too complex, so it will not do it.”

Hargreaves Lansdown head of pensions research Tom McPhail says: “The DWP still wants to get rid of short service refunds, but the industry had some concern about people who were auto-enrolled and then changed jobs after a couple of months and ended up with a tiny pension pot.

“The question was asked about whether we could have a micro pot refund, just as an administrative easement. But the DWP has said no.”


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


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

  1. That’s an example of pensions simplification and strategy working at its most effective level

    I’m just dealing with a friend who has a £6K fund and can’t use triviality owing to other benefits. So he’ll get TFC of £1500 and a pension of about £200 p.a. but hasn’t a clue about pensions as he finds the whole issue so confusi

    If he wasn’t a friend he’d have to pay someone in the region of £1000 to deal with it owing to the risk, time and effort. Where’s the logic in that Steve Webb?

  2. They keep getting this stuff so wrong. They should have brought in a 3 month vesting immediately which would have been practical rather than phillosophical/political.

    Would have stopped the nonsense 2 year vesting activities in their tracks but practical to avoid pots being too small.

    They are hanging their hat on pot following member working, but don’t have a plan B.

Leave a comment