Hornbuckle Mitchell senior executive David White has attacked rival Sipp providers who have criticised the FSA’s proposed method for increasing capital adequacy requirements.
In November, the regulator published a series of changes to Sipp capital requirements designed to provide greater protection for investors.
One of the FSA’s proposals would see a firm’s capital requirement linked to assets under administration rather than expenditure.
In its response, Sipp trade body the Association of Member-directed Pension Schemes warned the proposal may fail to provide adequate protection to consumers.
Hornbuckle senior executive White accuses providers of being “self-serving” in their opposition to the reforms.
White says: “Some of the push back from the Sipp market has been very disappointing and looks self-serving, rather than focusing on what the regulator is trying to achieve.
“Given the regulator’s concern is around liquidity, then linking capital requirements to assets under administration is the right approach.”
Amps chairman Andrew Roberts says: “The choice of using AUA as the key metric rather than expenditure or number of Sipps has practical issues and the clear danger that the capital requirement could fall when consumers need to rely on it the most.
“Our alternative of using the number of Sipps as the key metric would result in a higher requirement for some operators than the FSA’s proposal, demonstrating that the thought process Amps used had the consumer at heart.”