View more on these topics

Stranded: Govt urged to bring self-employed into auto-enrolment

WEB_101215_SecondCoverStory_Image1

Pensions experts are calling on the Government to avert a savings disaster by bringing self-employed workers into automatic enrolment.

The reforms require every employer to enrol staff in workplace pensions by 2018 but exclude people earning less than £10,000, the under-22s, those over state pension age, and people without an employer.

At the same time, the self-employed’s share of the labour market has risen dramatically since the recession while the proportion of savers has plummeted.

So, could the Government move to bring people without an employer into the scope of auto enrolment or should it rely on boosting awareness? If so, where could the Treasury find extra cash to expand the programme?

High-risk group

Around 20 million people are eligible for auto-enrolment but the same number again are excluded, according to the Pensions Policy Institute.

This includes 4.6 million who are classed as self-employed, representing 15 per cent of the labour market, up from just 3.8 million in 2007, according to Office for National Statistics figures.

But the growth in people working for themselves has not been matched by increased participation in pension saving.

In 2002/3 there were 1.2 million self-employed contributing to a personal pension. By 2013/14 this had fallen to just 420,000.

Government-backed scheme Nest accepts self-employed members but to date only 1,500 have signed up.

Aegon regulatory strategy director Steven Cameron says: “People need something on top of the state pension and the self-employed are the group most at risk of having nothing other than a state income.

“Whether the Government goes for compulsion or behavioural encouragement it would be right to turn political attention to that group next.”

Tisa pensions strategy director Adrian Boulding was part of a three-man review of auto enrolment in 2010. He says the Government should clamp down on salary sacrifice arrangements and use the proceeds to fund an extension of auto-enrolment where the state plays the part of the employer.

In last month’s Autumn Statement, the Treasury said it “remains concerned” about salary sacrifice and “is considering what action, if any, is necessary”.

Boulding says: “There is a growing shock that the fabulous success story of auto-enrolment is only a partial success because a whole load of people were not in it.

“The self-employed miss out on being auto-enrolled, they miss out on the employer contribution and they miss out on the Government subsidy of employer National Insurance relief.

“The self-employed need a larger incentive from the Government to make up for the fact they are not getting that NI relief and they are not getting the employer contribution.”

He adds: “Salary sacrifice is a bit of a dodgy practice and the Government would save between £600m and £800m by unwinding the large salary sacrifice schemes. Some of these are just blatant tax avoidance schemes and could be stamped on by HMRC.

“That money could be put back into a self-employed pension for moderate earners as matching contributions from the Government.”

Boulding says high-street banks and building societies would begin actively selling pensions to self-employed customers if a savings incentive was created.

Hargreaves Lansdown head of retirement policy Tom McPhail says: “The logical place to go is via the tax and National Insurance system. I don’t see how else you could facilitate auto-enrolment for the self-employed.

“In terms of contributions we’re back to something that looks a bit like contracted-out Serps pensions, effectively saying to the self-employed, ‘you all need pensions; here’s the qualification threshold, we’ll collect a chunk of money and put it into Nest’.

“If the tax incentives are there, despite the lack of an employer contribution, you could still make it a logical and worthwhile proposition for the self-employed.”

State boost

There is no doubt there is a growing crisis among the self-employed but not everyone agrees the Government should step in and assume the role of employer.

The new single-tier state pension begins from April 2016 and the long-term self-employed are set to be one of the winners from the changes. Under the old system the self-employed were limited to the basic state pension but – as long as they have 35 qualifying years of NICs – they will get an increase of around £40 a week in the new regime.

Aviva head of financial research John Lawson warns against the Government helping one section of the population over others.

He says: “The self-employed are one of the big winners from the new state pension. They get an extra £40 a week or £2,000 a year. That’s equivalent to around an extra £70,000 to  buy an annuity of the same value. It’s questionable whether the tax-payer should subsidise this part of the population. The taxpayer doesn’t do that for the low paid in employment to any greater degree so why pick out one section over another?

“The state is not an employer, so it doesn’t feel like a logical step to pay a contribution on behalf of the employer. In total around a quarter of an employee’s salary goes on NI, but the self-employed only pay 9 per cent. If anything the low-paid employed deserve more because they are paying more in tax.”

But he concedes the decline in adviser numbers and the disbanding of salesforces are likely to have hit the self-employed disproportionately.

Federation of Small Businesses senior policy adviser David Nash says around 40 per cent of its members are “one-man bands”. He says: “The Government needs to recognise this is an issue and use the 2017 review of auto-enrolment to think about how we can tailor it to the self-employed who don’t currently have any other forms of savings.”

Adviser view

Syndaxi Financial Planning director Rob Reid says: This is an accident waiting to happen. Self-employed people often say they will sell their business to fund their retirement and as an industry we try to sell them the idea of diversification so they have something else to fall back on. If the Government is going to start targeting the self-employed they are going to have to do a lot more than the “I’m in” campaign.

Expert view

Government will struggle to fund auto-enrolment expansion

The automatic enrolment strategy has been built around people getting contributions from their employer to boost their savings. It is really hard to do something similar for the self-employed.

We also have to think about how the self-employed population has changed over the years. We need to do some more in-depth research to know what sort of work is being done by the self-employed. A lot of the growth has been from jobs that were traditionally employed roles, such as contract work.

People did not worry before about the self-employed in terms of pension provision because the feeling was they had a business they had built up which they could use to fund their retirement. However, it is likely that since the recession a lot of people have gone self-employed rather than becoming unemployed.

We also need to have a look at the overlap between self-employment and part-time working. There are still a fair proportion of self-employed people who are in that situation where in order to live off the business you have to realise it in some way, which is either selling it on or winding it up. But now many will have an intellectual business rather than anything that has physical value and it is harder to realise that kind of human capital into money when you retire.

One of difficulties at the moment is whenever we are looking to increase the amount of resources devoted to one part of the population, we are looking for places to take resources from.

Auto-enrolment is spreading the same amount of money over a larger group of people. If we introduce the self-employed without any extra money, then there is a question of whether anyone comes out well enough.

Unless more money is going to come from the self-employed themselves or from the Government – which seems unlikely in the current climate – it really is about more signposting and encouragement.

Chris Curry is director of the Pensions Policy Institute

Recommended

Stress-retirement-income-savings-pension
1

Thousands of ‘bogus’ self-employed missing out on pensions

Up to 460,000 people across the UK could be “bogusly self-employed” and missing out on benefits such as auto-enrolment pensions and holiday pay as a result, Citizens Advice warns. Office for National Statistics figures show the number of people self-employed has grown rapidly since 2008, from around 3.8 million to 4.5 million today. But in […]

House-and-Calculator-Mortgage-Property-700.jpg
5

Lenders need to ‘wake up and smell the coffee’ on self-employed mortgages

Many lenders are still shying away from developing mortgages for the self-employed almost a year after the Mortgage Market Review and despite growing evidence of a “glut” of self-employed borrowers. Numbers of self-employed workers have steadily climbed over the last two years, rising from 4.2m in December 2012 to 4.5m at the end of 2014. […]

1

John Cupis: Things are looking up for self-employed mortgage applicants

Being self-employed post-MMR feels like a bad place to be and the situation is worsening. According to the Bank of England, 15 per cent of the UK workforce is now self-employed, while self-employment has accounted for over a third of the overall increase in UK employment since the recession: around 600,000 people. Of that increase, […]

5

Labour moves to tackle self-employed access to mortgages and pensions

Labour shadow ministers have met with business leaders in a bid to tackle a crisis in self-employed access to mortgages and pensions. The meeting took place in London and shadow work and pensions secretary Rachel Reeves said she wanted to “break down barriers” to financial services products. The latest Office for National Statistics data show those […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 10 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. A Guardian article from last year detailed that the fastest-growing age profile of self-employed is the over 65s – up to over 500k in number. The average age of self-employed is also much older than employed at 47.
    I have a number of clients who have left careers and gone on to part-time, self-employed consultancy in later life, who already have decent pension provision from their employed careers and do not need to (and in some cases cannot due to LA issues) save any more into pension.
    As the article states, the self-employed are going to be major beneficiaries from the State Pension changes, so I do not see the need to throw even more taxpayer’s money at them for auto-enrolment.
    At the end of the day, if auto-enrolment is such a great idea, then they could just incorporate into one-man limited companies and get the benefit of the employer contribution and employer NI saving that they would otherwise miss!

  2. So how would this work? As Kevin has said a significant number are above SRA. For the rest how do you prove income on what the contributions are based? The self employed are the most independently minded group in the country – that’s why they are self employed. All that will happen is that accountants and advisers will make a few bob explain they myriad ways of avoiding this nonsense for the self -employed.

    As I get fed up saying, if the Government is so concerned that people should have a decent retirement income – then take the 0.5% of GDP being wasted on Foreign Aid, dismantle the Public Sector Pensions, find savings from elsewhere if possible and then if necessary increase taxes in order to provide a decent State Pension for all. That is the surest way. Unless of course the Government is untrustworthy – as it has been for the last 70 years with NI.

  3. How odd that the beginning of the decline coincides almost exactly with the introduction of the, ill-fated, Stakeholder Pensions.
    Remember those Mr Blair? You said, if we make pensions cheap enough, then ordinary folk won’t need advisers to persuade them to take one out. They will flock to buy them of their own accord.

    I said you were being a fool then and, wow, history proves the point

  4. …although Salary Sacrifice should go. What possible logic is there for that?

  5. Harry – agree but we also need to properly fund long term care too. 2% increase in council tax will not wash and the fact that it is not compulsory (i.e. centralised) means that you still have different policies and treatment of our elderly based on arbitrary postcodes.

    • Institutionalised long term care is a rip off. Converting the house and hiring a carer works out far cheaper. Trust me I have had direct personal experience of arranging this for members of my own family. If all else, there is always the house. Can be sold or even equity release. (That’s coming from me – a long time critic of ER, but in the last resort…..)

  6. The fact is the pension regulator needs to start auditing companies that have already auto enrolled schemes up and running as I suspect there is a high level of non-compliance with rules.

    A good example would be building companies who employ self-employed contractors and do not auto enrole them, as under auto enrolment there is a different level of test for eligible employees. Even self-employed people working with in their own limited companies could be classified as eligible employees.

    It is funny how the pension regulator is not making points like this clear to employers and indeed payroll and employment solicitors.

    I’ve come across both payroll specialists and employment solicitors who are totally unaware of the eligible employee test for self-employed individuals that is stated on page 7 of the pension regulator’s first guide employer duties and defining the workplace.

    Personal service workers
    15. If an individual does not work under a contract of employment, they may still be assessed as a worker for the purposes of the new duties if they have contracted to perform work or services personally (this is sometimes referred to as a ‘contract of services’). However, an individual who is paid a fee as a self-employed contractor under a contract for services is not normally a worker.
    16. The distinction between a ‘contract for services’ and a ‘contract of service’ is much debated in employment law and employers will be used to making the assessment of employee status for employment rights and tax purposes.
    17. However, employers should not rely solely on a person’s tax status when assessing whether they are a worker. An individual considered by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) as self-employed for tax purposes may still be classed as a ‘worker’ under the new employer duties legislation, if they are in fact working under a personal contract of services.
    18. No single factor, by itself, is capable of being conclusive in determining whether a contract is ‘for services’ or ‘of service’. However, individuals are likely to be considered as personal service workers (workers under the contract of services) if most, or all, of the following statements are true: The employer relies on the individual’s expertise and expects them to perform the work themselves.
    • There is an element of subordination between the employer and individual, for example the individual reports to the employer’s managers or directors in respect of the specific operation or project on which they are contracted to work.
    • The contractual provisions state that the contract is not a contract for services between the employer and the individual’s own business.
    • The contract provides for employee benefits such as holiday pay, sick pay, notice, fees, expenses etc.
    • There is a mutual obligation set down in the contract to provide or do the work.
    • The individual does not incur any financial risk in carrying out the work.
    • The employer provides tools, equipment and other requirements to the individual to carry out the work.

    19. This list is not exhaustive. As when they are assessing an individual’s status for tax purposes, an employer must take into account all relevant consideration.

  7. In other words, HMRC make their rules as they go along.

    Nothing changes.

Leave a comment