View more on these topics

MM leader: Toxic products and second-hand annuities

Natalie Holt, journalist with Money Marketing Photo by Michael Walter/Troika

Once again, the FCA finds itself in the unenviable position of having to be the chief enforcer for the Government’s latest idea to shake up pensions. This time it is the creation of the secondary annuities market, where savers can exchange their guaranteed income for life for upfront cash.

The pension freedoms reforms have already wreaked havoc with the concept of a pension being a vehicle to see savers through retirement. A pension is now seen as something to access sooner rather than later, or at the other end of the spectrum, something to use as a tax planning mechanism to pass down money through the generations.

Adding tradeable annuities into the mix has rightly put many in the pensions industry on high alert, not least the FCA itself.

Unlike pension freedoms, the Government is trying to take the time to get the secondary annuities market right, and aims to allow cash for annuities from April 2017. It is also good to see that in the context of allowing providers to buy back annuities from existing customers, this marketplace will be regulated and will be carried out through a third party, with buyers needing special regulatory permissions.

How buybacks will work, and at what value of annuity savers will have to take advice, are all details to be teased out over the coming months.

But for those that are wary about secondary annuities, the concern is not one of mere practicality about how the market will work.

In its consultation this week, the Treasury also talks about developing a “tertiary” market, which would allow second-hand annuities to be packaged up and sold on. Here we are, over a year away from the creation of the secondary annuity market, and we are already on to the next level of reselling.

In an interview with Money Marketing this week, FCA director of strategy and competition Chris Woolard compares tradeable annuities to traded life settlements, given the inherent uncertainty about making payments based on unpredictable events, such as when someone is gong to die. Given the fallout with the likes of Keydata and Catalyst, this comparison is a worrying one.

If the secondary annuity market is causing concern, the tertiary market is a whole different ball game. As I recall, the packaging up of mortgages and selling them on did not exactly leave the financial services industry smelling of roses.

Recommended

Baldwin-Harriett.Conservatives.Dec2013
1

Treasury quizzed over Northern Rock assets sale

Treasury economic secretary Harriet Baldwin is facing questions from an influential committee of MPs over the sale of former Northern Rock assets. The Treasury announced a £13bn deal to offload a book of mortgages from the collapsed building society to US-based Cerberus Capital Management in mid-November. However, Treasury committee chairman Andrew Tyrie has now written […]

FCA logo new 620x430.jpg
5

FCA bans advice boss over £2m Ucis losses

The FCA has banned the director of an advice firm after he transferred over £2m of clients’ funds into inappropriate investments. The regulator says Quintillion Asset Management director Simon Silva-Peake also caused or allowed a further £659,270 of client money to be misappropriated. Money Marketing first flagged investor concerns about Quintillion in March 2013. Silva-Peake […]

Paradigm partner to launch robo-advice service

Paradigm founding partner Anthony Morrow has teamed up with Moneysupermarket.com co-founder Duncan Cameron to launch a robo-advice service. The Telegraph reports the pair plan to launch the eVestor service next year and will charge customers 0.44 per cent. Of this, 0.35 per cent will go to portfolio management and 0.09 per cent as a fund […]

FCA logo new 620x430.jpg
3

FCA consults on regulatory barriers to social investment

The FCA is calling for feedback on whether regulation is stifling the social investment sector. In its latest paper, ‘Call for Input: Regulatory Barriers to Social Investments’, the regulator has published a set of questions to gather views from social enterprises, investors and financial advisers on a wide range of issues including capital raising and the potential risks […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

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

  1. Re a “tertiary market”, this seems reminiscent of the mortgage market. As an ex buiding society manager I had responsibility not only for arranging/underwriting mortgages (in the days before the computer said yes/no), but also for dealing with the arrears when it all went wrong. That rather focussed the mind.

    The centralised method was pronounced much more efficient, specialist processing/packaging centres would say yes….and equally specialist marketing centres would bundle up the loans and sell them on. At the time, seperating the responsibility for arranging the loan from it’s subsequent performance was a really wizzy idea, which would set the market alight. Hmmm.

    Reminds me of all those mutuals that went to the market on the basis of it was the modern approach….another great idea.

    Lets hope securitastion of traded annuities turns out well….

  2. Lets be very clear about one thing. No provider is going to enter this market if it cannot see how it can make a profit in doing so. Why would they, they are commercial organisations? In order to do this they have to make their profit from their customer and basic logic dictates that in doing this, the only person who will suffer is the annuitant. I think this is the next PPI debacle in the making and the Govt and Regulator will wash their hands of all responsibility when it goes boobies up, and it will go that way. As sure as night follows day

  3. The tertiary market is fraught with obstacles. What should be the purchase price for an annuity presently in payment? It will depend on the state of the health and thus life expectancy of the would be purchaser, which may well be completely different from that of the seller.

    Similarly, the surrender value of an existing annuity will be different depending on the state of health of the annuitant~ won’t it?

Leave a comment