View more on these topics

Billy Burrows: Should you bend your retirement planning rules?

Burrows-Billy-2009-700x450.jpg

In such an uncertain world, working out how best to convert a pension pot into income is one of the most complex areas of financial planning. It is made even more complicated thanks to the many behavioural and technical issues to consider. So how do advisers work out the advice they give to clients?

I attended an excellent conference on exchange-traded funds recently and was struck by something said by one of the speakers. He said, instead of debating active versus passive investments, it might be better to talk about the difference between rules-based decisions and those made with discretion.

Applying this to retirement income advice, I see a parallel. How many advisers use their discretion when making a recommendation and how many follow a rules-based process?

A good example of discretion is where an adviser takes the view clients with larger funds are better served with drawdown than annuities and will arrange the plan on their preferred platform using a model portfolio. One of advisers’ many strengths is  they research the market and use their skills to identify the best solutions. With this in mind, discretion can be a very positive thing.

The other approach involves an adviser analysing the client’s retirement objectives and using a number of simple rules to determine the most suitable solution. An example of one of these rules is that the amount of guaranteed income needed over and above the state pension and any defined benefits should be secured by a lifetime annuity. Another is the 4 per cent rule used when calculating the level of sustainable income from drawdown.

bestforannuity

I have my own three golden rules:

  • Clients should only consider taking risk with retirement income if they have other sources of income or capital to fall back on if needed.
  • Clients must understand relevant risks and the impact on their income should the market crash.
  • All relevant alternative options should be considered.

Clients should not be given a black and white choice between annuities and drawdown. Good advice involves discretion, underpinned by a rules-based process.

annuity-yeidls

Billy Burrows is director at Retirement IQ and adviser at Better Retirement

Recommended

Burrows-Billy-2009-700x450.jpg

Billy Burrows: The retirement market trends to watch in 2017

Following my series for Money Marketing last year looking at the tools of the retirement advice trade, I want to move my focus now to the changing nature of the retirement income market. There are some major topics to get our heads around, including robo-advice, sustainable income levels from drawdown, the future for annuities, Brexit […]

Burrows-Billy-2009-700x450.jpg

Billy Burrows: Advisers can beat clients’ behavioural biases

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has just published its 2016 Pensions Outlook and it is essential reading. There are several things that jump out of the pages. The first is the importance of financial advice and the need to fill the advice gap and second is the importance of annuities. The report says […]

Guarantees in the retirement income market

Lorna Blyth, Royal London  Do guarantees benefit customers and, if so, when? To answer this conundrum we commissioned Millimans, a global actuarial consulting firm, to conduct an independent review of the UK retirement income market and whether guarantees really do offer customers better value for money. The brief The study was one of the most comprehensive undertaken […]

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. This statement is where I stand too “Clients should not be given a black and white choice between annuities and drawdown. Good advice involves discretion, underpinned by a rules-based process.”

  2. Billy, you are far from alone, I’m sure! Common-sense dictates that a “bespoke” retirement income “solution” should be created and agreed with those clients lucky enough to have a substantial retirement “pot”. I would merely mention that we have had a pretty good run in the markets over the last few years and clients need to be regularly reminded that there will be many “bumps in the road” as time passes. Whilst the new(ish) FAD rules have made pensions very useful IHT planning tools, clients need to also remember that the purpose of having a pension fund is exactly that, to provide a pension in one way or another (unless they are lucky enough not to “need” it, that is!).

Leave a comment