View more on these topics

Malcolm McLean: Pension tax relief consultation is a dangerous game


Could the green paper on the reform of pension tax relief lead, in George Osborne’s words, to the “strengthening of incentives to save and offer savers greater simplicity and transparency”? Well, it might. But it obviously depends on exactly what is decided at the end of the day and how it is viewed by those who are (or are considering) saving into a pension.

The concept of a single rate of tax relief of, say, 30 per cent, arguably offers the best chance of success. However, even that will not be seen as particularly simple by payroll operators or as a strengthening of incentives for higher rate taxpayers. Indeed, the reverse would no doubt be true for those in the latter category.

But all of that may be academic if the Treasury goes ahead with what I suspect could well be its first choice: the more radical option of a reversal of the existing tax process for pensions, so they are treated more like Isas.

“You pay in from taxed income and it is tax free when you take it out,” said Osborne in his Budget speech earlier this month. Sounds simple enough, doesn’t it? As ever, though, things are not always as clear-cut as they might first appear. Indeed, the prospect of a switch of exempt-exempt-taxed into something more akin to taxed-exempt-exempt could be incredibly complicated, involving everybody having to have at least two separate pension funds (one before and one after the changeover date), and the consequences this might have, in particular, for the future of DB schemes.

The lack of tax relief on contributions on the way in, as it were, could turn young people off the idea of putting money away into a pension on the basis that a “bird in the hand is worth two in the bush” and they could not be sure the withdrawal of their money free of tax would be honoured by a future government many years hence. There also surely needs to be some sort of government top-up at some stage to cushion the loss of up-front tax relief and provide an incentive to lock money away until closer to retirement age.

Nonetheless, it would be surprising if the Chancellor did not have his beady eye on pension tax relief as a means of raising extra revenue to help deal with the many financial demands coming his way over the next few years. Not having to pay out up-front relief on contributions would give him a considerable boost in that direction. In 2013/2014, the total bill for tax relief on pensions was a massive £48bn: a target, I would suggest, he may well find impossible to resist.

I am not suggesting the consultation will not be an open and wide-ranging one but I have got a feeling I know what the outcome will be. Let’s hope pensions are not the loser and the benefits being accrued from auto-enrolment and other recent innovations are not put in jeopardy as a result.

Malcolm McLean is senior consultant at Barnett Waddingham                                                                 



Chinese firm in £357m Kleinwort Benson takeover bid

Chinese firm Fosun has launched a takeover bid for BHF Kleinwort Benson worth €500m (£357m). The Chinese investment group is an existing shareholder of merchant bank Kleinwort Benson, holding 19 per cent of the firm. Kleinwort Benson was told of the takeover bid via a regulator notification from the Financial Services and Markets Authority, with Fosun offering €5.10 […]


Chinese markets plunge 8.5%

The Chinese stock market has fallen 8.5 per cent, marking the second worst trading day for the country in 18 years. The Shanghai Composite Index has dropped 28 per cent below its peak, which came just over a month ago on 12 June 2015. Overnight the index suffered its largest one-day fall since February 2007. However, […]

Alan Higham Annuit Direct 700

Alan Higham: Osborne is missing the point on pensions reform

Do you know how much money is saved every year into a tax-approved pension scheme? No? Well, at least you are not alone. I do not know and it turns out nobody else does either. I had a good chat with a friendly official at the Office for National Statistics, who explained why it was […]

MPs slam ‘miserable’ Govt response to pensions report

Work and Pensions select committee chair Frank Field has condemned the Government’s response to its report on automatic enrolment. In March the committee, then chaired by Dame Anne Begg, issued a raft of recommendations following a review of auto-enrolment and the broader pension reforms. Begg’s committee called for an increase in the age at which […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


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

  1. Of course rather than the “two pot” approach one before and one after he could simply stop taxing existing pension income and still end up with a net £21.2bn yearly saving. Some might say that’s a bit unfair because then some pensioners would end up exempt- exempt- exempt but this isn’t really about fairness is it? I thought it was about saving money

  2. To include both new savers and to convert existing schemes I wonder if anybody has thought of Exempt-Taxed-Exempt at the same time as reducing (not removing) tax relief in some way? This would save money and increase his tax take from existing schemes, with the bonus to the existing saver that they have exempt access compared to now. I am in no way endorsing this, but I suspect that the chancellor would present a money saving victory from a calculated ‘net’ saving of relief-tax=saving.

  3. Julian Stevens 29th July 2015 at 8:29 pm

    I really don’t know why anyone keeps talking about a flat tax relief rate of 30%. That would mean an extra 50% relief for basic rate tax payers, which just isn’t going to happen. If Osborne wants to attack higher rate relief on pension contributions, why not just make it 20% for all?

Leave a comment