View more on these topics

Pension details must be simpler

As practising IFAs, we have become increasingly concerned with this Government&#39s continuous changes and additions to pension legislation.

Since 1997, we have seen the abolition of ACT relief and the replacement of Serps which has increased the cost of retirement funding. We now have the introduction of stakeholder pensions, concurrency and the new investment instrument, the individual pensions account.

With an ageing population, we understand that the Government is keen to reduce the burden of state pensions and is introducing lower charged and flexible contracts which will now incorporate concurrency. The original intention was to encourage the lower-paid workforce to contribute to a stakeholder scheme which was never likely because of their limited disposable income and the lack of compulsion.

Now the Government is aiming stakeholders at middle-income earnings. Stakeholder, and the new IPA, increase the level of complexity, which is likely to increase the risk of getting things wrong.

We fear the end result will be considerable numbers deciding not to invest in pension at all and eventually compulsion will become necessary.

Concurrency will allow employees earning less than £30,000 per year to contribute to an occupational scheme and a stakeholder, combining what has been separate pension regimes. By doing so, it will enable the participants to take 1.5 times salary as tax-free cash from the occupational scheme and 25 per cent from Stakeholder. Surely this runs counter to the Government&#39s aim to increase its tax receipt?

Instead of concurrency, why not impose stakeholder terms on existing AVCs and FSAVCs and revert to the pre-1987 rules for AVCs? This would give low-cost, flexible terms for topping up occupational schemes and also remove a layer of confusion.

IPA is, in effect, a low-cost Sipp. The idea in principle is fine. However, there are several flaws in the Revenue press release dated July 11, 2000. It seems to be confusing the investment instrument (the IPA) with the stakeholder and its regulations.

Reading the case studies added to the confusion. The case study of Miss A seems to suggest a teacher would be better off with a stakeholder IPA rather than joining an index-linked final-salary occupational scheme.

While the stakeholder and the IPA are, in themselves, good concepts, the detail has been poorly drafted. If the purpose is to encourage more people to contribute to a pension, then the legislation should be simple and transparent.

Kay Lowe, Equal Partners, John Sheridan, Vivienne Starkey, Eddie Titcomb, Haddock Porter Williams


IFAs take 75% of CGNU&#39s business

CGNU have revealed that IFAs now account for more than three-quarters of its life and pension business in the UK.The newly merged life office saw UK life and pension sales rose by nearly 25 per cent to £479m from £384m in the first six months of this year, in equivalent premium income terms.The company says […]

Skipton Building Society launches two-year growth mini cash Isa

Skipton Building Society has joined the very small number of companies providing capital protected Isas, with the two-year growth mini cash Isa.The Isa, has an unlimited term, tracks the FTSE 100 index for the first two years. It is aiming to grow by one per cent for every one per cent increase in the index, […]

Berkeley Alexander Safety First – 27th July 2000

Type: Accident, sickness and unemployment cover.Maximum benefit: Up to 65 per cent of income subject to a maximum of £1,500 a month.Benefit payment term: 12 months.Deferred period: Choice of 30 or 60 days.Premium: Unemployment-only or disability-only cover: 30 day deferred – £2.95 per £100 monthly benefit, 60 day deferred – £2.70 per £100 monthly benefit. […]

Revenue loses tax fight with converted societies

The Inland Revenue has lost a landmark tribunal ruling over the taxation of building society costs when they convert to banks.A tribunal found in favour of four former societies in their dispute with the Revenue over whether their conversion costs, such as legal and advisers&#39 fees, were tax- deductible.According to law firm Clifford Chance, the […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    Why register with Money Marketing ?

    Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

    News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
    Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

    Money Marketing Events
    Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

    Research and insight
    Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

    Have your say
    Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

    Register now

    Having problems?

    Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

    Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm