View more on these topics

Pensions Policy Institute says Govt does not value pensions advice

The Government does not value financial advice for retirement planning as it focuses on cutting costs, according to the Pensions Policy Institute.

Speaking at the Money Marketing Retirement Planning Invitational in London yesterday, PPI director Chris Curry said the lack of advice risks undermining value for savers.

He said: “At the moment advice isn’t really anywhere on the Government agenda. It doesn’t seem to be valued as a particularly useful Government policy tool.

“If you read the press and look at auto-enrolment there is much more focus on getting charges and costs down.”

He says the Government believes all schemes are equal so lower charges will produce better incomes.

Curry says: “The problem is that you cannot assume everything is equal. If you have advice in the workplace that encourages fewer people to opt out and increases contribution levels, even if it costs more, then the value is greater.

“There isn’t a focus on value at the moment, it is just about making things cheap and using inertia.”

Curry also questioned how the Nest charging structure would square up to a Government annual management charge cap.

Last month the Government opened a consultation on a charge cap between between 0.75 per cent and 1 per cent.

Nest operates a dual charging structure, with members paying a 1.8 per cent contribution fee on new investments alongside a 0.3 per cent annual management charge.

Curry said a small number of people would benefit significantly from a charge cap and a ban on active member discounts.

He said: “There are certain relatively small but important groups – around 30,000 in legacy schemes and more than 40,000 on active member discounts – who can lose relatively large amounts of money for themselves because of charges.

”A lot of it is retrospective so if you look at schemes going forward then most automatically enrolled members will be with Nest, the People’s Pension, Now: Pensions or Legal & General which are big master trust schemes with low charges. This is why I don’t think a charge cap will necessarily mean much of an impact on many people.

“What it will mean is a significant change for a relatively small number of people with these high charges. The bigger issue the charge cap is addressing is trust and confidence in the industry.”

Recommended

Loney-Phil-Royal London-2013

Royal London confirms sale of international arm

Royal London has sold its international division, Royal London 360°, to private equity firm Vitruvian Partners for an undisclosed sum. Royal London says the management buyout, led by Royal London 360° chief executive David Kneeshaw, will see the business rebranded as RL360°. It says there will be no job losses as part of the sale. […]

Money-Currency-Coins-Pound-GBP-700.jpg

KRS ditches ‘free of charge’ non-advised claim

Non-advised annuity broker Key Retirement Solutions has changed the way it describes its charges following accusations it was “misleading” customers. Last week, Money Marketing reported adviser concern about KRS’ claim that its service is “completely free of charge”. In a section on the firm’s website setting out frequently asked questions, KRS asked: “How much will [the […]

Coin-Stack-Money-Currency-700.jpg
2

Two fund managers rethink clean prices after MM probe

Two fund managers are reviewing their pricing after a Money Marketing investigation revealed some clean share classes are more expensive than the bundled fund. Last month the FCA said converting to clean share classes should only take place where it is in the client’s interest. Aviva Investors, M&G, Ruffer, Aberdeen, JP Morgan Asset Management, Blackrock and Royal […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Except in the running of its own affairs, the government virtually always prioritises price over value, which just goes to show how woefully out of touch it is with the real world.

  2. The government seem to think that taking out a pension plan is as simple as going into a supermarket and picking up a bag of potatoes. The total emphasis seems to relate to capping charges. The other issues such as investment performance, annuity rates and levels of contributions actually required to build a decent sized fund seem to be ignored.

  3. Does Webby shop at Aldi then ?

  4. The Turner Commission concluded there was very little economic value from tadvice. The key objective is to increase pension saving, regardless of how.
    I agree.

Leave a comment