View more on these topics

Providers and trade bodies clash over Nest restrictions

London UK Thames Parliament 480

Aegon has warned lifting Nest’s restrictions early will risk causing consumer detriment because the Government-backed scheme was not designed to meet the needs of higher earners.

Nest is currently shackled by a transfer ban and an annual cap on contributions of £4,400. These restrictions, which were put in place to ensure the scheme focuses on its target market of low to medium earners, are due to be reviewed in 2017.

In November, the Department for Work and Pensions issued a call for evidence asking whether the restrictions are influencing employers’ choice of automatic enrolment scheme in a way that was not intended.

Earlier today, the TUC, Age UK, manufacturers’ trade body EEF, the Federation of Small Businesses, the British Chambers of Commerce and Which? called on the Government to scrap the restrictions because they make auto-enrolment “difficult for both employers and employees”.

The issue has divided insurance companies, with some, such as Aviva, calling for the restrictions to be lifted.

However, Aegon regulatory strategy manager Kate Smith says: “We think removing the cap could lead to poorer consumer outcomes because the entire Nest proposition, including the default investment fund, has been designed for low to medium earners.

“It is simply not suitable for higher earners because of the very cautious outlook in the early days.

“Nest’s proposition also does not help employers deal with the complexity of automatic enrolment and that is a major oversight. Without that help employers will simply get it wrong.”

Nest chief investment officer Mark Fawcett says: “We believe a well diversified fund that manages risk actively throughout different economic conditions is an investment approach that most people require.

“Nest’s default investment strategy manages risk in this way through three distinct phases based on members’ ages. All of these phases have clear objectives with the aim of maximising pot sizes whilst avoiding unrewarded or unacceptable risk.”


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Pensions apartheid will become ever more apparent asthe gap between those fortunate enough to be a member of a DB scheme and everyone else becomes apparent. Pity that it will be long after those that contributed to this mess have left office.

  2. Interesting that the Pension Regulator’s website boasts they have “Civil Service Pension arrangements, which are recognised as some of the best in the pensions world” Am I the only person that finds this both hypocritical and scandalous?

    This organisation will only get any credibility when their staff are provided with the same pensions as they expect everyone in the DC world to suvrive on.

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