View more on these topics

Regulator wants providers to police auto-enrol contributions


The Pensions Regulator has proposed a significant strengthening of the role of providers and trustees in policing employer contributions under automatic enrolment.

The regulator has published a consultation today outlining how it wants employer pension contributions to be monitored under auto-enrolment.

It proposes forcing providers to check the way employers calculate member contributions to make sure they are receiving the right amount of pension.

The consultation says: “As part of their monitoring activities, the regulator considers that those running schemes should seek to establish the reasons and circumstances that give rise to a contribution that falls to be paid not being paid in full on time.

“This will allow trustees and providers to identify and correct any administrative errors that arise and restrict reporting to the regulator to material payment failures, including wilful and deliberate non-payment by an employer.

“We expect employers to provide this information to enable trustees and providers to effectively monitor. In any event, trustees and providers have the power under pension legislation to request the necessary information from employers.”

Legal & General pensions strategy director Adrian Boulding (pictured) says: “At the moment we take what the employer gives us in contributions and we bank it. We do not go back and undertake checks as to how it is calculated, which is what The Pensions Regulator wants us to do.

“It is frustrating that, so close to the launch of auto-enrolment, we are now being asked to make extensive and potentially expensive system changes.”

Aegon regulatory strategy manager Kate Smith says: “These proposals rely on the employer providing us with the correct information, which is not always the case at the moment.

“If we do not get the right information it will be difficult for us to monitor contributions accurately.”

Association of British Insurers director of life, savings and protection Stephen Gay says: “We have been discussing the issue of maintaining contributions with the regulator for a number of months.

“Providers have a duty to check that the expected contributions are made on time, but it would be unrealistic to expect that they could monitor the application of internal agreements between employer and employee, and we believe this is outside the current framework of workplace pension rules.”


What advisers are saying: Getting the most out of paraplanners

Pat Rice was Arsenal’s assistant manager for six years before being replaced at the start of the season by (uncle) Steve(y) Bould. To be fair to Pat, it seems his role was fairly limited – Frank McLintock recently said: “I think Pat Rice was possibly held back, that might be a strong statement, but I […]

Mark Winlow joins Ageas board

Former KPMG partner and head of general insurance Mark Winlow has joined Ageas as independent non-executive director and will shortly be appointed to the boards of Ageas UK, Ageas Protect and Ageas Insurance Limited. Winlow was previously Zurich Financial Services managing director of the UK personal lines division and was a partner at Ernst & […]

Out of context

“I was seeing Liam Gallagher’s dentist.” Syndaxi Chartered Financial Planners managing director Robert Reid gives an MM hack an insight into his rock and roll lifestyle. “Supporting Aston Villa is much more stressful than being governor of the Bank of England.” Sir Mervyn King reflects on the highs and lows of life as a Villain […]


Legal view: IFAs deserve a longstop

It is good to see momentum being maintained on the issue of the longstop with the recent publication of the Aifa/Zurich report on the issue. For a long time, the FSA refused to even consider this issue – it now appears that the FSA (or its successor) may be prepared to consider the issue properly […]

Scheme pays explained

By Fiona Hanrahan, senior product insight and technical support analyst We’ve received lots of queries on scheme pays and when it can be used. This article explains how it works and the conditions which apply. What is ‘scheme pays’? If an individual exceeds the annual allowance (AA) and an AA tax charge is due, they […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. What a load of tosh. It will become law and will be an offence not to comply so it should be the sole responsibility of the Employer to ensure they do not break the law, not the provider. All this will do is add a layer of cost to the scheme that need not be there.

  2. this is horrendous overkill. why not wait to see if it is a problem and if it is then act rather than heaping work on people for a problem that might not exist

  3. Surely the right approach is to leave responsibility with the employer. The employer is generally working off payroll records and the ability of the provider to ensure these are correct is minimal. This looks like an attempt to get the provider to do the work that the regulator has suddenly realised is too much for it. They should have been more careful in framing the regulations.

  4. Passing the buck and the expense.

  5. So presumably NEST will be expected to do this too. I wonder if anyone’s discussed this with Tata yet.

Leave a comment