View more on these topics

Tory MPs join Labour calls for full pension charges transparency

Conservative MPs have joined Labour in calling for further fund manager transparency over pension charges.

In a joint letter, sent to the FT, Tory MPs David Mowat and Nigel Evans wrote to the Financial Reporting Council calling for providers to explain all charges.

The letter calls on the FRC “to ensure that the accounting standards employed by fund managers are accurate and fair”.

“A . . . regime that claims to disclose transaction costs but omits major types of transaction cost does not meet these requirements.”

The MPs highlighted key charges such as trading costs, stock lending charges, interest retained on cash balances and transaction costs.

Mowat is an organiser of the FortyGroup of Conservatives who produced a “moderate manifesto” calling on pensions tax relief reforms and action on charges.

Shadow pensions minister Gregg McClymont, who organised the letter, tabled an amendment to the Pensions bill calling for full transparency of costs and charges but it was rejected by the Government.

He recently hit out at the Investment Management Association for “walking slowly backwards” from reform and says fund managers are still “putting off” disclosure.

Speaking to Money Marketing last week, Work and Pensions select committee chair Anne Begg said the proposed cap on pension charges would not work without full transparency.

Recommended

An-older-couple-outside-smiling-700.jpg

Phoenix launches pilot to swap small pot annuities for cash

Phoenix Group is offering 8,000 pensioners with small pension pots the chance to swap their annuity income for cash. The Mail on Sunday reports the pension provider is piloting a new scheme for 8,000 customers aged between 70 and 85 to cash in annuities they bought with “trivial” pots. Trivial commutation rules allow people who […]

Cricket - thumbnail

England vs Australia: pensions

Well, the cricket season is here, and England and Australia are stepping up to the wicket. Although we compete with each other in the sporting world, when it comes to pensions, Australia’s pension programme is held up as a model for our auto-enrolment initiative. Auto-enrolment was introduced because people weren’t saving enough into their pensions, and it is still early days but signs are positive. However, in Australia, saving into a pension is compulsory, and in fact employers are the ones who have to pay in. Employees in Australia can make additional contributions into their pensions, but they don’t have to. Should the onus be on the employer or employee to save? Well in the UK we think it’s both, but to get ‘adequate’ savings for retirement it’s the employee who has to pay more in.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Is it not an irony that Conservative, Liberal, Labour (and alike) are so keen on transparency when it comes to resolving a problem that they created? McKinsey Global Institute found that our debt to GDP ratio is over 500%. Others suggest 950%. The welfare state & public sector unfunded pensions are costing us our future. This is where the transparency needs to be shown.

Leave a comment