What’s wrong with Life Platforms? Nico and Henry in conversation March 14th

Nico and I come at this subject from different angles. I was at Investment Solutions before it became Mobius Life and have spent more time than I should admit to with Adrian Swales – thinking about insured and non-insured solutions.

Nico’s views are public and well known. I have published a paper of his on my blog and have had some pushback on it – though I am not endorsing by publishing.

DC funds use insured platforms but DB funds used insured LDI solutions so there is no certainty of happy outcomes from insurance. Do life platforms add anything but convenience for the funders of workplace pensions?

Can Life funds and platforms really manage liquidity and what about the problems with valuations that follow a run on a fund?

Days after Schroders announce the launch of the first LTAF, what future does this new permitted-links buster have?

And what’s wrong with the Investment Trust as a means to access high quality illiquid assets without the fuss of a fund at all?

What do you think? Most people don’t know enough to have a view and I think this discussion could be really interesting.

If you have any questions you’d like me to put to Nico, send them in to AgeWage.com

For many the only question for Tuesday 14th March is whether State Man can beat Constitution Hill in the Champion Hurdle, but that’s not till 3pm

By way of a distraction you can log on to http://www.pensionplaypen.com and book your place via the events tab  

I’d strongly advise you read Nico’s paper on this – which you can find here.


About henry tapper

Founder of the Pension PlayPen,, partner of Stella, father of Olly . I am the Pension Plowman
This entry was posted in pensions and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to What’s wrong with Life Platforms? Nico and Henry in conversation March 14th

  1. Byron McKeeby says:

    A delayed consultation, first announced in the 2020 Spring Budget, essentially boiled down to the question of whether a new principles-based definition of a VAT-exempt “special” investment fund (SIF) should be added to the UK’s VAT Act to sit alongside the existing list of funds to which SIF status has previously been granted. The consultation ended last month.

    I could be wrong but I always thought pension funds using insured “wrappers” got a favourable VAT treatment compared with funds which employed managers and paid VAT on management fees, the majority of which VAT was irrecoverable.

Leave a Reply