Yesterday was a beautiful day with sunshine all over Britain, even here in central Scotland
The temperature and climate of the Pension PlayPen was clement to the twenty or so souls who arrived to discuss Rachel Reeve’s Spring Statement and what we can expect from Government following on from her speech to parliament.
I spoke for a quarter of an hour, the bulk of the meeting was taken up answering questions, which we had pre-announced . There were also questions we hadn’t but you’ll have to whizz past me to get to them!
The meeting clashed with the IFS event I’ve reported on elsewhere. It is time we made our own Spring Statement on behalf of the pension play people!
Do not overly worry yourself about my opening statements, they are merely a rehearsal of the themes of this blog. Listen to the questions and statements from Peter Cameron-Brown, Con Keating and William McGrath. Peter kindly donated a chart which I share with you this morning
I am not sure of its provenance but Peter Camron-Brown is someone I trust. This put some historic perspective about where we are, a situation that hasn’t occurred since the 1990s and the early years of this century.
There is hope for Rachel Reeves.
For those who want a full economic analysis of the Treasury’s opportunities, I have included the most recent VFM podcast. I can’t say it concluded that anything is going on in the pension’s bit of Reeve’s brain. I am not so sure!
It was a rather short podcast by the lads’ normal podcast duration,
For me, like many coffee sippers, there was a world outside and I hope that some listeners and watchers, will do so from the open air!
I listened with great interest to the coffee morning discussion and found the estimates of transitory surpluses and the focus on decades of so-called de-risking quite thought-provoking. Very worrying that those that regulate cannot agree on the figures.
The topic of LDI seemed to be underemphasized, almost as if it were a non-event.
With this new perspective, I am more convinced than ever that DC is the most transparent and reliable option available.
The assumption that IHT is the driving force behind providing a realistic lump sum for income beyond work might apply to a very small segment of the population, likely among the 0.6% of the working population who contribute 34% of the income tax and a significant portion of the VAT.
At some point, considering Henry’s income solution or a traditional indexed joint life annuity makes sense to avoid an IHT-liable estate.
Current pension planning aims to support the current retired community, and the method is well-suited for its goals. HOwever it has faied consistantly to provide for the majority. Only when the rulmakers have the same retirement underwriting will thay understand pensiosn form the point of vie of those they serve.
There is room for improvement, the achievements so far are lamentable.
There is still a need for a model that acknowledges the possibility of a 100-year life for those younger than 35(ish)