People need more pension, not just moaning about the lack of saving!

Posted on March 19, 2026 by henry tapper

I enjoyed Richard Smith’s post on L&G’s moan about not getting enough paid into workplace pensions

We know only too well that enough money is going into pension pots. Last Friday I listened to a friend telling the few delegates who stayed on to hear him, we need to make pensions a more attractive proposition to the folk who one day will get a pension from them.

I suspect that people who pay into a “pension” will expect a “pension”. Richard and Rory are as one in suggesting we could do better for the people we serve by making the prospect of a pension a little more attractive to the people we serve.

So this Government has decided to put bigger pensions before more contributions and if I was the FD of a major company paying contributions into a workplace pension, the news that the pension that I’d be giving could go up by up to 60% without me having to pay more contributions, I’d be more interested.

If I was younger , I would be looking for value for my money , before investing money into a pension plan the fruits of which would be decades away.

People will use pension boards and find the visit like a visit to the dentist. Richard takes us through that journey in another gem where he reminds us of the pain of the visit, discovering the prospects for the future , the satisfaction of at least engaging with the problem and the worry of the cost of putting things right (for teeth read retirement income).

Let’s finish where we started, with another Richard Smith gem. The bad news coming this time from Standard Life rather than L&G. I hope that both are considering how to improve the pensions from the pots they are helping us build up. It is the pension and not the pot that we’ll be confronted by when going to the dentist …sorry – pension dashboard.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

I hope professional trustees will come to CDC independently

Posted on March 19, 2026 by henry tapper

I was surprised to see  a firm of professional trustees promoting itself with  WTW , who are consultants but also providers of DC services through LifeSight .

I have heard WTW present CDC as an extension of Lifesight , with CDC being available at Retirement (but not before). Most recently I attended an advertorial for itself at Pensions UK’s investment conference.

We do not yet know how Retirement CDC of this type, will emerge and when it will be available so it is odd that it is being promoted to trustees at this early stage. I asked the question of Torsten Bell, will we be getting Retirement CDC draft legislation this year and Torsten Bell told me and 1500 in the hall, we will. I am pleased for CDC and WTW and Lifesight. But it is odd that WTW are so forward in promoting Retirement CDC.

It is also odd that HS Trustees are promoting themselves by being photographed from the top floor of WTW’s City offices in Lime Street (the insurance end of the City).

My hope is that HS Trustees will focus today on what is legislated for today and for which in a couple of months we will have a CDC code.

Both the DWP and TPR have made it clear that trustees should not promote one CDC scheme over another but must stick to the job that trustees have, of making sure that members are treated fairly and that they get the value from their money they’ve put by.

It is important that CDC does not become conflicted. WTW’s potential conflict is that they both advise and provide a DC master trust and much as I like Simon Eagle and Keith McNally and other senior WTW employees who work on CDC, I am aware that the Retirement CDC they hope to use as the default pension for Lifesight  members reaching retirement.

There are other consultants who are not conflicted and who can offer trustees a view of the market that includes whole of life CDC schemes. They may not have the money to throw at trustees in the way that WTW appear to have. But I suspect that it is better governance, a Trustee whether professional or member or employer nominated, to get your information from Government or at least advisers who are unconflicted.

If I was HS Trustees, I would not be posting their photographs in this way, if I was WTW, I would be very careful not to breach the conflict of interest between making money as an adviser and making it as a provider of DC (and at some stage CDC) services.

 

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Is America a good place for insured retirement funds from Britain?

Posted on March 19, 2026 by henry tapper

I am pleased to see Calum Kapoor and Mary McDougall working together on an article that looks at the taxation of overseas money invested in American assets. You can read it on a “free share” here.

I profess to be unaware of some of the nuances of the concerns but that two pension stalwarts are writing this article, suggests that the transfer of money that was in DB pensions across the pond to American private equity firms (fronted by UK insurers) is a dangerous practice.

The US Treasury may have moved to reassure some of the country’s biggest foreign investors over a shake-up of tax rules after top sovereign wealth funds warned they could cut their exposure to America if it pressed ahead.

That’s fine if we still had the chance to choose where our pension fund money is invested, but many pensioners have no representation by trustees and only an insurance company to look to for their pension investments.

Under Section 892 of the US tax code, foreign governments and their controlled entities — a category that includes SWFs and some public pension funds — do not pay US tax on what the IRS categorises as investment activity. The Treasury said in response that it was “considering all options” for the proposed regulations, which it had issued “due to requests for certainty from the industry”, the spokesperson added.

I cannot think of any western country that I would trust on tax (including tariffs) than America.

It is time that we thought seriously about the impact of American companies owning British insurance companies and investing money for British companies in America. I will finish how Calum and Mary finish

The proposed regulations come after Section 899 in last year’s “big beautiful bill” threatened to increase taxes on dividends and interest on US stocks and some corporate bonds for foreign investors.

Babak Nikravesh, a partner at law firm Greenberg Traurig who advises a number of sovereign wealth funds, told the FT his clients had been “really concerned” about how hospitable the US would remain and would “have a hard think” when it comes to deploying new cash.

We have the PRA, the BOE and ultimately His Majesty’s Treasury looking out for the safety of those in insurance arrangements. This includes those in retail and bulk annuities.

I hope that the Government’s financial organisations are considering our “wealth” whether “sovereign” or “insured“.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Trustees are for members , not just compliance

Posted on March 19, 2026 by henry tapper

Maggie Roger has written a sensible article that explains why member nominated trustees are essential to good governance.

Increasingly we are seeing professional trustees taking not just the lead role but the only role as trustees. The view that schemes are professional because of their exclusively offer trustees is indeed faulty. I fear too often it is part of what is wrongfully called “de-risking” and is a means of placing compliance as the principle function of trustees.

Maggie Rodger has been a strong advocate of CDC and has spared me time whenever I have met me to explain the work she has been doing with the Church of England CDC scheme. She takes the responsibility of trustees not to market the scheme they are involved in seriously, so this work does not appear in her article but I can say (not as a trustee) that her and the  involvement of the Association of Member Trustees in the selection of trustees, says good things about the CoE CDC scheme to come.

Maggie looks back to Royal Mail

The introduction of member trustees brought an insight into wider member views as well as governance balance. Member-nominated trustees (MNTs) have given confidence to members that their scheme is being run in their interests.

This was demonstrated recently when the Royal Mail member trustees were instrumental in helping their members understand and accept collective defined contribution (CDC).

I will not be shy in saying that CDC can take a step forward from common practice today of DB schemes in wind-up and commercial DC master trusts. CDC scheme can and (I hope) will have representatives not just of employers but of members on extended boards. The Pensions Regulator calls for a minimum of three trustees on a  CDC Trustee Board but I think there is space for more at the table.

I absolutely agree with Maggie Roger when she says

New pension models, such as CDC, will rely for their success on good governance to ensure generational fairness in the design, annual valuation and balancing decisions. Value for money proposals in defined contribution (DC) stop short at the non- numerical concepts of stewardship and service quality. Since these DC models place all the risk on members, either individually, or shared, surely they should be involved in governance of these issues?

The work of the AMNT has been taken up by the TUC in there recent paper and campaign for more representation for members

You can download this paper here.

It is worth reading alongside Maggie’s Professional Pensions article which you can access from here.

There is of course a place for the professional trustee and all trustees including member trustees should be qualified to do their job.  But to suppose that trusteeship starts and ends with compliance with codes is to forget who pension schemes are working for!

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Pensions and IHT – Really?

Posted on March 18, 2026 by henry tapper

Here’s yesterday’s Pension PlayPen’s Coffee Morning – an ardent discussion on IHT and Pensions.

Here is the video to go with it

Click the disclaimer to watch the slides live or download the slides from this link.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Yeovil’s shocking performance puts me in mind of relegation

Posted on March 18, 2026 by henry tapper

Last night I went down to Woking with my son to watch my side “Yeovil Town” play one of the worst games I’ve ever seen them play. I am glad they got the rollicking they did from their manager.

436 commited fans turn up for Yeovil Town. Shame 18 players cannot do the same.

This is a club with a great past, a great stadium and great support. It is time that it got its act together or it is heading for National League South (again).

Posted in pensions | Tagged , | 2 Comments

We have become too prudent with our long term money

Posted on March 18, 2026 by henry tapper

This is the problem we have. We are a nation that has de-risked and see that as prudent.

I do not want to criticise “individuals”, they have good advocates in Martin Lewis and others, and are right to be prudent when the world is full of predation.

But I wonder if individuals are best off taking decisions on their own , for themselves.

We used to have collective investment that helped out people as varied as miners and postal workers. Only those in the public sector get collective workplace pensions (ok I miss out Royal Mail , USS, Railpen and a few more) but my point is simple.

Left to our own devices, we seek to be prudent and de-risk our finances to a point we have no chance to benefit from the growth of the nation and of the organisations that drive that growth.

That’s not what money in a cash account is good at doing.

We grab our invested funds as soon as we can and cash them out, swapping growth for de-risked prudent cash. Except it’s not prudent or risk-free. That’s because to meet our needs in later life we need our money to grow to beat inflation and last as long as we do!

Let’s not blame individuals for being over-prudent. Instead let’s ask how we can make it easier for us all to invest for growth by encouraging each other to go for growth.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Do we need VFM reports to consolidate small DC schemes?

Posted on March 18, 2026 by henry tapper

The Pensions Regulator lays out what we have left of DC Occupational Pension Schemes

The TPR’s take on its work

Brighton seems pretty content with the state of our workplace pension market , for private DC schemes it looks like the end of the road unless you’re a commercial master trust. Recently our largest DC schemes, Lloyds Banking Group’s “Your Tomorrow” DC scheme said it had no tomorrow and was to be consolidated by the Scottish Widows Master Trust. That is not yet in TPR’s numbers as it’s still in consultation but if it is too small , then how many single sponsored  DC schemes will be left by the end of the decade.

Here are the numbers from the TPR

  • DC scheme numbers fell by 15% to 790 in 2025.
  • Assets increased by 22%, rising from £205 billion to £249 billion.
  • Schemes that do not deliver value for savers should consolidate out the market, TPR urges.

The Pensions Regulator (TPR) is calling on DC trustees to review if their scheme presents value for savers, as the shift towards a market of fewer, larger schemes continues, driven by a decline in the number of smaller DC schemes.

TPR’s 2025 DC landscape report published today, shows the number of DC schemes has decreased by 15% to 790 in 2025 – consistent with 2024’s decline when the number of schemes fell below 1,000 for the first time. The decrease in the number of schemes is primarily driven by those with fewer than 5,000 memberships exiting the market.

At the same time, assets have continued to grow – from £205 billion in 2024 to £249 billion in 2025 – an increase of 22%, while memberships are up by 7% on last year.

Master trusts account for the majority of DC members, holding 30.1 million memberships (92%) and £208 billion in assets (83%).

Richard Knox, TPR’s Executive Director, Strategy, Policy and Analysis, said:

“People rightly expect to receive value from their hard-earned retirement savings. As we move towards a market of fewer larger schemes, master trusts now dominate. We believe that larger schemes are better placed to deliver value for money, including stronger investment returns and better service.

“The current Pension Schemes Bill will speed up market dynamics.

“In the new pensions world, we urge pension trustees of smaller schemes, in particular, to review their scheme today. Those that cannot match the stronger performers should consolidate out of the market and transfer savers to a better value scheme.”

My favorite Brighton actuary has this to say

The annual TPR DC scheme data publication is out.  Nothing surprising. But does confirm the rapid consolidation (down by 15% as last year) and is now 730 if you exclude those winding up and micros.

And the data are in a sense out of date – up to date as far as the TPR database is concerned but this is as at the most recent scheme relevant date. So I expect the actual current number is closer to 600.

And it includes the Mastertrusts. (Very annoying they are shown separately everywhere). So we are well on the way to only have a few D.C. non MT non micro schemes.

What a palaver asking the Chairs to do so much. And the dashboard.

And VFM ha ha.

VFM- ha ha!

Assuming your view is that VFM is just performance tabling then Cap Data has some interesting things to say (though you have to pay to find out what happens for those close to retirement.

The closest we have to a VFM assessment of the DC market is Corporate Adviser’s “CapData”. It has recently been published and it tells us that there is very little correspondence between size and the amount of money you get from your DC workplace “pension” , oops “pot”.

 

SEI tops CAPAdata chart, highlighting gulf between top and bottom performers ahead of VFM metrics

The table ought to show the biggest at the top, as it happens WTW’s huge Lifesight is near the top but at the bottom are L&G and Nest (even huger)

You might say that consultants are winners on performance but Mercer’s performance stinks. Infact, it’s hard to tally anything with anything. Here’s the VFM performance table that people actually use (rather than TPR and FCA’s versions which are under consultation.

Total return – Younger saver

CAPA –

Corporate Adviser Pensions Average

56.3%

 

Aegon –

Aegon MT – BlackRock Lifepath Flexi

69.9%

(+13.6%)

Aegon –

Aegon Workplace Default (ARC) – GPP

43.8%

(-12.5%)

Aon –

Managed Core Retirement Pathways

76.1%

(+19.8%)

Aviva –

My Future Focus Universal strategy

48.3%

(-8%)

Fidelity –

FutureWise

69.3%

(+13%)

Hargreaves Lansdown –

HL Growth Fund

46.9%

(-9.3%)

Legal & General –

Lifetime Advantage / Multi Asset Fund

30.8%

(-25.5%)

Legal & General –

Target Date Fund

46.5%

(-9.8%)

LifeSight (WTW) –

Medium Risk Drawdown

87.6%

(+31.3%)

Mercer –

SmartPath Targeting Drawdown

37.5%

(-18.8%)

NatWest Cushon –

Sustainable Investment Strategy

54.1%

(-2.2%)

Nest –

Retirement Date Fund

48.9%

(-7.4%)

Now: Pensions –

now: growth fund & now: retirement countdown fund

40%

(-16.2%)

Penfold –

Standard Lifetime plan

Data not available

Royal London –

Balanced Lifestyle Strategy (Drawdown) (GPP)

57.4%

(+1.1%)

Scottish Widows –

PIA Balanced (Targeting Flexible Access) (MT&GPP)

55.1%

(-1.2%)

SEI –

Flexi default (drawdown)

94.9%

(+38.7%)

Smart Pension –

Smart Sustainable Growth Fund

56.2%

(-0%)

Standard Life –

Sustainable Multi Asset (AP) Universal SLP

47.2%

(-9%)

The Lewis Workplace Pension Trust –

TLWPT (The Lewis Workplace Pension Trust)

65%

(+8.7%)

The People’s Pension –

The People’s Pension Balanced Profile

49.6%

(-6.6%)

TPT Retirement Solutions –

TPT Target Date Fund

68.8%

(+12.6%)

VFM performance tables are useful for employers in working out how big “pots” are but they don’t tell employers or regulators the value of consolidating into pensions.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Are what were our “pensions” now to be traded as distressed assets?

Posted on March 18, 2026 by henry tapper

I am sorry to continue a series of articles that report on the pending  failure of the private equity firm in America but I must. These firms have set their eyes on our private DB legacy and will buy it out through the insurers they now own.

You can read this article in the FT for free on this link.

The private capital industry’s problems are far worse than Wall Street has acknowledged, as traditional metrics obscure weaknesses in the leveraged buyout market, according to a top credit hedge fund.

So starts Amelia Pollard’s article on Monday (16th).

A “substantial portion” of the private equity industry is already “stressed or distressed”, said Tony Yoseloff, managing partner and chief investment officer at credit hedge fund Davidson Kempner Capital Management.

The hedge fund argues excessive leverage, weak cash flows and loose debt contracts have converged to create a ripe environment for corporate defaults.

How do we feel if our pensions are traded in a secondary market of distressed assets being sold by distressed private equity firms?

“You’re not looking at a problem five years from now, you’re looking at a problem that exists today.”

The hedge fund argues excessive leverage, weak cash flows and loose debt contracts have converged to create a ripe environment for corporate defaults.

Is this what we mean by “gilt edged buy out”? We should not suppose that when an insurer buys out our pensions, it does not try to make money on our money.

So far we have looked at the buy-out market in DB pensions as safe as the Bank of England who regulates the market through the PRA, but is the PRA in control of what happens when money is bulked off to Bermuda and used to provide private credit through firms we read about but have no knowledge of. The likes of Blue Owl are not known in Britain but they are the problem that is frightening the US retail market.

Private equity has gone to extreme lengths to generate returns even as firms have struggled to exit investments, turning to secondary fund sales and continuation funds to make distributions to investors.

The industry’s proliferation of roll-ups of mom-and-pop businesses like car washes and insurance brokerage firms has also had mixed results. These groups had a record backlog of almost $4tn in unsold investments last year, even as dealmaking began to make a comeback, according to a recent report from consultancy Bain & Company.

I suggest there is a generation of young people who were not in the market in 2007 when we last had a looming crisis heading our way from the United States by way of financing.

I remember how it began and it feels like it now.  Back in those days, the sitting duck was housing, today it is pensions. Either way we are walking into a problem because the clever people who advise and practice pension buy-outs do not consider what is happening to the money that has been put aside to pay pensions in the UK.

 

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

IHT on Pensions…today (Tuesday) 10.30 – entry here

Posted on March 17, 2026 by henry tapper

Coffee Morning – IHT on Pensions…REALLY!!! CPD included

Type – Teams Online

When – Tuesday 17th March at 10:30am

You are cordially invited to attend our next Coffee Morning. At this event we are delighted that Mark Plewes from WBR Group will be presenting his thoughts on the change in IHT for the Pensions landscape.

He will give us his thinking of an overview of where things sit with the current IHT proposals on unused pensions passing through parliament and any lingering concerns that there might still be around implementation and issues. He will also want to touch on how the potential complexity of the plans might impact outcomes for beneficiaries and whether there is presently a risk of wider detriment and scam activity in terms of the confusion that such a change will cause.

Background:

In December 2025 the Government published the Finance Bill containing provisions to bring pension scheme death benefits within the scope of inheritance tax from 6 April 2027.  We look at what has changed since the legislation was originally published in draft, and consider what action SIPP and SSAS providers need to be taking now.

Agenda

  • What to do now?
  • How will pension planning change?
  • Occupational vs SIPP/SSAS?
  • What are the alternatives?
  • Will a new government U Turn this decision?

TO REGISTER

Please add to your calendar and click HERE on the day 

Mark Plewes is Head of Technical at WBR Group and recently appeared by invitation at the House of Lords to inform the  pensions finance bill debate.

Mark has been at WBR Group for over 3 years and prior to this role he was Senior Technical Specialist at Rowanmoor.

This should be a lively session with emotions running high!!.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments