Tag Archives: DB Funding Code

Buzzing for the DB funding code?

Posted on January 23, 2021 by henry tapper

Views of the proposed DB Funding Code from Con Keating In their weekly Pensions Buzz survey, Professional Pensions posed the following question: “Is TPR’s approach to the new DB funding code the correct one in your view?” There were 100 respondents … Continue reading →

Posted in actuaries, advice gap | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Codes and the Interim Consultation Response – Con Keating watches them spinning out of Control

Posted on January 19, 2021 by henry tapper

Very early in my career, in order to learn to understand and speak Japanese, it was necessary to comprehend the circumlocutions and etiquette of that culture. ‘Yes, but….’ means ‘NO!’ was an early revelation.  Responses to regulatory consultations similarly have … Continue reading →

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

Are John and Norma right – are we facing the end of mass-retirement?

Posted on November 2, 2020 by henry tapper

@JosephineCumbo could you pls explain why “open” DB schemes are less risky than closed schemes, and should therefore be subject to weaker funding requirements? “Josephine Cumbo: Open and closed case @@corpadviser https://t.co/u3loRiZxB6 — John Ralfe (@JohnRalfe1) October 30, 2020 The … Continue reading →

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

With Friends Like These, Who Needs Enemies? The DB Funding Code: An Existential Threat to Open DB Scheme

Posted on November 1, 2020 by henry tapper

  We have been asked what impact the Funding Code would have on open schemes by a number of correspondents.  This blog illustrates why the new funding code is the  biggest risk that open scheme members face . Simply put, … Continue reading →

Posted in actuaries, advice gap, age wage | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Association of Pension Lawyers dubious about tPR’s DB funding code

Posted on September 15, 2020 by henry tapper

      Editor’s note Apologies to the APL and to readers for the poor reproduction of Rosalind Connor’s letter. This is due to the shortcomings of my PDF reading rather than a failure of the APL to correctly format … Continue reading →

Posted in Blogging, later life, leadership | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Seven ways to improve Defined Benefit funding

Posted on September 10, 2020 by henry tapper

In March 2020, The Pensions Regulator (TPR) opened a consultation on its proposed revisions to the DB funding code. In framing its response, First Actuarial proposes seven ways to change DB funding for the better. What do we want the … Continue reading →

Posted in accountants, dc pensions, de-risking | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Sam Marsh’s response to TPR’s DB Funding Code

Posted on September 4, 2020 by henry tapper

Sam Marsh is a lecturer and branch president of the Sheffield UCU. He has responded on his own behalf to TPR’s consultation. Continue reading →

Posted in age wage, pensions, USS | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ros Altmann’s response to TPR’s DB funding code consultation.

Posted on September 3, 2020 by henry tapper

I have asked for responses to the Pension Regulator’s consultation questions and Ros Altmann has obliged. As a member of the House of Lords and former Pension Minister, I hope Ros’ replies will be of particular interest Continue reading →

Posted in accountants, actuaries, pensions, Pensions Regulator | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Jon Spain’s submission on DB Funding

Posted on September 1, 2020 by henry tapper

Although people have been living far longer than used to be the case, the financial assumptions are generally far more significant than the demographic assumptions.

If, as appears to be the case, we can’t get simple things right, why should we think we can tackle complex stuff successfully? Continue reading →

Posted in actuaries, advice gap, pensions | Tagged , , , , | 6 Comments