TPR has issued its latest guidance on the very tricky subject of Employer Related Investments. Readers may know that for many years now there have been fairly strict limits on the amounts that a pension scheme can invest in the business of its sponsoring employers. In very simple terms, no more than 5% of the fund can be invested and there are complete bans on things like providing bank guarantees to the company.
Posts under ‘TPR’
No one said it would be easy…
Now that the dust has settled a bit on the excitement of the Auto Enrolment announcements of last week, I thought I might just sit down and try to understand a little bit more about what the proposals might actually mean in practice, particularly for small to medium sized businesses. I’m not addressing the really small employers here – those with just a few employees and who previously provided no pension provision. Yes, it’s true that they will for the first time have to look at this, but generally, they will probably just auto enrol into NEST and be done with it.
Leave them kids alone…
Bad news story of the week is the proposal leaked by the Daily Telegraph today (24 September) that the Pensions and PPF Ombudsman Service is to be merged with the Pension Regulator. As a consequence, the Pensions Advisory Service is to be abolished. This is a seriously bad idea for a number of reasons. Here are just a few.
1. tPR is very nearly unfit for purpose. It makes orders such as Financial Support Directions on Lehman Bros subsidiaries that cannot be enforced in all likelihood. It is seemingly unable to attract and recruit a new Chief Executive or Chairman. It is well past it’s ‘use by’ date and needs a radical rethink.
Fish and Chips…
I have recently been instructed by a trustee client to assist them in the merger of two pension schemes of the same employer. Great news of course especially for my bank balance, but it immediately started me thinking about possible conflicts of interest. Stay with me here and I’ll explain why.
A little unusually, the two schemes had the majority of the trustees in common. Now most Conflicts guidance, including that of the Pension Regulator tend to concentrate on the possible conflicts that can arise when a senior executive of the Employer also sits as a trustee and that’s fine and dandy but this was a bit different. So what were the trustees to do? Could they effectively and fairly negotiate with themselves when dealing with relative funding positions, future benefits in the merged scheme and the like?
Hard to Digest…
So, Readers Digest (or rather the pension scheme of course) has now entered the PPF Assessment process as was almost inevitable following the calling in of the Administrators in February. Readers of my blog will know that RD had been in discussion with the PPF prior to this in relation to its multi million pound deficit and came a cropper when TPR refused to accept a negotiated deal that would have seen an innovative resolution including a significant cash injection and a large equity stake in the US parent company being taken by the scheme trustees.
And they’re off…
I have decided that this blog will be an election free zone – at least for the time being. I suspect that none of the three main parties actually have much of a clue about pensions other than how they can get the over 55’s to vote for them with a bribe or two so let’s not go there and instead talk about a couple of other pensiony issues
First, a cautionary tale for Trustees, with tPR having reported two trustees from the firm GP Noble to the Serious Fraud Office. Charges have been laid and the matter is next due before Southwark Crown Court on 16 April.
It seemed like a good idea at the time…
Sometimes, its not just what you know…it’s who. The Pension Regulator has just found this out having been sent off with a flea in its ear by both the US and Canadian Courts in its attempts to enter the ‘world domination’ market by thinking – completely wrongly as it turns out – that it had jurisdiction in those countries.
The background is it’s attempt to make the overseas parent companies of the Nortel UK Pension Schemes to pay an additional contribution to cover the significant deficit. The US and Canadian courts have given permission for the overseas parent to ‘ignore’ the demand for £2.1 billion. Nortel is bankrupt by the way.
Jennie advises large multi-employer schemes as well as smaller single employer arrangements and has wide experience of both Defined Contribution and Defined Benefit schemes. Jennie qualified in 1986 originally as a criminal prosecutor. She sits as a Magistrate in her local justice area and is an Approved Chairman and Deputy Chair of the Bench Training and Development Committee. Jennie was formerly Legal Director of the Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority. When her busy practice allows, Jennie likes to indulge her passion for travelling. To consult Jennie on any corporate Pensions matter, please call her on +44 (0)20 7749 2700 or send her an email by clicking below: