The item you have requested is not currently available in English and you have been redirected to the next available page. You may use your browser's back button to return to the item you were viewing.
Country desks feature Dentons lawyers in one jurisdiction with a particular focus or experience in another jurisdiction.
Learn more about our Canada capabilities
Learn more about our United States capabilities
Learn more about our Latin America and the Caribbean capabilities
Learn more about our Europe capabilities
Learn more about our United Kingdom capabilities
Learn more about our Central and Eastern Europe capabilities
Learn more about our Russia, CIS and the Caucasus capabilities
Learn more about our Africa capabilities
Learn more about our Middle East capabilities
Learn more about our Central Asia capabilities
Learn more about our China capabilities
Learn more about our ASEAN capabilities
Learn more about our Asia Pacific capabilities
Learn more about our Australia capabilities
At Dentons, we bring together top tier talent found at the intersection of geography, industry knowledge and substantive legal expertise. Start by clicking here
Dentons HPRP wins "Aviation Law Firm of the Year" in the 2018 Indonesia Law Awards
Dentons HPRP wins the “Aviation Law Firm of the Year Award” at the 2018 Indonesia Law Awards in Jakarta, on 4 October 2018.
What’s in a name? When is an “unnamed insured” entitled to insurance proceeds?
Is it possible for a party not named in an insurance policy to be entitled to insurance proceeds under that policy?
Court declines to certify “slack fill” class action
A Missouri federal judge recently denied certification of a proposed “slack fill” class action against the maker of “Mike and Ike” candy.
Changes to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive approved by the European Parliament – what does it mean for the media market?
In October 2018, the European Parliament approved the amendments to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive 2010/13/EU (AVMS Directive) and the Council’s approval is expected imminently.
California breaks new ground in mandating gender diversity on corporate boards
In September 2018, the State of California became the first state in the United States to pass legislation mandating gender diversity in board representation.
Starting your career as a student at Dentons exposes you to a world of experience and opportunities
With 172 locations in 76 countries, Dentons is home to top-tier talent that is found at the intersection of geography, industry knowledge and substantive legal experience. Working with Dentons, you will have the opportunity to learn from the best lawyers in the industry at the largest law firm in the world.
Dentons Rodyk ranked ‘Outstanding’, ‘Highly recommended’ in Asialaw Profiles 2019
Dentons Rodyk is pleased to be ranked in 18 industry sectors and practice areas in Asialaw Profiles 2019.
Mark Withey appointed Partner at Dentons’ Moscow office
Mark Withey has been appointed a partner in Dentons’ Russian Corporate and M&A practice.
Dentons recruits leading Real Estate partner in London
Dentons is pleased to announce that partner Deepa Deb is to join the Firm's Real Estate team in London. Deepa will join from Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (BCLP) where she has been a partner since 2012.
The big surprise of this year's Budget is the proposal to fundamentally rejig how defined contribution investment pots can be used to provide a retirement income.
The DC pensions industry, both trust-based and contract-based, has been taking something of a battering recently over how it provides (or more to the point does not provide) good value and retirement outcomes for savers. A key issue is how investment pots are turned into retirement income.
Presently, DC savers have three choices. Members with a high, alternative, retirement income (currently £20,000 per year) can use flexible drawdown to take money from their pension pot as they wish. Most people, however, do not qualify for flexible drawdown and have to use most of their pension pot to buy an annuity – 25% can be taken as a tax-free lump sum. An alternative to purchasing an annuity is capped drawdown where members can draw an income of up to 120% of the annuity they could purchase. Capped drawdown, however, lacks flexibility and can be difficult for savers to understand.
The Financial Conduct Authority found recently that the annuity market does not work well for savers. Although members can shop around for an annuity (the open market option), most buy an annuity from their pension provider. This often does not provide best value for money. Many people also do not receive financial advice to help them with their annuity purchase and may not choose the annuity which best suits their circumstances. For example, many people choose to buy annuities with no inflation protection, not realising how, over time, inflation will reduce the purchasing power of their pension.
The Government's solution to this problem is to empower members with more flexibility as to how they use their pension pot. Its key proposals are:
The Government is also going to review how pension funds are treated on death with an indication that tax rates will be reduced. We support such a review as the present system can act to deter saving through a pension.
There are some other changes around trivial commutation which fit into the same overall framework:
More broadly, ISAs are also being simplified and expanded. Rather than there being separate cash ISAs and share ISAs, there will be a single ISA. The maximum annual amount that can be paid into this unified ISA will be £15,000, replacing the current £5,760 limit for cash ISAs and £11,520 limit for share ISAs.
Finally, HMRC will be given additional powers to deal with pensions liberation through the mechanics of its registration process. These include HMRC being able to consider whether an administrator is a fit and proper person to administer a registered pension scheme, and also a broadening of the grounds for deregistering suspect schemes.
Given the breadth of the proposed changes, the Government has launched a consultation on practical implementation issues and on consequential changes for DB schemes and the overall pension system. Particular issues on which the Government is seeking input include:
The proposals represent a radical change to the current pension system and a U-turn on the policy decided in April 2011 by the Treasury not to allow early access to pension savings. Many issues will need to be worked through in finalising the new system and we hope that every effort will be made to make the new system as simple and clear as possible - not something on which Governments have a good track record. The speed with which the Government will need to put these measures in place may also count against a well co-ordinated implementation. We have doubts, for example, as to how realistic it is to get a retirement guidance system in place within the space of 12 months, especially as the details of the system remain to be worked out.
From a pension saver's perspective, we welcome the Government's decision to give members more flexibility in how they use their pension savings. The current system on how pension savings can be used is inflexible, difficult for members to understand and for many provides poor value for money. The changes will also better accommodate the more phased approach to retirement being adopted by more and more people.
We have reservations that the proposals go too far, especially in allowing total pension savings to be withdrawn at any time and that this could result in some savers using their pension pots in a way which fails to provide a sufficient retirement income throughout their life. Keeping some limits based on the value of other sources of wealth and income would seem a sensible precaution. The Government, however, has considered and discounted this risk and believes that people should be trusted to decide how best to use their pension pots. It considers that the new state pension system will significantly reduce the risk of profligate pensioners becoming a burden on the public purse. Other elements of the proposals, such as the wider provision of financial advice and possible increase in the earliest age for using pension pots, will further mitigate against this risk.
Savers will no doubt be happy about the increased flexibility, especially on lump sums. We expect howls of protest, however, should there be significant increases to the minimum age at which a pension pot can be used (for example, by setting it at an age which is only five years below state pension age). We believe that such a change should be avoided as it may act as a disincentive for people to save through a pension.
Immediately following the Chancellor's announcements, there was a sharp drop in the share price of some insurers and particularly specialist annuity providers. Some commentators have speculated that the changes represent the death knell for annuities. We believe this is an overreaction and there is likely to remain a demand for alternatives to drawdown, particularly investment-linked and fixed-term products. Innovative providers will see the changes as an opportunity.
The Government has announced that it will be providing £20 million of funding for the right to guidance scheme that will assist members in making the right financial decisions at retirement. One of the main questions is how the additional costs of this will be funded. The proposals involve members receiving impartial and face to face advice and possibly from a third party rather than the providers themselves. Face to face advice is much more expensive to deliver than either telephone advice, or providing information on paper. The consultation is silent on this point, appearing more concerned with how and what advice will be delivered, rather than how this will be funded. Passing on the cost to members will be complicated if a charge cap is imposed.
The consequences of the changes for trust-based schemes will depend on whether they are forced to offer drawdown. The Government is considering whether the proposed new flexibilities should be mandatory or whether they will remain subject to contrary scheme rules. We believe that in principle it is best to avoid differences between trust-based and contract-based schemes but that the new system should operate so as not to impose significant additional costs on employers providing trust-based schemes.
For DB schemes, we believe that the Government is right to consider restrictions on DB to DC transfers as the new flexibility could cause a run on DB schemes with adverse consequences for employers and remaining scheme members. We do not favour a complete ban, however, and think a system where trustees or employers have a discretion as to whether or not to allow transfers, or where there are exceptions for certain members such as those in ill-health, would be more appropriate. It will be interesting to see if the possibility of a DB to DC transfer ban will spur employers to implement enhanced transfer value exercises over the next year. The Government already has the power to ban this type of exercise and even if employers are following the incentives code of practice, the Government could temporarily apply the brakes while it formulates its policy on a transfer ban.
The increased trivial commutation limits are likely to be welcomed by trust-based schemes. They will allow them to provide more cost-effective benefits to members with small savings pots. A lump sum will be a great deal easier to administer than the purchase of a very small annuity which, in most cases, even if a provider can be found, will offer poor value for money. The enhanced limits will also ease the burden of paying small pensions for DB schemes.
You can find full details of the HM Treasury Budget 2014 proposals here.
We do not offer administration, actuarial or other pension consultancy services.
The URL of this tweet is below. Copy it to easily share with friends.
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more