Corporate Adviser
  • Content Hubs
  • Magazine
  • Alerts
  • Events
  • Video
    • Master Trust Conference 2024 videos
  • Research & Guides
  • About
  • Contact
  • Home
  • News
  • In Depth
  • Profile
  • Pensions
    • Auto-enrolment
    • DB
    • DC
    • Defaults
    • Investment
    • Master Trusts
    • Sipps & SSAS
    • Taxation
  • Group Risk
    • Group Life
    • Group IP
    • Group CIC
    • Mental Health
    • Rehab
    • Wellbeing
  • Healthcare
    • Musculoskeletal
    • Mental Health
    • IPT
    • Wellbeing
    • Trusts
    • Cash Plans
  • Wellbeing
    • Mental Health
    • Health & Wellbeing
    • Financial resilience
  • ESG
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Adviser
No Result
View All Result

THE BIG QUESTION

by Samuel Joy
August 1, 2010
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Pinterest

Ian Naismith, pension market development head, Scottish Widows

YES. To remove it completely would be a big vote-loser, particularly for the Conservatives. It will be interesting to see where they do set the annual allowance, after the review, but removing it altogether would be too much of a step.

Even though it is LibDem policy to do so, I think the Conservatives will strongly oppose it because it hits too much at their core vote.

There was a genuine mood of concern amongst the life insurance industry before the election that higher rate tax relief would be going in the June Emergency Budget, but the Tories moved to allay these concerns early on. With the direct link between tax relief and tax paid already broken under Labour, there were genuine concerns, but I think that they have receded somewhat now.

But the Coalition Government may cap tax relief at 40 per cent in future, rather than 50 per cent.

Iain Anderson, chief corporate counsel, Cicero Consulting

MAYBE. This is because within the Coalition, the LibDems have committed to getting rid of it. On the other hand, for the Conservatives to do it would be an act against their natural constituency.

In advance of the Budget there was a lot of lobbying on behalf of the industry to stop it happening.

The fact the Government has gone for a limitation of contribution, rather than cutting higher rate relief suggests the likelihood of keeping higher rate relief has moved to probable from possible.

We will get more clarity on this when we have had the Nest consultation and public sector pension review completed. One of the solutions to the public sector review is to give some DC alternative, and that would require tax relief being available.

Getting rid of it altogether is attractive to the Treasury, but the Conservatives have to think how that would play out to their electorate. Wrapping tax relief up with Isas would be attractive, and build on David Willetts’ 2005 work on lifetime savings. But sweeping away the pensions regime is one big ask, particularly for a coalition

Kevin Wesbroom, principal consultant, Hewitt Associates

YES. Because the Coalition will survive for that long, and they have made clear they are committed to keeping higher rate tax relief. There is a general recognition that the behaviour of decisionmakers is influenced by whether or not they are in the scheme.

However, we could see an annual allowance at £35,000.

There are people who would like to see it go altogether, and if it was abolished, it could pay for a 60 per cent increase in basic state pension, which obviously has its attractions. Steve Webb has made no bones that he would like to see it go. He predicates everything he says with the qualification that it is on the basis of there being a realistic basic pension.

But if the idea of getting rid of higher rate tax relief does get close to reality, the Treasury will throw its hands up in the air and say it cannot deal with it. The complexity of the transitional process would be a nightmare as you would have to ring-fence every tax-relieved contribution to date. I cannot see higher rate tax going as things currently stand.

VIDEO FROM ROYAL LONDON


Find out more about how to support the switching of a workplace pension

Corporate Adviser Special Report

REQUEST YOUR COPY

Most Popular

  • Family - thumbnail

    Standard Life launches financial coaching platform for families

  • TPT launches managed retirement income for life offering

  • Govt Spending Review: industry reaction

  • Capital Cranfield appoints LGIM DB head as trustee

  • Underestimating life expectancy leading to £35,000 shortfall in pension planning: BW

  • Half of UK companies see employee benefit costs as primary financial challenge

Corporate Adviser

© 2017-2024 Definite Article Media Limited. Design by 71 Media Limited.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Privacy policy
  • T&Cs
  • Contact

Follow Us

X
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • News
  • In Depth
  • Profile
  • Pensions
    • Auto-enrolment
    • DB
    • DC
    • Defaults
    • Investment
    • Master Trusts
    • Sipps & SSAS
    • Taxation
  • Group Risk
    • Group Life
    • Group IP
    • Group CIC
    • Mental Health
    • Rehab
    • Wellbeing
  • Healthcare
    • Musculoskeletal
    • Mental Health
    • IPT
    • Wellbeing
    • Trusts
    • Cash Plans
  • Wellbeing
    • Mental Health
    • Health & Wellbeing
    • Financial resilience
  • ESG

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • News
  • In Depth
  • Profile
  • Pensions
    • Auto-enrolment
    • DB
    • DC
    • Defaults
    • Investment
    • Master Trusts
    • Sipps & SSAS
    • Taxation
  • Group Risk
    • Group Life
    • Group IP
    • Group CIC
    • Mental Health
    • Rehab
    • Wellbeing
  • Healthcare
    • Musculoskeletal
    • Mental Health
    • IPT
    • Wellbeing
    • Trusts
    • Cash Plans
  • Wellbeing
    • Mental Health
    • Health & Wellbeing
    • Financial resilience
  • ESG

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.