Budget 2008 - Overview

Budget 2008 - Pension Tax Relief

The previously announced reduction in basic rate income tax from 22% to 20% from 6th April created concerns for 2 sectors.

Firstly, charities were concerned that they would lose out because Gift Aid donations would only benefit from 20% income tax relief with a resulting reduction in the gross donation.

Secondly individuals making personal pension contributions would only benefit from 20% tax relief at source instead of 22%. For instance a personal pension contribution of £78 would be worth £100 after basic rate tax relief in 2007/08. After 6th April the same £78 contribution becomes £97.50 after basic rate tax relief. This represents a small but significant reduction in your pension fund. Higher rate tax payers can claim back a further 20% through self assessment, increased from the previous 18% but the gross pension premium is still reduced for the same initial investment.

It was pleasing to see the Chancellor act on the concerns of charities and add 2% relief to Gift Aid donations for a transitional period.

It was a shame that the same generosity was not extended to the millions of us trying to save for our retirement.

Budget 2008 - Pensions

There appear to be no dramatic new announcements relating to pension planning in this budget. As previously announced the annual allowance increases to £235,000 for 2008/09. The lifetime allowance becomes £1,650,000.

Individuals who have not reviewed their pension arrangements since the 2006 'Pension Simplification' should do so now. In particular transitional protection against the effects of the lifetime allowance can be applied for. The deadline for applying for this protection is 5th April 2009.

Budget 2008 - ISAs

The budget confirmed previously announced increases to ISA allowances for 2008/09.  From 6th April individuals can contribute up to £7,200 in ISA. Of this up to £3,600 can be invested in cash. The remainder can be invested in Stocks and Shares. The old and confusing regime of Mini and Maxi ISAs will cease to exist after 5th April. Instead, the more appropriately labelled Cash ISA and Stocks and Shares ISA will be the terminology.

Individuals contributing the maximum amounts by direct debit may wish to review their arrangements.

Budget 2008 - Enterprise Investment Schemes

The 2008 budget included possible incentives for individual savers and investors at two opposite extremes of the market.

Firstly the announcement of more consultation on the Savings Gateway to encourage lower income individuals to save regularly in deposit accounts. This was originally consulted on in 2001 and has been trialed since. We shall wait and see whether a scheme whereby the government matches an individuals savings will actually be implemented.

Secondly the governments want to simplify the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS) to encourage investment in smaller, high-risk trading companies. These schemes allow an investor to benefit from 20% income tax relief as well as CGT deferral for reinvestments and gains free of CGT where income tax relief has applied. The government wants to increase the limit for income tax relief from £400,000 to £500,000 for 2008/09. This will be subject to State aid approval. In addition a consultation to try to encourage more investment is to be undertaken. This consultation will focus on various matters but will include how to increase awareness of these schemes amongst investors as well as the possibility of carrying back tax relief being extended to carry forward.

Is it a good time to invest?

This is a question asked frequently of advisers and the answer is usually straightforward in that it is normally better to invest than to see cash value eroded by inflation. However in times of extreme market volatility as we are currently experiencing, the answer is more difficult. The risks of investing appear higher now than they have for some time.

Short term volatility naturally makes potential investors nervous. Longer term market falls make investors even more nervous. Potential investors are generally tempted back into the markets when there is evidence of a sustained recovery. This may help investors to sleep at night but it may mean missing out on the best investment opportunities.

Many individuals like the thrill of trying to bag a bargain and will look to optimise the timing of investments. Some will win and some will lose. Most will both win and lose at different times. The majority of investors however have neither the time nor the inclination to make these timing judgements. They may leave decisions to 'experts' but in general these experts have a vested interest in investing. The best alternative is often to drip feed regularly into the market with little regard for timing or volatility.

Monthly regular saving allows you to gain from rising asset prices whilst benefiting from the purchase of more assets when prices are depressed. Those in our industry use the jargon - 'Pound Cost Averaging'. It is not exciting and it is not fashionable, but it allows you to accumulate wealth over the medium to long term. That sounds like an investment objective.

So is it a good time to save regularly? Almost certainly.

Pension Plans in Legacy Planning

The tax benefits of personal pension funding are compelling.

However when the time comes for pension benefits to be realised many people are put off by the perceived lack of flexible options available. In particular the apparent lack of value available for other family members in the event of premature death can cause particular angst.

Continue Reading...

We have only ourselves to blame?

Our industry has an unfortunate reputation for shooting itself in the foot; it delights in finding new and ingenious ways of pulling the wool over the legislators and the treasury and then explodes in fits of outraged indignity when the government retracts from certain accepted practices and understanding. We have seen this of late, with some of the so called “Pension Simplification” legislation

The idea as I understand it, was to both simplify and relax pension rules, a laudable intent but the outcome sadly one year on from A day is anything but, as the government has sought to control an industry that has tried to turn such changes into sales opportunities, whilst at the same time going way beyond what the government intended.

Two examples for you. Firstly take the Alternative Secured Pension (ASP), this is a mechanism by which annuity purchase can be delayed after age 75 by utilising income drawdown (now called unsecured pension). The main reason the government will say that this was introduced, was to allow the “Plymouth Brethren”, a religious body who believe that annuities amount to gambling on human life because they are based on estimates of how long policyholders are likely to live …. You really can’t make it up can you! Well, within moments the industry had formulated over-enthusiastic strategies whereby pension pots for the over 75’s on death could be passed down to other family members and thereby circumnavigate Inheritance Tax, thus, the strategy of the “family SIPP” was born.

The treasury caught off balance were then deeply concerned that investors would opt for the ASP mainly because it allowed them to pass on assets when they died and predictably reacted with an inevitable clampdown to what they saw as abuse of a plan which was only intended for a few people of a certain religious belief.

The situation now, is that ASP is still available to all who are over 75 but the government watches and waits and maintains it’s position that it is still really only intended for the few and not the many!

And what of the clampdown, well there was the removal of the “death guarantee” but the change that drew most attention was the change whereby if you were to die under ASP and there are no dependants then any transfer, now called a Transfer Lump Sum Death (TLSDB) will no longer be an authorised payment and thus will be subject to an unauthorised payment tax charge of 70% and in addition an IHT levy of 40% will apply leaving a princely 18% left to be distributed.

Some would argue that this is punitive and beyond the pale but those of a different disposition may state “well something is better than nothing”. I will let you decide!

A second recent example, where industry over-enthusiasm has led to a government change of heart concerns the area of “Trivial Pensions”. It is my understanding from some reading in this area and from several very informative blogs that the government had planned to introduce simple rules when dealing with “trivial pensions”. The initial plan was that each pension scheme would be treated on its own merits. The concept was scrapped when some providers and advisers presented it as a tax planning opportunity for clients, to make payments, with tax relief, into several pension schemes and commute them all for cash. Unsurprisingly, the government clamped down on this and the final rules are as a result much more complex.

The changes involve ensuring the total pension funds for the individual are not more than 1% (currently £16,000) of the lifetime allowance (currently £1.6 million). This change is particularly regrettable, because in trying to benefit better-off pension investors, some in the industry have effectively made things much more difficult for those who will struggle to make ends meet in retirement.

We expect the government to behave responsibly in changing legislation, however, the industry must also ensure that it does not force the government’s hand by promoting ‘opportunities’ that we know it will find completely unacceptable.

What do you think?  Subscribe and join in with this and many other discussions today.


Distance Marketing Directive (DMD)

The government is currently facing a real headache with regard to the latest pension reform policy in the shape of a piece of European legislation.

The culprit is the Distance Marketing Directive (DMD), as this stops employers automatically enrolling their employees into contract-based pension arrangements, such as group stakeholder pension plans (GSHPs) and group personal pensions (GPPs).

No auto-enrollment means that these pension schemes would fail the new exempt scheme test under pensions reform, and employers instead would have to offer a trust-based scheme or (more likely) pay into personal accounts for their employees, come 2012.

Most observers would conclude that this would be a most unacceptable outcome.

GPPs are very popular within the industry and employers alike, and the take up of these plans is growing all the time as employers opt out of the more onerous trust-based defined contribution and benefit occupational schemes in favour of them.

Thankfully the Minister of State in charge of Pension Reform a certain James Purnell is well aware of the problem and sympathetic to the potential problems (as he alluded to at the Financial Adviser expo this May), but and there is always a but, he has at present no clear idea of a way forward. He is of course taking advice!

But the question is, how can a fix be found?

It may be possible for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to look at this piece of legislation and push to have it amended to allow auto-enrollment into GPPs and GSHPs while still meeting the principles of the Directive. Or, perhaps some other way at a more grass route level, involving the employee giving their prior consent to an employer.

One thing is clear however; allowing GPPs and GSHPs to pass the exempt scheme test is a problem that must be sorted.

Suggestions on a postcard!