Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related Glossary Terms

CASE STUDY

“In some areas of research there were also significant time savings. You get to what you are looking for more quickly, which all goes to the value of the product.”

Harper Mcleod

Access all documents on Age-related rebate

Age-related rebate meaning

What does Age-related rebate mean?
A former payment made by HMRC’s National Insurance Contributions Office (NICO) to certain contracted-out pension arrangements, calculated as a percentage of relevant earnings that increased with the member’s age to reflect the cost of replacing State additional pension rights. In practice, age-related rebates were credited to appropriate personal pension schemes (including appropriate stakeholder pensions), contracted-out money purchase schemes (COMP) and contracted-out mixed benefit schemes (COMBS) for members who had contracted out of SERPS/S2P. The rates and age bands were provided for in UK social security legislation and set periodically by statutory instruments (rebate orders) following reports from the Government Actuary. These payments ceased for defined contribution contracting-out from 6 April 2012. All remaining contracting-out ended on 6 April 2016 with the introduction of the new State Pension. Usage and legal effect were consistent across England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The term is UK pensions terminology and has no direct counterpart in Irish pensions law. Practically, “age-related rebate” is now encountered in historic scheme administration, HMRC reconciliation exercises, transfer and benefit audits, mis-selling/redress cases, and when identifying or tracing protected rights funds that were derived from contracting-out and subsequently converted into ordinary pension rights.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Age-related rebate

NEWS
Planning weekly: London housing package - 50% borough CIL cut; s106/CIL reform; NSIP updates - PINS tracker, Wales Act; Green Belt 'exceptional circumstances' ruling; new towns agency proposal (England and Wales)

In this issue: Planning conditions, obligations and CIL Planning for nationally significant infrastructure Planning policy Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Related Documents Planning conditions, obligations and CIL Planning conditions, obligations and CIL Government and Mayor unveil temporary London housing support package with 50% CIL cut and relaxed design rules On 23 October 2025, the government and the Mayor of London released ‘Homes for London: A package of support for housebuilding in the capital’. The agreement brings in time-limited 50% reductions to borough-level community infrastructure levy (CIL), a fresh fast-track pathway for projects with 20% affordable homes, and looser London Plan design benchmarks—each intended to re-energise halted residential output across the city. The bundle blends fiscal support, policy latitude and additional mayoral powers—each crafted to make it simpler to kick-start schemes. CIL relief: The flagship step is a temporary 50% reduction in borough-level CIL for eligible brownfield housing proposals delivering a...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Age-related rebate

PRACTICE NOTES
Reintroduced Coronavirus Statutory Sick Pay Rebate Scheme (21 Dec 2021–17 Mar 2022): eligibility, claims, HMRC guidance, caps, TUPE, CJRS interaction, record-keeping and tax [Archived]

This Practice Note reviews the Coronavirus Statutory Sick Pay Rebate Scheme (CSSPRS), temporarily reinstated by the Statutory Sick Pay (Coronavirus) (Funding of Employers’ Liabilities) Regulations 2022 (SSP Funding Regs 2022), SI 2022/5, in force from 14 January 2022. The reintroduced CSSPRS applied to coronavirus-related sickness absence between 21 December 2021 and 17 March 2022. Employers were able to reclaim coronavirus-related SSP via the online service until 24 March 2022, which has since closed. For further detail, see: LNB News 25/02/2022 13... Key points to note The government’s plan to reimburse coronavirus-related statutory sick pay was first outlined in the Spring Budget 2020 (see News: Special temporary measures for Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) refunds announced in Budget). Section 39(1) of the Coronavirus Act 2020 inserted a new funding mechanism into the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 (SSCBA 1992) to meet employers’ SSP liabilities connected to coronavirus. SSCBA 1992, s 159B(1) authorises regulations so that HM Revenue and Customs can fund employers’ statutory sick...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Post Danmark II (CJEU, 2015): AEC test not required and no appreciability threshold for dominant undertakings' rebate schemes under Article 102 TFEU

CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub sets out the position as at the judgment of 6 October 2015 and is not being maintained. For further details, see: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases. Case facts Outline A reference from Denmark’s Sø- og Handelsret (the national maritime and commercial court) was submitted to the Court of Justice seeking a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU. Among other matters, it asked whether, when assessing the anti-competitive character of rebate schemes under Article 102 TFEU, the law requires a price/cost evaluation comparing the dominant undertaking’s conduct with that of an equally efficient competitor (the ‘as-efficient-competitor’ test), and also whether any exclusionary effect arising from the rebate arrangement must be ‘appreciable’ in order to fall within Article 102 TFEU...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Intel v Commission (T-286/09 RENV): EU General Court annuls conditional rebate findings and €1.06bn fine for AEC errors; naked restrictions upheld under Article 102 TFEU

CASE HUB NOTE-appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 240/222 ARCHIVED -this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 26 January 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases. Case facts Referral back to the General Court followed the Court of Justice’s ruling in Case C- 413/14 Intel v Commission, an appeal against the General Court’s earlier judgment that had upheld the Commission’s decision of 13 May 2009 (Case AT.37990) finding an infringement and imposing a fine on Intel for alleged abuse of dominance via conditional rebates and loyalty payments. Outcome On 26 January 2022, the General Court delivered its judgment, annulling the Commission’s decision in part. It held, amongst other matters, that the Commission’s assessment was incomplete and failed to establish, to the required legal standard, that the rebates in question were capable of having, or likely to have, anti-competitive effects. Parties Applicant: Intel Corporation (Intel) ...

Read More Right Arrow