Authorised employer payment meaning

Under the Finance Act 2004 (FA 2004) and its associated regulations, payments made by a registered pension scheme to, or on behalf of, a member or an employer are categorised as either: authorised payments unauthorised payments Any payment that is not an authorised payment will be treated as unauthorised, unless it falls within a statutory exception; moreover, certain types of payment are expressly identified as unauthorised. Unauthorised payments—consequences Subject to their own rules, registered pension schemes may make unauthorised payments Unauthorised payments typically trigger tax charges for both the recipient and the scheme, and can in the end result in de-registration, causing the loss of the scheme’s tax-privileged status Reporting obligations apply to schemes where unauthorised payments have occurred Benefits offered under registered pension schemes are generally designed to prevent unauthorised payments arising...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—12 February 2026 In this issue: CPR updates Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Road traffic accidents Sports injuries Claims involving a fatality Claims involving a mentally incapacitated claimant Costs and funding Employer&39;s liability Abuse and criminal injuries LexisNexis® Quantum Portal LexTalk® PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts LexisNexis® Webinars Useful information CPR updates 193rd Practice Direction update—in force various dates The Master of the Rolls and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice have authorised the 193rd Practice Direction (PD) update to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). See: LNB News 10/02/2026 26. Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2026 The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2026, SI 2026/97, modify the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. Most provisions take effect on 6 April 2026, with two changes commencing on dates to be set by other legislation. See: LNB News...

Ways of providing death-in-service benefits Employers commonly provide their staff with death-in-service benefits (often referred to as 'life assurance' or 'life cover' benefits). This protection is ordinarily limited to employees (hence the term 'death in service', reflecting the label itself), although in certain situations an employer may decide to extend the benefit beyond retirement. Employers can deliver these benefits in three ways: via a dedicated trust-based arrangement that, while registered as a pension scheme for the purposes of Part 4 of the Finance Act 2004 (FA 2004), provides only death-in-service benefits—such arrangements are frequently known as 'life cover only schemes', 'death-in-service schemes' or 'standalone life assurance schemes', and no other benefits through a registered pension scheme (usually an occupational pension scheme) in which the death-in-service benefits form part of the broader benefit structure of the scheme as a whole. In this type of arrangement or model, a scheme member may receive: both death benefits (including death-in-service benefits) together with...

A registered pension scheme may provide benefits without an overall ceiling. Nevertheless, under the Finance Act 2004 (FA 2004), where a scheme makes an unauthorised payment, tax charges arise for both the recipient and the scheme unless a specific exception applies (though, in certain situations, individuals and companies may seek from HMRC a discharge of liability for those charges where appropriate). For additional detail, see Authorised and unauthorised payments and Unauthorised payments: tax charges and reporting requirements, together with the associated reporting obligations outlined there. Exceptions in special circumstances At times, pension schemes make mistakes that lead to unauthorised payments being issued. There are also situations where making an unauthorised payment is necessary to ensure a beneficiary is treated equitably. Accordingly, there are several exceptions to the standard rules governing unauthorised payments. Such exceptions apply only in particular, defined circumstances...

Before 6 April 2014, where a claimant succeeded before an employment tribunal, the tribunal’s remit was limited to granting the available remedies for the particular claim and making costs orders (see Practice Note: Costs in the employment tribunal). It could not impose a sanction on the respondent employer for the breach of employment law itself. As of 6 April 2014, section 12A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (ETA 1996) introduced a statutory power for tribunals to require any respondent employer to pay a financial penalty where a worker’s rights have been breached with aggravating features. For contraventions commencing on or after 6 April 2019, the ceiling for such penalties is £20,000 (see: How the financial penalty is calculated below). With effect from 6 April 2016, ETA 1996, s 37F empowered enforcement officers, appointed or authorised by the Secretary of State, to issue financial penalty notices to employers who do not pay an employment tribunal award or a settlement sum agreed following Acas conciliation. For further detail, see: Financial penalties...