Comparative pensions meaning

In this issue: Investigating criminal conduct Criminal procedure and evidence Appeal and judicial review Sentencing Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls Environmental offences Financial services and pensions offences Fraud, forgery, tax and theft offences Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences Insolvency offences and Companies Act offences Local authority prosecutions Money laundering Corporate Crime in Scotland International LexTalk®Corporate Crime: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Investigating criminal conduct UK to void NDAs that hinder crime reporting. On 28 March 2024, the government confirmed plans to ‘clarify’ the law so non-disclosure agreements that stop victims sharing suspected criminality with authorities will not be enforceable. See News Analysis: UK to nullify NDAs that stop people reporting crimes and LNB News 28/03/2024 84. Criminal procedure and evidence The British jury system: Liam...

The IA, in a letter to the FCA published on 18 October 2024, warned that the regulator’s plan to score pension providers with a traffic‑light style label risks stifling market innovation. It argued that schemes ought to be judged chiefly on delivery against their own strategic objectives, rather than set against other plans pursuing different aims. The letter expresses strong misgivings about the comparative elements of the package, noting that the potential downsides of receiving a red or amber mark, when measured against peers, would remove any clear motivation for providers to innovate within their investment offerings. The FCA’s consultation on a proposed value‑for‑money framework for defined contribution schemes closed on 17 October 2024. Under the proposals, pension providers would be assigned red, amber or green ratings—the ‘RAG’ approach—mirroring the colour coding used for food product grading. The IA said it was extremely concerned about comparative ratings stifling provider innovation and incentives...

This Practice Note summarises the principal factors and illustrative calculations for deciding whether to elect under section 425 or section 431 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 (ITEPA 2003), or to make no election, on acquiring restricted securities. For further background, see the following Practice Notes: What are restricted securities? Restricted securities—tax treatment and joint elections Guidance on making a valid restricted security election The question of whether a section 425 or section 431 election (or no election) should be made is examined using the example set out below. Factual background An incoming director of a private company pays £100 to subscribe for 100 shares in the company at par, provided as a ‘golden hello’. If, within five years of acquisition, the director does not meet specified performance conditions, resigns voluntarily, or is dismissed (including, but not limited to, for misconduct), the director must transfer the shares to a designated shareholder for an amount equal to the...

Practice Note This Practice Note includes references to case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). For guidance on whether EU judgments are binding on UK courts, consult Practice Note: Assimilated law — Assimilated case law. Please note that, while UK measures implementing directives form part of domestic law, the directives themselves are not. For further detail, see Practice Note: Assimilated law. A significant proportion of the leading authorities on discrimination and part-time workers centred on sex discrimination, reflecting that most part-time roles were held by women. Accordingly, claims could be framed as indirect sex discrimination even in the absence of specific protection for part-time workers. These cases are considered in the Practice Note: Sex discrimination for pension lawyers. This Practice Note examines the principal decisions in which the courts have dealt with claims relating to: comparative issues between part-time and full-time workers, regardless of the gender of the workers concerned...

This practice note applies solely to defined benefit occupational pension schemes Asset-backed contribution structures are one means of helping to cut deficits within pension schemes. They carry risks; however, sound professional advice and careful structuring can limit these. Appropriate advice helps identify pitfalls and shape a robust framework. Yet the central issue for the trustee and its advisers is whether entering an asset-backed contribution puts the trustee and scheme in a stronger position than committing to a lengthy recovery plan. Trustees should weigh comparative outcomes, timing and certainty before proceeding. Since 2008, when Marks & Spencer pioneered a property-backed contribution aimed at trimming its pension deficit by £500m, several prominent organisations—among them John Lewis, Sainsbury’s and Whitbread—have adopted similar approaches. Today, employers regard asset-backed contributions as an efficient method of financing rising shortfalls in defined benefit occupational pension schemes. For many, ABCs can complement, or replace, prolonged deficit repair in suitable circumstances thoughtfully. What is an asset-backed contribution arrangement? An asset-backed contribution (ABC) is a contractual funding...