Contribution meaning

THIS CHECKLIST APPLIES TO OCCUPATIONAL PENSION SCHEMES This checklist highlights the key actions involved in bringing an occupational pension scheme to a close—whether a defined benefit (DB) or defined contribution (DC) arrangement—and aligns with winding-up guidance from the Pensions Regulator (TPR). For fuller detail on these steps, see Practice Notes: Winding up a defined benefit (DB) occupational pension scheme; Winding up a defined contribution (DC) occupational pension scheme; and Winding-up an occupational pension scheme—statutory disclosure from 6 April 2014, reporting and record-keeping requirements. Data cleansing and reconciling records Once trustees decide to wind up the scheme, they should carry out a thorough data cleansing exercise. As this can be lengthy, it should, where practicable, be completed before formal winding-up starts. Where trustees cannot control the timing of the wind-up, cleansing and planning should begin as early as possible within the winding-up process. As part of the data cleansing exercise, trustees should: Check and reconcile member records. Where the scheme is a former contracted-out...

Planning of merger Secure an 'in principle' commitment from the trustees and employers of both the transferring and receiving schemes to proceed with the merger. Examine the governing provisions for each scheme to verify that the transfer of assets, liabilities and members can take place; amend those provisions where necessary and practical. Confirm whether the schemes' benefit structures align and are compatible. Assess if the contracted-out status of either scheme creates any issues. Review the funding positions of both schemes and obtain actuarial advice; determine whether an employer top-up contribution is required. ...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. This chronological timeline outlines every UK and EU development concerning the regulation of crowdfunding. It also covers the various forms of crowdfunding and the differing approaches adopted by UK and EU regulators, legislators and industry groups towards crowdfunding. Crowdfunding (sometimes called ‘crowdsourcing’ or ‘crowd financing’) operates on the basis that people seeking finance, such as entrepreneurs, present projects or businesses on an internet platform, and members of the public provide money through that platform. There is no ceiling on any single person’s contribution; however, in contrast to more established fundraising methods, many platforms enable participants to give as little as £10. Usually, the entrepreneur must set a target sum and a cut-off date, and will not obtain the funds from the platform unless that target is achieved by the stated deadline...

CureVac On 27 March 2025, CureVac announced that the EPO has formally permitted it to retain a revised version of its mRNA technology patent. As of 28 March 2025, the EPO’s full written decision was not yet publicly available. In a statement, Alexander Zehnder, CureVac’s Chief Executive, said the bid to secure the patent is a ‘multi-step process’ in Europe and the US. He added that the ruling is a significant milestone on a journey they expect will result in acknowledgement of CureVac’s substantial contribution to safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines as one of the earliest pioneers of mRNA technology...

The FTT decision As noted in a previous Insight, the proprietor of Vista Tower ('Grey') applied for an RCO against the building’s original developer and 95 additional parties who met the definition of ‘associated persons’ due to shared directors during 2017 to 2022. The owner requested an order requiring the respondents to cover both historic and forthcoming costs to rectify fire safety defects, estimated at over £20m. The FTT granted that relief, on a joint and several liability basis, against 75 respondents. The appeal Certain respondents appealed on these grounds: whether the Tribunal can make RCOs rendering multiple respondents jointly and severally liable for the same overall sum, or whether it must make individual orders against each respondent for a specifically identified amount. whether the Tribunal misdirected itself on the “just and equitable” test, given that for many respondents there was no demonstration that they participated in the relevant development or obtained remuneration from it, and that the Tribunal improperly required respondents to...

Mercer highlighted three central problems: inadequate retirement saving, modest performance from long-term pots, and limited participation by savers. It called on policymakers to widen auto-enrolment in pension schemes and to lift the statutory minimum contribution rates. According to Mercer — one of the four operating subsidiaries within the global professional services firm Marsh McLennan Companies Inc. — such reforms would raise future retirees’ living standards and strengthen the UK’s economic resilience. Phil Parkinson, the firm’s UK head of wealth, voiced unease about the system’s current path, stressing that many are putting aside too little to secure a comfortable later life. ‘We are inching towards a cliff edge for pensions and long-term saving, yet there remains a chance to tackle these issues,’ Parkinson noted in the years ahead...

The Pensions Regulator (the Regulator) The Regulator is an arm’s-length public body set up under the Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004). Its authority to impose contribution notices and financial support directions appears in PeA 2004, ss 38–50. Although the Act does not use the label, these provisions are widely known as the Regulator’s ‘moral hazard’ powers. Their purpose is to counter the ‘moral hazard’ arising from the Pension Protection Fund (PPF): the possibility that corporate groups might organise their structures so as to heighten exposure within their pension schemes, comfortable that the PPF would intervene if the employer entered insolvency. The principal moral hazard tools—and the only ones exercised so far—are the power to issue a contribution notice (CN) and the power to issue a financial support direction (FSD). A CN compels the recipient to pay a specified amount into a defined benefit occupational pension scheme. A CN can be issued where the criteria in PeA 2004, s 38 are satisfied. These mechanisms exist to deter behaviour that would...

Introduction to Musharaka—a profit and loss sharing instrument of Islamic finance At the heart of Islamic finance lies the maxim ‘no profit without risk’, ie no person should realise a gain unless they bear some degree of risk. This concept is most clearly shown through the application of profit and loss sharing instruments. For further detail on this principle, see Practice Note: Key principles of Islamic finance. This Practice Note examines Musharaka, an Islamic finance technique originally founded on profit and loss sharing and broadly analogous to a conventional partnership arrangement. In straightforward terms, a Musharaka is a partnership customarily entered into by two or more parties, not necessarily for a fixed term, and most commonly for the purpose of undertaking a business venture. In a typical Musharaka, each participant makes a capital contribution to the venture and profits and losses are shared between them. A comparable Islamic finance arrangement premised on the same profit and loss sharing rule is Mudaraba, a special form of partnership in which only...

This Practice Note sets out the principal steps for properly bringing to an end a defined contribution (DC) occupational pension scheme—also described as a money purchase occupational pension arrangement or a trust-based defined contribution plan. Throughout this Practice Note, this type of arrangement is termed a ‘DC scheme’. The guidance applies across a range of DC schemes, including trusts that sit outside the authorised master trust framework and small self-administered pension schemes (SSASs), although the latter may, in certain cases, be excluded from particular statutory obligations or requirements. This Practice Note does not cover the winding-up of any: an ‘authorised master trust’ under the Pension Schemes Act 2017 (PSA 2017)—for further detailed information, please see Practice Note: The authorisation and supervisory regime for master trusts, contract-based DC arrangements (eg group personal pension arrangements)—for further details and guidance, see Practice Note: Winding up of personal pension schemes Statute makes distinct and specific provision for hybrid schemes (combining defined benefit (DB) and DC...

1 The aim of the absence management strategy 1.1 Decrease the annual absence rate from [ insert rate, eg 3.5% ] to [ insert rate, eg 2.0% ]. 1.2 [ Lessen the negative effect on service delivery arising from the firm’s high level of short, irregular absences. ] 1.3 Enhance the handling of long-term sickness so its contribution to the firm’s absence rate is lowered. 2 Key trends and causes of absence over the past 12 months 2.1 [ One member of staff has been away for six months with long-term illness linked to stress (following the breakdown of marriage). No meetings have taken place yet owing to the sensitive nature of the sickness. ]...

1 Reserve Fund 1.1 Definitions In this clause, the following further definitions apply: Fund Account – an interest‑bearing [ trust ] account [ opened with [ name of bank ] ] held in the Landlord’s name; Reserve Fund – a fund that the Landlord may, though is not obliged to, set up and keep from time to time to receive and hold a Reserve Fund Contribution; Reserve Fund Contribution – the sum (if any) in each Service Charge Period that the Landlord [ (acting reasonably) ] determines to be a fair annual payment by the Tenant towards the advance funding of [ providing the Services OR regularly‑recurring major items of [ the Service Costs OR service charge expenditure ] ] [ (including, but not limited to, repair, decoration, maintenance and renewal) ], and including any VAT payable where the Landlord cannot obtain a credit for that VAT from HM Revenue & Customs...

This Agreement is dated [ insert date ] Parties [ Insert name of investee company ], a company incorporated in England and Wales with number [ insert company number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ], with brief particulars set out in Schedule 1 (the Company) The several persons whose names and addresses appear in Part A of Schedule 2 (together, the Founders) [ The several persons whose names and addresses appear in Part B of Schedule 2 (together, the Other Shareholders) and ] [ Insert name of investor ] [ incorporated in England and Wales under number [ insert company number ] whose registered office is at OR of ] [ insert address ] (the Investor) [ (each of the Company, the Founders, the Other Shareholders and the Investor is a Party and, together, the Company, the Founders, the Other Shareholder and the Investor are the Parties). ] BACKGROUND The Investor has agreed to...

The nature of joint and several liability As outlined in the Practice Note on joint, several, and joint and several liability, joint and several liability arises when two or more parties to the same contract give a promise to the same person, while, at the same time, each of them separately makes that identical promise to that same person, within the same contractual arrangement...

A Post-Employment Notice Pay (PENP) calculation It uses a set calculation that lets employers identify the taxable portion of a severance package on termination of employment when the basic salary actually paid falls short of what would have been earned had proper or full notice been worked. The method takes basic pay, multiplies it by the remaining notice days, then divides by the number of days in the relevant pay period, before deducting in full any amounts paid net of tax, except for holiday pay and termination bonuses. The requirement to perform a PENP calculation stems from reforms that took effect from 6 April 2018, making all such payments in lieu of notice chargeable to tax and national insurance...

This query asks whether the owner of the land (the servient owner) on which a septic tank currently sits, and across which a neighbour has acquired prescriptive drainage rights, is entitled to replace that tank with a modern treatment unit, and whether the neighbour benefiting from those rights (the dominant owner) can be obliged to contribute to the costs of installing and maintaining the replacement apparatus. Can the servient owner replace the tank? On the basis that the dominant owner holds a prescriptive right to drain into the septic tank (as stated), the initial issue is the servient owner’s entitlement to substitute the existing septic tank with a contemporary equivalent. Provided the works are organised so that the neighbour’s drainage rights are not hindered to an actionable extent, both during installation and thereafter, there is, in principle, no reason to object to the servient owner upgrading their own installation in this manner...