Pensions Act 2014 meaning

THIS CHECKLIST APPLIES TO DEFINED BENEFIT SCHEMES ONLY Schemes which require a summary funding statement Trustees of a defined benefit arrangement must draw up and distribute a summary funding statement to the scheme’s members and beneficiaries where the scheme: is an occupational pension scheme that meets the requirements in Schedule 1, paragraph 1 of the Occupational and Personal Pension Schemes (Disclosure of Information) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/2734 (the Disclosure Regs 2013). For further details, see Disclosure requirements applicable to occupational and personal pension schemes after 5 April 2014—Scope of the 2013 Disclosure Regulations; and falls within the scope of Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004...

This Checklist This Checklist outlines several principal steps that schemes must undertake with effect from 24 July 2014 to meet the requirements of section 29 of the Pensions Act 2011 (“section 29”). That provision revises the meaning of money purchase benefits in section 181 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993, with the effect that some categories of benefit cease to be money purchase. For further detail on the impact of the updated statutory definition of money purchase benefits on schemes, refer to Practice Note: Money purchase benefits—the transitional regulations [Archived]...

In this issue: Tax treatment Regulatory Budgets, Autumn Statements and Finance Bills Corporate governance Useful information Dates for your diary Weekly highlights from other practice areas Tax treatment FTT rules that shares issued by the appellant were employment-related securities, and that disposals above market value triggered income tax and NICs (CooperVision Lens Care Ltd v HMRC). The UK First-tier Tribunal (Tax) for the most part dismissed the appellant’s challenge to HMRC’s conclusion that it ought to have operated PAYE and accounted for Class 1 National Insurance contributions on sums paid to three of the four shareholders on the company’s sale in 2014. The shareholders had, between themselves, agreed a non-proportionate division of the consideration, under which certain majority holders took a larger slice than they would have received on a strict pro rata basis. HMRC maintained that the uplift over market value was taxable as income and subject to NICs under Chapter 3D of Part 7 of...

Summary The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman dismissed a complaint about a scheme’s due diligence when making a discretionary transfer to a remote HMRC‑registered arrangement. The Deputy decided the scheme owed no duty—under statute, guidance, general law or any assumed responsibility—to investigate the receiving scheme or to judge whether the transfer served the member’s best interests. Although there were warning signs, the trustees were entitled to proceed with a discretionary transfer once the scheme rules and section 95 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 (PSA 1993) had been satisfied, and they were not required to follow The Pensions Regulator’s suggested due‑diligence measures. This decision indicates it is now challenging for members to succeed in disputes concerning pre‑2021 transfers. What were the facts? Mr S was a member of the BMW UK Operations Pension Scheme (the Scheme). In 2014, he sought to transfer from the Scheme to the Uniway Systems Retirement Benefit Scheme (the Receiving Scheme). The Scheme included a discretionary transfer provision...

Original news Mr S (CAS-78487-F8S2)—7 October 2024 Summary The Pensions Ombudsman dismissed a complaint concerning a transfer into a pension liberation arrangement. Despite flaws in the scheme’s transfer procedures, the Ombudsman concluded the complainant would have proceeded even if extra warnings had been issued. The determination underscores the need to assess whether any gaps in the due diligence process would truly have influenced a member’s decision to transfer... What were the facts? Mr S was a deferred member of the Asda Group Pension Scheme (the Scheme). In 2014, he received an unsolicited call from an unregulated provider promoting a pension scheme featuring an appealing hotel investment. Mr S asked the Scheme to provide transfer details to an FCA-authorised adviser. He was to act as trustee of the receiving scheme...

Meaning of ‘non-executive director’ The broad definition of ‘director’ is not closed. Under the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), a director is any person who occupies the office of director, whatever title they hold. Accordingly, this covers both executive and non-executive directors (NEDs). Executive directors are typically authorised, either by the company’s constitution or by authority delegated from the board, to manage the company’s day-to-day affairs, and they usually have a full-time service contract. NEDs generally: have no executive powers play a pivotal role in the company’s corporate governance are not employees of the company There are a number of challenges around granting shares to NEDs. This Practice Note considers the issues to assess when offering shares or share-based remuneration to NEDs, including: the potential impact on the NED’s independence the share dealing provisions of Assimilated Regulation (EU) 596/2014 for the UK, and the Market Abuse Regulation (Regulation (EU) 596/2014) previously and for the EU ...

THIS PRACTICE NOTE RELATES TO REGISTERED PENSION SCHEMES By means of Schedule 4 to the Finance Act 2016 (FA 2016), the government brought in an allowance protection regime designed to sit alongside the cut in the lifetime allowance from £1.25m to £1m on 6 April 2016. Termed fixed protection 2016 (FP 2016), it mirrors earlier fixed protection regimes respectively launched on 6 April 2012 (fixed protection 2012, or simply ‘fixed protection’) and 6 April 2014 (fixed protection 2014). This Practice Note focuses on FP 2016, which is the subject of this Practice Note. The original purpose of FP 2016 was to give transitional protection to people who, before 6 April 2014, had already accumulated pension savings above £1m, or who expected to do so on the basis that the lifetime allowance would be maintained at no less than £1.25m. Although the lifetime allowance was removed with effect from 6 April 2024, FP 2016 still delivers limited transitional safeguards regarding an individual’s rights to (i) the lump sum allowance, (ii)...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. Alongside the civil/regulatory approach to market abuse, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) previously contained two criminal offences for making misleading statements and engaging in misleading practices under FSMA 2000, s 397. These offences were revoked by s 95 of the Financial Services Act 2012 (FSA 2012). That said, FSMA 2000, s 397 still applies to offences committed before the FSA 2012 came into force on 1 April 2013; conduct after that date is brought under the offences set out in FSA 2012, ss 89–91. For an outline of the civil/regulatory market abuse regime prior to the introduction of Market Abuse Regulation (EU) 596/2014, see Practice Note: Market Abuse—pre Market Abuse Regulation. For details on the Market Abuse Regulation, see Practice Notes: Market Abuse Regulation (MAR)—essentials [Archived], Market Abuse Regulation (MAR)—timeline, UK Market Abuse Regulation (UK MAR)—one minute guide and News Analysis: Top 10 key changes introduced by the Market Abuse Regulation...