Insights and Analysis:Are you being paid to wait?

Recently there’s been growing industry talk around the idea of UK pension schemes being encouraged to ‘run on’ rather than securing liabilities through bulk purchase annuity (BPA) contracts.

Before jumping in, it's worth stepping back and looking at the bigger picture—especially the potential conflicts of interest among providers and advisers that often go unspoken.

Why insure?

Sponsors are often tired of increasing costs and contributions, as well as balance sheet volatility unrelated to core operations.

However, buying bulk annuities can be costly and potentially leaves value on the table. Furthermore, the pricing structure of insurers is opaque, making it hard to challenge or negotiate prices, particular for smaller schemes.

There can also be a commercial desire and potential pressure from sponsors to ‘get a deal done’.

Trustees play a crucial role here in ensuring value for members while balancing the needs of other stakeholders.

What drives the pricing of bulk annuities?

Fundamentally, pricing is based on:

Yields on liability-matched duration assets held by insurers:

  • Market-risk free rates
  • Credit spreads

The insurance premium on top, which soaks up:

  • Cost of reinsurance (especially for longevity risk)
  • Ongoing running costs (impacted by limited number of qualified professionals)
  • Insurer profits (impacted by appetite for new business)

Additionally, and perhaps not as often acknowledged insurers also typically benefit over the lifetime of a BPA contract. This can be material (late teens to low 30s % return on capital). As such, there is a queue of capital waiting to back existing and new insurance providers.

The mechanics of the transaction and obscured insurer profits

Trustees hand over liabilities and assets (broadly equivalent to government bonds backing the liabilities) to an insurer. The insurer then purchases (cheaper) investment-grade credit securities. This provides the insurer with an upside of the annual credit spread, on top of their quoted premiums.

This additional profit is released over time to the insurer. And, although hard to predict, could be as high as 10% of the assets.

Recently-announced regulatory changes may impact insurers’ ability to generate increased profits from their underlying assets. This may pass through to pricing over time.

The significant returns for bulk annuity providers might lead to buyer’s remorse, if pricing drops or alternative solutions emerge.

Why some schemes might consider running-on

Larger schemes might consider running-on in a self-sufficient manner to benefit from the somewhat unclear upside of extra money. The question then is who should receive this benefit – sponsors (and therefore the government through surplus taxation), members, or both?

Many schemes have benefited from insuring their pension schemes and providing ongoing member security, leaving them free to focus on the member experience.

For smaller schemes, insuring still makes sense, but it’s not always appropriate for everyone. Schemes and sponsors will want to see a financial benefit from delaying execution that outweighs the costs of running on. This includes all legal, actuarial, investment advisory, asset management, trustee and other ongoing costs.

As a rule of thumb only, schemes below £100m, that are in a position to insure, will likely have less incentive to run-on given the size of their fixed operational costs.

What should schemes do?

In both corporate and pension trustee boardrooms there is sometimes a reticence to ‘be the first’ or step out of line with what peers are doing. But, given the importance of getting this right for many suitably invested schemes it could pay to be patient.

This leads to the need for considerations around how to invest in the final years approaching a decision point. This is likely to keep trustees of such schemes busy over the coming years.

Which brings things back somewhat to the potential for conflicts of interest with the whole ecosystem of trustees and advisers who might wish to continue their roles into the future, or execute lucrative transactions.

Ian McKnight, Senior Adviser - Cartwright Pension Trusts


Cartwright Latest Article: 2024 CMI Mortality Projection Model

Meet our team

Sam Roberts, Investment Director

Sam Roberts: Meet our Investment Director busy and find out what keep him busy

Robin Pearce, Operations Director

Robin Pearce: Find out more about our Operations Director

Jo Causer, Actuary

Jo Causer: Jo has been an actuary with Cartwright for more than 25 years, find out more

Tony Grist, Commercial Director

Tony Grist: Meet our Commercial Director, find out more about Tony and his love of a certain football club


"Cartwright are a hidden gem in terms of pension scheme providers."


Recent feedback from a former Chair of Trustees

 

Call now on 01252 894883 to speak to a member of our team or use the form below to send an enquiry.

Send a message

To discuss your specific requirements with a member of our team, please start by sending us a brief message or, if your enquiry is more urgent, call our Head Office on 01252 894883

Please tick to receive news and updates from Cartwright. Your personal details will NOT be shared with any third party organisations. Click here to view our Privacy Policy.


Please confirm you are not a robot and then click below to send your email.

Accreditations and Memberships

Bitcoin Policy Investor in Customers PASA Member Carbon Neutral Commitment UN Principals for Responsible Investing Quality Assurance Scheme and Actuaries Code