Will staff automatic pensions lead to mis-selling scandal?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Pensions Institute warned this week that the auto-enrolment process could cause widespread mis-selling for millions.
Under the scheme, which began at the start of this month, up to nine million workers will be automatically recruited into company pension schemes in the next few years. But the institute warned that anyone joining an existing defined-contribution scheme, could be hit by high charges and poor returns.
In a report entitled Caveat Venditor, the academics said: "Charges for default funds in large new auto-enrolment schemes generally represent good value, but tens of thousands of employees currently are trapped in the funds of older schemes with high and disguised charges.
"There is a very real danger that smaller employers will use these older schemes for auto-enrolment, potentially bringing millions of new pension investors into poor value default funds."
Tom McPhail of Hargreaves Lansdown agreed that there are potential problems. "There is a risk of regulatory failure leading to poor member outcomes," he said. But he criticised the report for overstating the risk of workers ending up in high-charging legacy pensions.
"Instead, the report should have addressed the importance of employers providing their employees with an effective shopping-around process at the point of retirement," said Mr McPhail.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments