Pensions - Articles - Government continues to reject pensions equality


BROADSTONE dismayed by lack of equality with paltry cost

 As the controversial same-sex marriage bill is debated, the government continues to reject pensions equality, which would be the least controversial element, if the Bill is passed. At a commons debate the cost of equality has been estimated at a paltry £18m (small in the greater context of the enormous pensions industry).

 David Brooks, Pensions Consultant at Broadstone Corporate Benefits commented:

 “As we expected, the cost impact on schemes and employers for providing statutory equal death benefits for same-sex and opposite married couples is a fraction of the cost of equalising GMP (the contracted-out benefits earned by individuals between 1978 and 1997). Estimates vary, but GMP equalisation could cost employers over £10bn in increased liabilities and £300m in administration costs. The government’s inconsistency here is very surprising as on one hand they call for gender equality but they have rejected sexual orientation equality with little justification.”
  

Back to Index


Similar News to this Story

4 ways completing a tax return can help boost your pension
Missing the Self-Assessment deadline not only risks a penalty for late filing but could cost individuals hundreds, if not thousands of pounds in uncla
DWP holds AE thresholds with GBP90bn of pensions expected
The DWP has issued its review of the Automatic Enrolment Earnings Trigger and Qualifying Earnings Band for 2025/26, retaining all three thresholds at
Response to Triple Lock means testing comments
Aegon has called for ‘a future focused debate on a sustainable state pension’ following comments on the Triple Lock by Conservative leader Kemi Badeno

Site Search

Exact   Any  

Latest Actuarial Jobs

Actuarial Login

Email
Password
 Jobseeker    Client
Reminder Logon

APA Sponsors

Actuarial Jobs & News Feeds

Jobs RSS News RSS

WikiActuary

Be the first to contribute to our definitive actuarial reference forum. Built by actuaries for actuaries.