The Automatic Enrolment Bill is no cure for the epidemic of under-saving
The recent royal assent to the Automatic Enrolment Bill marks a significant development in the UK pension landscape. There are notable changes that could shape the retirement savings framework for certain employers and employees but more needs to be done to fix the consistent under-saving for retirement that’s threatening to become an epidemic if not addressed sooner.
The Bill makes two changes. First, auto-enrolment is extended to those aged 18 to 22. Certain employers may now find more of their workforce eligible for auto-enrolment, provided they meet other criteria. Given the requirement to earn over £10,000 per annum to be eligible, only those in full-time work are likely to benefit, students with part-time jobs will likely still be ineligible for auto-enrolment.
Employers utilising the “qualifying earnings” definition for pension contribution calculations will witness a shift. Previously, contributions were calculated on salary between £6,240 and £50,270. The bill now mandates contributions from the first £1 of earnings. Although most employers do not employ the “qualifying earnings” model, those who do will experience increased contributions, impacting the pension savings of their workforce.
While widening the scope of auto-enrolment to include younger employees and removing the lower qualifying earnings threshold is a step forward, some limitations persist. The requirement for employees to earn over £10,000 annually to be within scope still excludes many part-time and multiple jobholding workers. Addressing the issue of under-saving remains a challenge, as the auto-enrolment minimum contributions may fall short of providing a comfortable retirement lifestyle. Recent research has shown that the current model of contributing 8% of annual pensionable earnings is not enough for the retirement lifestyle many aspire too. In a time of high cost of living, many would argue increasing saving for retirement isn’t not a priority.
There is a dilemma of encouraging higher contributions versus the risk of people opting-out or leaving their pension scheme. In the current economic climate, employees might prefer immediate financial benefits over long-term pension savings. Raising minimum contributions could be a viable solution. However, this approach requires careful phasing to ensure savers are willing to contribute more. Another option is to raise the minimum employer contribution, but that has effects on company profitability which has further ramifications for employees. It is not an easy fix.
The Automatic Enrolment Bill’s royal assent certainly brings welcome changes to the UK pension landscape. As employers and employees navigate the evolving landscape, a delicate balance between encouraging greater savings and addressing immediate financial needs must be struck. The phased implementation of minimum contribution increases and a nuanced approach to diverse employment scenarios will be crucial in ensuring the success of these pension reforms.
Rhiannon’s article was published in Employee Benefits, here.
The views in this article are intended for general information purposes only and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice. Arc Pensions Law and the author(s) are not responsible for any direct or indirect result arising from any reliance placed on content, including any loss, and exclude liability to the full extent. Always seek appropriate legal advice from a suitably qualified lawyer before taking, or avoiding taking, any action. If you have any questions on the points raised in the above, please do not hesitate to get in touch.