Questions remain unanswered around defined benefit (DB) scheme funding, according to analysis by Lane Clark & Peacock (LCP).
Pension schemes have been “shoehorned” into valuing liabilities against gilts, creating a “herd mentality” that does not reflect scheme funding accurately, says PwC.
Professor Michael Bromwich explores the key differences between technical provisions and self-sufficiency, and how they can relate to a long-term objective.
Nigel Cayless looks at TPR's proposed funding regime and whether a more objective approach is on the way
Oversimplification must be avoided in The Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) proposed revision of the defined benefit (DB) scheme funding code, and a third way might be necessary, the industry has said.
Both open and closed defined benefit (DB) schemes will be given the clarity and flexibility they need under the proposed revision of the funding code, says The Pensions Regulator (TPR).
The Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) proposal for a ‘fast track’ approach to defined benefit (DB) scheme funding regulation is being “used too broadly” and in danger of suffering from “mission creep”, says Aon.
As TPR’s consultation on the principles underlying the revised code of practice for DB funding enters the final straight, David Fairs set outs why you should give the watchdog your views.
The Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) proposed revisions to the defined benefit (DB) funding code could reduce member security, Lane Clark & Peacock (LCP) has warned.
An “early warning” tool has been launched by Hymans Robertson to help defined benefit (DB) schemes understand which potential regulatory approach will be more suitable for their current funding strategy.
The economic crisis caused by Covid-19 has reinforced The Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) view that its defined benefit (DB) funding principles are “right”, says David Fairs.
It would not be appropriate to rethink or completely abandon the planned revision to the defined benefit (DB) funding code, The Pensions Regulator (TPR).
David Fairs set outs why the regulator believes the economic fallout from Covid-19 is not a reason to abandon revisions to the DB funding regime.
A poll of UK defined benefit pension schemes shows many are no longer in support of The Pension Regulator’s (TPR) proposed funding code after a second look at its implications, according to Aon.
With the DB funding code set for a major revision at the same time as upgraded powers for the regulator, Paul McGlone says it is important to watch how these interact with each other.
A two-track approach to DB funding valuations is expected to improve regulatory compliance while maintaining a level of scheme-specific flexibility where needed. James Phillips looks at some of the proposals
The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has set out plans for twin-track defined benefit (DB) funding rules mixing clearer regulatory expectations with scheme-specific flexibility.
The industry has positive expectations for The Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) forthcoming funding code for defined benefit (DB) pension schemes, according to Aon.
The Pensions Regulator (TPR) will launch the first of a two-part consultation on a revised defined benefit (DB) funding code in March, it has told PP.
The industry is urging the government to prioritise combatting pension scams in 2020, according to research by the Society of Pension Professionals (SPP).
Matthew Harrison looks at what the forthcoming defined benefit funding code of practice means for pension schemes