As the pensions review gets underway, there’s one section of the market that’s out of scope – defined benefit (DB) schemes. The terms of reference for the review which were published over the summer state: “Ongoing policy development with respect to defined benefit workplace pensions schemes will remain separate from the review.”
To exclude such a large section of the market from the government’s review in some ways feels counterintuitive. Collectively DB schemes have £1.4 trillion of assets under management and 8.9 million members.
Whilst 91% are closed to new members, the sector will remain a significant part of the pensions landscape for many years to come.
What’s the government’s rationale?
Given the maturity of the schemes, it’s likely that most will be seeking to implement investment strategies that match their assets to their liabilities. Many will have negative cash-flows as they pay out more in benefits than they receive in returns or deficit recovery payments from their sponsors. As such, they will increasingly be moving more into bond and bond-like investments which feature a regular contracted cash flow or payment.
In terms of the government’s productive finance agenda, it’s certainly true that DB offers much less potential than DC and LGPS schemes that are cash flow positive with a fundamentally different member base.
Nonetheless, DB scheme remain large investors in the UK. They are the biggest buyers of UK gilts, providing the government with huge sums of money to spend on its wider political priorities. They also support the UK through investments in corporate credit, direct lending to SMEs, infrastructure and income generating property. With this in mind, retaining an ongoing dialogue with the DB sector is in everyone’s interest.
They can also find it harder to navigate the highly intermediated nature of the UK pensions system. All this results in significant value leakage, which could be addressed by greater collaboration and / or consolidation of the DB market.
With regulatory pressure growing on pension schemes to agree their endgames, greater certainty on the direction of travel on surplus would be welcome.
The DB sector is out of scope of the government’s pensions review but it shouldn’t be forgotten.