Skip to main content
The Actuary: The magazine of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries - return to the homepage Logo of The Actuary website
  • Search
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on LinkedIn
  • Visit @TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Visit the website of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries Logo of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries

Main navigation

  • News
  • Features
    • General Features
    • Interviews
    • Students
    • Opinion
  • Topics
  • Knowledge
    • Business Skills
    • Careers
    • Events
    • Predictions by The Actuary
    • Whitepapers
    • Moody's - Climate Risk Insurers series
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
  • Jobs
  • IFoA
    • CEO Comment
    • IFoA News
    • People & Social News
    • President Comment
  • Archive
Quick links:
  • Home
  • The Actuary Issues
  • April 2013
04

Scottish independence 'would involve major pensions costs'

Open-access content Friday 26th April 2013 — updated 5.13pm, Wednesday 29th April 2020

A ‘yes’ vote for Scottish independence could have ‘substantial’ funding implications for pension scheme sponsors, according to a report published today by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.

2

Scottish independence would also require the creation of a separate Pension Protection Fund, the accountancy body said in Scotland's pensions future: what pensions arrangements would Scotland need?

Under European Union solvency requirements, schemes operating across an independent Scotland (assuming it joins the EU) and the rest of the UK would be classed as 'cross-border' and therefore subject to a host of new rules. These include having to fully fund their liabilities at all times and eliminate deficits immediately, rather than through a staged recovery plan as is currently the case for UK schemes.

'The potential impact on funding requirements for employers operating defined benefit or hybrid schemes across the UK is likely to be substantial, although we have not been able to ascertain the number of schemes which would be affected,' the report said.

Employers would also have to conduct annual, rather than triennial actuarial variations, placing an additional regulatory and cost burden on schemes, it added.

In the immediate aftermath of a 'yes' vote, the Scottish Government should continue with existing UK arrangements for pensions regulation, the report said. However, it highlighted specific challenges with pension protection which meant separate arrangements would eventually be needed in this area.

'Protection arrangements may need to operate separately for Scottish-based and rest-of-the-UK-schemes to reflect the existence of two separate countries, two bodies of law and the impact of EU solvency requirements, which may have different implications depending on whether an independent Scotland's membership of the EU remains unbroken,' ICAS explained. 'Also, schemes which continue to operate across border would need to be accommodated within the new arrangements.'

'Assuming that separate protection arrangements would be required, at some future date, if not immediately after independence in the event of a "yes" vote, a separate Scottish protection fund would need to take over the assets and liabilities of Scottish pension schemes which had transferred previously to the UK PPF, as well as the net investments and returns to date on those schemes' assets,' it added.

A 'yes' vote would also raise questions over which government would be responsible for the state pension entitlements of Scots built up prior to independence, as well as how to deal with £86bn of public sector pension liabilities related to Scotland, the report noted.

ICAS called on the Scottish Government to develop a 'robust' plan for Scotland's pensions future in the lead up to next year's independence referendum, and for the UK government to also assess the implications a 'yes' vote would have for pensions in the rest of the UK.

David Wood, ICAS executive director for technical policy, said: 'Both governments have a duty to engage with citizens and other pensions stakeholders to prepare a way forward, in advance of the referendum, and agree transitional arrangements to be implemented in case of a "yes" vote.'

This article appeared in our April 2013 issue of The Actuary.
Click here to view this issue
Filed in
04
Topics
Regulation Standards

You might also like...

Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Pensions Actuarial Analyst

London, Midlands, Scotland
£Market Competitive
Reference
143788

Senior Manager/Director level roles - Life insurance

Stirling
Generous salary with excellent bonus and benefits
Reference
143787

Reinsurance Pricing Actuary

London (Central)
£60-90K depending on experience
Reference
143786
See all jobs »
 
 

Today's top reads

 
 

Sign up to our newsletter

News, jobs and updates

Sign up

Subscribe to The Actuary

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
Spread-iPad-slantB-june.png

Topics

  • Data Science
  • Investment
  • Risk & ERM
  • Pensions
  • Environment
  • Soft skills
  • General Insurance
  • Regulation Standards
  • Health care
  • Technology
  • Reinsurance
  • Global
  • Life insurance
​
FOLLOW US
The Actuary on LinkedIn
@TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Facebook: The Actuary Magazine
CONTACT US
The Actuary
Tel: (+44) 020 7880 6200
​

IFoA

About IFoA
Become an actuary
IFoA Events
About membership

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to The Actuary Magazine
Contribute

The Actuary Jobs

Actuarial job search
Pensions jobs
General insurance jobs
Solvency II jobs

© 2023 The Actuary. The Actuary is published on behalf of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries by Redactive Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ