Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the Pensions industry myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

The UK government is planning to expand the scope of collective defined contribution pension schemes in the hope it will improve retirement planning and channel savings into a wider pool of assets. 

In a consultation launched on Tuesday, the government is proposing to broaden access to CDC pensions to allow multiple employers to participate in a single scheme. The move comes after the Royal Mail launched the UK’s first such scheme this week. 

“This significant innovation will offer a more predictable income and greater finance security for future pensioners,” said pensions minister Emma Reynolds. 

CDC schemes offer a halfway house between traditional defined benefit pensions plans, which offer predictable payouts but are now generally closed to new members in the private sector, and defined contribution plans, where payouts are based on investment performance as well as how much the employee and company has paid in.

CDC members participate in a pooled scheme and are offered a target return they can plan their retirements around — but returns are not fixed and companies are not obliged to make up any shortfalls in the scheme’s funding. 

The government hopes that if companies club together to produce large CDC schemes, more investment will be channelled towards UK infrastructure and start ups, helping to support the government’s mission to boost the economy. 

The consultation comes as chancellor Rachel Reeves has made a review of the £2.4tn UK pensions industry a cornerstone of her plans to boost the economy and lift investment in British assets.

Reeves has said she wants to create a “Canadian-style” model with massive retirement funds investing in British equities and infrastructure.

A report published by New Financial last month found that UK pension schemes had only about 6 per cent allocated to private equity and infrastructure combined, compared with 34 per cent for Canadian public sector schemes and 14 per cent for Australian superannuation schemes.

However, the take up of CDC schemes — which have been allowed in the UK since 2021 — has been slow. The Royal Mail is the only company to announce plans to launch such a scheme.

Companies have been reluctant to set up CDC schemes because they have established defined contribution plans and are nervous of introducing new structures that could introduce new business risks.

“A ‘club’ approach is more viable than individual businesses . . . CDC does need scale for the concept to work,” said Raj Mody, partner at PwC, but he added that the challenge would be how companies mitigated the challenges involved with partnering with other companies. 

“Businesses are likely to want to see some protection from any club approach, especially given the long-term commitment required. Otherwise it may be too big a leap of faith,” he said. 

Edi Truell, a City financier, warned that there was also a “risk of intergenerational unfairness” with CDC schemes, with younger members bearing a disproportionate amount of the investment risk than older members, because they have longer to run until retirement and more time to weather any downside shocks.

THIS is the horrific moment a one-year-old baby girl is slapped by a man on the streets of Barcelona.

Shocking footage shows the man screaming in the tourist’s faces, including the little girl as she waddles in front of her pushchair.

4

4

Advertisement

4

4

The video shows the stranger wind his arm back before pretending to hit the toddler, stopping a mere few inches from her face.

The one-year-old’s dad protects her, using his arm as a shield between the thug and the child.

But it isn’t enough as the man takes another swing at the girl, making contact with her left cheek.

Her dad swoops up the crying baby out of panic before he and the baby’s mum hastily walk the other way.

The 31-year-old perpetrator allegedly assaulted two other people over the weekend before he was arrested by cops on Sunday, local media claims.

Another of his alleged victims is a 60-year-old man who suffered horrific cuts to his face and bruised all over his body.

The heinous attacker was able to be identified through video footage and eyewitness descriptions.

He is to appear in court on Tuesday.

The incident reportedly happened on a walkway on Montjuic hill, Barcelona, where popular tourist attraction like the Basilica de la Sagrada Familia are.

According to police, the little girl suffered minor injuries and didn’t require hospital treatment.

It comes as anti-tourist fury swept Spain this summer.

In July around 2,800 protesters took to Barcelona‘s streets and drenched holidaymakers using water guns in an anti-tourism demonstration.

Locals marched along a waterfront district of the city with their furious slogan “Enough! Let’s put limits on tourism”.

Protesters were proudly holding signs reading “Barcelona is not for sale” and “Tourists go home” as they walked the popular tourist spots of the city.

A motive for the moment is Barcelona’s current housing crisis that has reportedly seen home costs rise by 68per cent in the last decade.

Rents also rose by 18per cent in June from a year earlier in tourist cities like Barcelona and Madrid, according to Idealista.

Some locals blame the rising prices on tourists, sparking outrage and therefore encouraging protests.

Barcelona’s mayor, Juame Collboni, announced a plan in June to phase out short-term lets by 2028.

It’s been seen as a rather extreme and unexpected move by authorities.

But many still feel that locals are not prioritised in the city, with not enough being done to balance tourism with residents.

Anti-tourist measures sweeping hotspots

A WAVE of anti-tourist measures are being implemented across Europe to curb mass tourism in popular holiday hotspots.

Overcrowding has become the main problem in many sunny destinations, with authorities trying to find a solution to keep tourists and locals happy.

Advertisement

Officials have attempted to reduce the impact of holidaymakers by implementing additional taxes on tourists, or banning new hotels.

Earlier this year Venice became the first city in the world to charge an entry fee for holidaymakers after it started charging day-trippers €5 (£4.30) if visiting the historical Italian centre.

It was followed by an area in Barcelona which resorted to removing a well-used bus route from Apple and Google Maps to stop crowds of tourists from using the bus.

 Meanwhile, San Sebastián in the north of Spain, limited the maximum number of people on guided visits to 25 to avoid congestion, noise, nuisance and overcrowding.

Advertisement

The city has already banned the construction of new hotels.

The Spanish government has allowed restaurants to charge customers more for sitting in the shade in Andalucia.

Benidorm has introduced time restrictions, as swimming in the sea between midnight and 7am could cost a whopping £1,000.

The Canary Islands are also considering adopting measures to regulate the number of visitors – and charge tourists a daily tax.

Advertisement

Greece has already enforced a tourist tax during the high season (from March to October) with visitors expected to pay from €1 (£0.86) to €4 (£3.45) per night, depending on the booked accommodation.

Officials in Santiago de Compostela in Galicia want to introduce a fee for travellers to remind people to be courteous during their trips.

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

The stories that matter on money and politics in the race for the White House

Kamala Harris has ruled out meeting one-on-one with Russian President Vladimir Putin to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine unless leaders from Kyiv were involved.

In some of her most detailed comments to date about how she would try to end Russia’s war in Ukraine if elected US president, Harris said she would not meet “bilaterally” with Putin “without Ukraine”.

“Ukraine must have a say in the future of Ukraine,” Harris added, in a televised interview with CBS News’s 60 Minutes that aired on Monday night.

Harris also criticised Donald Trump’s claims that he would immediately halt the war.

“Donald Trump, if he were president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now,” Harris added. “He talks about, ‘Oh, he can end it on day one.’ You know what that is? It’s about surrender.”

With less than a month to go until November’s US presidential election, Harris, Joe Biden’s vice-president, and her Republican opponent are sharpening their attacks on each other.

While Harris maintains a more than three-point lead in national polls, according to a Financial Times poll tracker, the two candidates remain locked in a virtual tie in the seven swing states that will determine the election outcome.

In the 60 Minutes interview the vice-president sidestepped a question about whether she would expand Nato — a central ambition of Ukraine.

“Those are all issues that we will deal with if and when it arrives at that point,” she said, adding that the administration’s focus was on “supporting Ukraine’s ability to defend itself against Russia’s unprovoked aggression”.

CBS said Trump had declined to participate in a similar interview with 60 Minutes on Monday night.

Trump has repeatedly said that he would end the fighting in Ukraine on “day one” if he were given another term in the White House, but has refused to detail how he would do so.

He met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last month in New York, when the Republican presidential candidate touted his “very good relationship” with Putin as he said the war would be “resolved very quickly” if he were elected in November.

Harris met the Ukrainian president one day earlier at the White House. In remarks alongside Zelenskyy following their meeting, Harris suggested Trump would “force Ukraine to give up large parts” of its land and “require Ukraine to forgo security”.

Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. After more than two and a half years of the invasion, Kyiv is under growing pressure from western partners to find a path to a negotiated settlement with Moscow.

Trump raised alarm bells across Europe last month when, in his only televised debate against Harris, the former president refused to answer a moderator’s question about whether he wanted Ukraine to win the war. Instead he replied: “I want the war to stop. I want to save lives that are being uselessly [lost], people being killed by the millions.”

Earlier this year, Trump warned the US’s Nato allies that he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” if alliance members failed to meet defence spending targets.

NEW rules requiring banks to reimburse people tricked into transferring money to a fraudster have come into force today.

Under the shake-up, banks must reimburse authorised push payment (APP) fraud victims unless the customer has been “grossly negligent”.

1

Customers were initially set to receive reimbursements of up to £415,000.

However, the new rules have now implemented a cap of £85,000.

Banks can exceed this limit and repay higher amounts if they choose.

But, they also have the power to impose a £100 excess fee when settling claims, a policy that five banks have now adopted.

So, if your claim is for a payment of £100 or less, trying to recover the money may not be of any benefit.

Only four firms have pledged not to apply this charge: Nationwide, Virgin Money, TSB, and AIB.

Five banks – HSBC, First Direct, Lloyds, Halifax and Bank of Scotland – have said they will not cover fraud claims below £100.

The rest say that they “may” cover them or will judge each claim on a case-by-case basis.

Starling Bank says it may apply an excess of £50 rather than £100.

The only way to avoid this caveat is to switch to one of the four banks which have pledged not to apply these charges.

The £100 excess cannot be applied to vulnerable consumers under the Payment Systems Regulator’s (PSR) rules.

Liz Edwards, money expert at Finder, said: “Victim’s protection has been squeezed at both ends. When the upper refund limit was cut to just £85,000, many in the industry, including the PSR, justified this by saying it would still cover over 99% of claims.

“But because so many banks are now saying they won’t cover – or may not cover – the first £100, that 99% must surely be lower.

“Based on 2023 fraud figures, more than 58,000 cases would have resulted in no refund if all companies had applied the excess, and now only four of the major providers have confirmed they won’t.

“£100 is a lot of money to many people. It doesn’t help that 12 banks said they might apply it – customers don’t know where they stand.”

The new protections apply from October 7 and only when a transfer is made to and from a UK bank account.

Previously, many bank customers have relied on a voluntary code to get their money back.

Concerns were raised that consumers faced a refund “lottery”.

Fraud is broadly split into authorised and unauthorised.

Authorised fraud occurs when individuals are deceived into willingly handing over money or consenting to fraudulent payments.

Unauthorised fraud involves criminals stealing financial information to obtain products or services in the victims’ names.

A fraud explosion in recent years has seen criminals pose as trusted institutions such as banks, companies, or government departments to persuade people to part with their cash, and scams are becoming increasingly sophisticated.

According to figures from UK Finance, the total number of APP cases jumped by 12% annually last year to 232,429. Reported losses to this type of scam totalled £459.7 million.

Purchase scams accounted for around two-thirds (67%) of the total number of APP cases in 2023.

With a purchase scam, someone pays in advance for goods or services that are never received, often ordered online, such as through an auction website or social media.

PROTECT YOURSELF FROM SCAMMERS

More than three-quarters of authorised fraud starts online.

When handing over cash for goods or services found online that you haven’t yet received, you should be extra vigilant against scams. 

Fraudsters often use popular events, such as the recently announced Oasis concerts, to prey on victims.   

Buy from reputable sources and sites to protect yourself.

Alarm bells should be ringing if prices are too good to be true.

Take the time to carry out extra checks on unknown sources. 

Fraud cases originating through phone calls make up fewer cases, but losses are often far larger.

These are typically when criminals impersonate banks or other trusted sources.  

It’s ok to reject, refuse or ignore requests for cash.

Usually, criminals will try to pressure or rush you into payments.

If you doubt a caller’s identity, call a trusted company or organisation phone number to check.