Home

EXAMPLE - John & Jane SMITH

Actuarial Report on Pensions on Divorce

 

 

Geoffrey Wilson, Partner, Excalibur Actuaries

          40 The Avenue, Tadworth, Surrey  KT20  5AT

          gwilson@excaliburactuaries.co.uk

          Telephone: 01737-819808

 

 

1.         INTRODUCTION

 

This report has been prepared on the joint instruction of XXX Solicitors and YYY Solicitors, and is intended for use by their clients Mrs Jane Smith (the wife, W) and Mr John Smith (the husband, H) in the matter of ancillary relief proceedings in connection with their potential divorce. This report is addressed the court, and is also intended to be disclosed to all parties involved in this matter. My declaration that I have complied with the obligations of an Expert as set out in Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules is contained in section 5 of this report.

 

The purpose of my report is to give my opinion on questions connected with pension values and pension sharing set out in my instructions dated 1 February 2010 – a copy of these instructions is given in Appendix D. I have been provided with information attached to that letter of instruction, which I have supplemented by enquiry of the various pension scheme administrators. I comment that I have been instructed to ignore state pensions in my calculations.

 

The questions are, stated briefly:

 

Q1. to comment on CETVs and where appropriate advise on fair actuarial value of the pensions if different;

Q2. to calculate the pension sharing percentage needed to produce equality of income for the two parties on retirement at age 65 for Mr Smith and 63 for Mrs Smith;

Q3. to comment on alternative options for pension sharing, and on any other matters as appropriate.

I have carried out my calculations as at a date of 30 June 2010.

 

I am a Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries, and partner of Excalibur Actuaries, practising as actuaries and pension consultants. I attach a statement of my qualifications (Appendix C).

 

 

2.                  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

 

Q1.  I set out in Appendix A my calculation of fair actuarial value of the pensions, with comments on the CETVs in relation to those values.

Q2.  I set out in section 4 my calculation that a pension share of 55.16% on all of Mr Smith’s pensions is projected to give equality of retirement income of £11,697 a year for both parties starting at ages 65/63.

Q3.  I comment in section 4 on pension sharing issues, including a calculation of a more effective alternative of 100% sharing on Mr Smith’s BEC, Civil Service and Aegon pensions, and 13.35% sharing on his Acorn pension, which is projected to give equality of retirement income of £12,342 for both parties.

 

3.                  INFORMATION AND PENSION BENEFITS

 

I have been informed that Mr Smith was born on 6 November 1956, and is therefore 53 years and 7 months old, and that Mrs Smith was born on 15 November 1958, and is therefore 51 years and 7 months old, at the calculation date of this report. I have assumed they have normal life expectancy.

 

I set out a description in Appendix A of Mr & Mrs Smith’s pensions, including my calculations of fair actuarial value, with comments on the relation of the CETVs to those values. I comment that I have not been informed of (nor asked to provide any calculations or advice in connection with) any other pension benefits of the parties, and have been instructed not to take account of state pensions.

 

I summarise the pensions below, in a standardised format for clarity (the details of the calculations are set out in Appendix A):

 

Mr Smith                                  CETV/Value                Pension from 65/63 a year

Acorn                                       £164,562                                 £14,244

BEC                                         £100,368                                   £6,860

Civil Service                               £66,480                                   £4,154

Aegon                                        £12,873                                      £827

Total                                        £344,283                                 £26,086pa

 

Mrs Smith

Cabot                                           £5,125                                      £369

Aegon                                        £17,050                                      £933

Total                                          £22,175                                   £1,302

 

Difference (before sharing)        £322,108                                 £24,784pa

 

4.                  PENSION SHARING CALCULATIONS

 

I have been asked to calculate the pension sharing needed to provide equality of gross income in retirement for the two parties after sharing Mr Smith’s pensions. As shown above, if there is no pension sharing, Mr Smith has a pension of £24,784 a year more than Mrs Smith.

 

The Acorn and BEC pensions can only be shared externally, by the specified percentage of the CETV (which would be re-calculated by the scheme actuary after the PSO has been made) being paid over to a personal pension or other plan set up by Mrs Smith. They make an administration charge for implementing a PSO, of £1,685 for BEC and £1,760 for Acorn.

 

The Civil Service pension can only be shared internally, with Mrs Smith becoming a member of the scheme with a defined pension credit calculated to be actuarially equivalent to the pension debited from Mr Smith. There is an administration charge of about £700 for implementing a PSO.

 

Pension sharing on money-purchase plans like Aegon is implemented simply by transferring the specified percentage of the CETV to Mrs Smith’s own plan – typically with no (or a small) administration charge.

 

After pension sharing, Mr Smith’s pensions from his various schemes would be reduced by the specified percentage in the PSO, and Mrs Smith would have the corresponding percentage of the Acorn, BEC and Aegon CETVs transferred to a money-purchase pension plan, plus a defined Civil Service pension payable from age 60. I have estimated the benefits from those transfers as a pension starting at age 63 on the methods and assumptions in Appendix B, with an estimate for the Civil Service credit (actually payable from age 60 as a pension plus lump sum) converted to an actuarial equivalent pension starting at age 63.

 

I calculate that, in order to produce equal retirement income after sharing, a PSO of 55.16% on all four of Mr Smith’s pensions would be required. The pensions after sharing are set out below:

 

Mr Smith                                  CETV/Value                Pension from 65/63 a year

Acorn                                         £73,790                                   £6,387

BEC                                           £45,005                                   £3,076

Civil Service                               £29,810                                   £1,863

Aegon                                          £5,772                                      £371

Total                                        £154,377                                 £11,697

 

Mrs Smith

Cabot                                           £5,125                                      £369

Aegon                                        £17,050                                      £933

Sharing (money-purchase)        £153,236                                   £8,388

Sharing (Civil Service)    £36,670                                   £2,007

Total                                        £212,082                                 £11,697

 

Difference (after sharing)           -£57,705                                          £0

 

I comment that Mrs Smith’s pensions have a higher CETV than Mr Smith’s since (a) it costs 17% more to provide a pension for a 63-year-old woman than a 65-year-old man, and (b) some of the CETVs are lower than fair actuarial value, so in particular the Acorn scheme has a relatively low CETV compared to the pension it provides.

 

Alternative sharing options

 

I have been asked to advise on which schemes to share. The main factor of relevance in this matter is the relative generosity of the CETVs of Mr Smith’s various schemes – since if a CETV is ungenerous, and sharing is done by external transfer, sharing in effect imposes a “transfer penalty”. I have analysed the CETVs in relation to my calculation of fair actuarial value in Appendix A, and in summary:

 

* The BEC CETV is close to fair value;

* The Acorn CETV is significantly below fair value;

* The Civil Service offers sharing internally on reasonably fair actuarial terms;

* The Aegon CETV is money purchase and thus equal to fair value.

 

In my opinion, therefore, it would be best to avoid sharing the Acorn pension as far as possible, although since this is the largest value pension it is not possible to avoid sharing this altogether. I have calculated that equality of retirement income could be achieved by 100% sharing of the BEC, Aegon and Civil Service pensions, plus 13.35% sharing of the Acorn pension. This improves the income after sharing of Mr & Mrs Smith from £11,697 a year to £12,342 a year, or by 5.5%.

 

I comment that I assume that the parties will share charges for implementing pension sharing appropriately.

 

5.                  DECLARATIONS

 

I hereby confirm that:

 

(1)        I am aware that my duty as an Expert is to provide independent assistance to the court by way of objective, unbiased opinion in relation to matters within my expertise and that my evidence, as an Expert, presented to the Court must be, and must be seen to be, independently produced by myself uninfluenced by the instructing parties.

(2)        I have complied with my duty noted in (1) above.

(3)        I have considered whether there are any conflicts of interest in giving the opinions expressed in this report, and I declare that I do not believe that there are any such conflicts.

(4)        insofar as the facts I have stated in this report are within my own knowledge, I have made clear which they are and I believe them to be true and that the opinions I have expressed represent my true and complete professional opinion.

(5)        I have not, without forming an independent view, included or excluded anything which has been suggested to me by others – in particular by my instructing solicitors.

(6)        I will notify my instructing solicitors immediately if, for any reason, my report requires correction or qualification.

(7)        I have not entered into any arrangement where either the amount or payment of my fees is in any way dependent on the outcome of the case

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Geoffrey Wilson


 

Appendix A

 

PENSION BENEFITS

 

Mr Smith

 

(1) He has a pension from his current Acorn Laboratories employment as a member of their final salary pension scheme since 1 October 2001. The pension accrued as at 7 April 2010 was £14,244 a year. The pension will increase in future with pensionable salary, and with further service. The scheme benefits include limited inflation-proofing in retirement (RPI up to maximum 5%) and a normal retirement age of 65.

 

I have projected the pension to the same amount in today’s money terms coming into payment at age 65, in other words not allowing for the effect of future salary increases above inflation nor for the effect of future service.

 

The CETV as at 7 April 2010 was £164,562. I have calculated that the fair actuarial value of the pension, on the methods and assumptions set out in Appendix B, is £221,666. I comment that this is within the typical range of CETV practices, although definitely at the less-generous end – it is the result of the assumptions made by the Trustees and their actuary, and not due to any fund deficit.

 

(2) He has a preserved pension from his employment with BEC from 15 March 1993 to 10 March 1999 as a member of their final salary scheme, which was £4,863.61 a year as at the date of leaving. This is increased with inflation up to 5% pa compound during the period to pension age 65 (with the GMP element of £422.24 a year increased at a fixed 6.25% pa). It increases during retirement with inflation up to 5% a year (GMP increases up to 3% a year). I calculate that this pension is currently £6,641 a year with revaluation to date, and I have projected it to £6,860 a year at age 65 (in today’s money terms).

 

The CETV as at 12 April 2010 was £100,367.83. I have calculated that the fair actuarial value of the pension, on the methods and assumptions set out in Appendix B, is £106,027. I comment that this is within the typical range of CETV practices, although at the more-generous end.

 

(3) He also has a preserved pension from his employment in the Civil Service from 1983 to1988, where the accrued pension in 1988 was £1,375 a year. RPI inflation over the last 22 years has accumulated to a factor of 2.103 (average 3.4% a year), so the pension including revaluation to date is 1375 x 2.103 = £2,892 a year, plus a lump sum of 3 times this.

 

Converting the lump sum into a pension equivalent (the scheme offers members the option at retirement to do this), on the assumptions in Appendix B, the benefit is equivalent to a pension of £3,285 a year, in today’s money.

 

The PCSPS benefits are payable at age 60. For the purposes of this report, I have adjusted the benefits to a higher actuarial equivalent pension from age 65, using a factor (calculated on the assumptions in Appendix B) of 4.8% a year, so that the benefit is equivalent to a pension of £4,154 a year from age 65, in today’s money.

 

The CETV as at 1 March 2010 was £66,480. I calculate that the fair actuarial value of the benefit is £68,435, and comment that the CETV is reasonably close to this.

 

(4) He also has an Aegon Flexible Pension Plan, which is a money purchase pension with a value as at 2 March 2010 of £12,873.31. I have projected this to a pension starting at age 65 of £827 a year, on the methods and assumptions in Appendix B.

 

Mrs Smith

 

(1) She has a preserved pension from her employment with Cabot from 2 September 1996 to 29 May 1998 as a member of their final salary scheme, which was £314.24 a year as at the date of leaving. This is increased with inflation up to 5% pa compound during the period to pension age 65, and increases during retirement with inflation up to 5% a year as being typical practice in similar schemes in my experience. The pension is currently £411.72 a year with revaluation to date, and I project it to a similar amount at age 65, but in this report I have adjusted it to a reduced actuarial equivalent of £369 a year at age 63 (in today’s money terms).

 

The CETV as at 31 March 2010 was £5,124.95. I have calculated that the fair actuarial value of the pension, on the methods and assumptions set out in Appendix B, is £6,782. I comment that this is within the typical range of CETV practices, although at the less-generous end.

 

(2) She also has an Aegon Flexible Pension Plan, which is a money purchase pension with a value as at 9 March 2010 of £17,050.05. I have projected this to a pension starting at age 63 of £933 a year, on the methods and assumptions set out in Appendix B.

 


 

Appendix B

 

BASIS OF CALCULATIONS

 

In order to project pensions, and to estimate the pension from investments on money-purchase or personal pension plans, it is necessary to make assumptions for many years into the future about many variables – such as mortality, investment returns, inflation, interest rates and market annuity rates. A wide range of assumptions are possible, and can be justified in particular circumstances, and no one set of assumptions is definitely correct – since it is impossible to predict the future.

 

FAIR ACTUARIAL VALUE BASIS (FOS)

 

For the purposes of this report, I have come to an opinion on a set of assumptions which are reasonable in the circumstance of this matter, and which in particular strike a reasonable balance between the two parties in the matter. I have used the methods and assumptions first established by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in its review of personal pension mis-selling, and now reviewed regularly and set by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) who examine current complaints about transfers between final-salary pension schemes such as the Acorn scheme and money purchase personal pensions. These methods and assumptions are set out in detail on the website:

www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/guidance/pension_assumptions.htm

 

These assumptions are set for the year beginning 1 July 2010. The most significant assumptions I consider need to be mentioned here are:

Interest rate in retirement:                      5.0% a year

Investment return before retirement:       6.2% a year (less 1% charges = net 5.2%)

RPI inflation:                                         3.5% a year

Limited inflation-proofing (LPI):            3.3% a year in retirement

Mortality                                              Standard Actuarial Table PMA92 less 2 years

 

On this basis, the value of a single-life pension for a woman aged 63 of £1 a year with limited inflation-proofing is £22.230, and for a man aged 65 is £18.934.

 

PRESENT MARKET ANNUITY RATE BASIS

 

Information obtained from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) website on present market annuity rates, obtained today, is that the annuity rate for a 63-year-old female is a cost of £25.253 for £1 a year initial pension with 3% a year increases. (The rate for a fully-inflation-proofed annuity is much higher, at £29.343, and the rate for an annuity with no increases is £17.007.) For a 65-year-old man, the cost calculated similarly is £21.930 with 3% a year increases.

 

Thus annuities in the market today are more expensive (by 14% for a 63-year-old woman, or by 32% for a fully-inflation-proofed annuity) than the FOS basis assumptions for annuity rates in future as set out above, and reflects interest rates on 20-year gilts (the FTSE Actuaries UK gilts tables) of 4.16% a year at the same date, and on inflation-linked gilts of 0.74% a year (compared to the FOS basis equivalents of 5.0% and 1.5% respectively). I calculate that present market rates show that insurers use current long gilts yields in pricing fixed and fixed increase annuities, but also that insurers allow for further pessimism in pricing inflation-proofed annuities, in effect assuming they will achieve a nil return above inflation.

 

INCOME DRAWDOWN PLANS

 

I comment that for investors prepared to accept some investment risk during retirement, it is possible to obtain a higher initial income on retirement than is available from guaranteed annuities by using drawdown policies or with-profits annuities, on the basis of a reasonable expectation that long-term investment yields (after management charges) on such funds will exceed the long gilts yields of about 4 - 4¼% a year which underlies current annuity prices.

 

I have assumed that a money-purchase pension from an external pension share is used at retirement by Mrs Smith to provide an income from a drawdown arrangement (or with-profits annuity), with an initial income level allowing provision for future limited inflation proofing increases as calculated on my fair actuarial value basis above.


Appendix C

 

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

 - GEOFFREY WILSON

Personal

 

Date of birth:         7 February 1950

Nationality:            British

 

Education & Training

 

Qualified as Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries (FIA) in 1973, after taking a mathematics degree (BA 1971, MA 1973) at Christ’s College, Cambridge. He is a practising member of the Academy of Experts (MAE) and of the Institute of Expert Witnesses (MEWI), and a member of the Association of Consulting Actuaries.

 

Professional career

 

1971 – 1979: Government Actuary’s Department (GAD), actuarial advice to public sector pension schemes, demography, support to the Occupational Pensions Board and public enquiries (including advising the Pearson Commission on injury compensation, and advising the Scott and Clegg Commissions about valuation of inflation-proofed pensions in public sector pay).

1979 – 1987: HAY-MSL Management Consultants. This work included pension and total remuneration assignments for UK and international companies and governmental organisations.

1987 – 1996: partner, Binder Hamlyn, accountants, leading the Pensions & Actuarial Services unit providing support to the firm’s corporate and individual clients.

1996 – to date: senior partner of Excalibur Actuaries, actuarial and pension consultants.

 

Expert Witness (Forensic) Experience

 

My work has included expert witness and related “forensic” work – firstly alongside the large forensic accounting team whilst a partner at Binder Hamlyn from 1987, and secondly independently since founding Excalibur Actuaries in 1996. This has covered pensions and remuneration losses in employment cases, compensation and future losses in personal injury cases, as well as technical pensions and actuarial cases. I have been included in the Law Society’s Directory of Expert Witnesses since the early 1990s.