back
FT
‘Personal View’ article questioning the inadequacy of
Government policy to encourage savings
by
Dr. Ros Altmann
(All
material on this page is subject to copyright and must not be reproduced
without the author's permission.)
I
met an economics undergraduate last week who was mystified by UK
pensions and savings policy. He wanted to know why, after countless
consultations and several new Government policies to encourage savings,
the savings ratio has hit an all-time low, borrowing levels are
at record highs and a pensions crisis has developed. How could policies
designed to encourage saving by ‘Middle Britain’ have
gone so badly wrong that they have the opposite effect to that apparently
intended?
He
wondered whether it could be that, while paying lip service to the
desire to increase savings among middle income groups, the Treasury
is actually determined to ensure that only the top earners (who
would save anyway) are encouraged to do so.
He
suggested a potentially dangerous short-term scenario and, I must
say, I found his analysis hard to fault. He believes the Chancellor
is desperate to preside over a strong economy, so the last thing
he wants is for people to suddenly start saving. The UK economy’s
remarkable recent performance has been supported by a housing boom
and Government spending on job creation in the public sector. Is
this all part of the Treasury’s plan? Rising house prices
have a positive wealth effect, increase consumer spending on housing
related items and fuel sharp rises in borrowing, all adding to short-term
economic strength. The Treasury also seems unusually keen to prolong
the property boom. Almost immediately after the Bank of England
Governor warned of the risk of falling property prices, the Treasury
rushed to reassure investors. In fact, the student points out that
the latest pension reforms will encourage even more investment in
property, allowing residential housing to be held in personal pensions.
He
suggests that policy may be driven by a ‘growth at all costs’
agenda. If the Chancellor’s aim is to keep the economy strong,
as long as he is Chancellor, then policy will continue to encourage
unsustainably high consumer spending and borrowing and discourage
saving among middle-income groups. This will continue until someone
else takes over the keys to Number 11 and Gordon Brown can go down
in history as having presided over a period of superb economic growth.
However, the inevitable unwinding of accumulated debt, will be painful
indeed in the longer term.
The
undergraduate’s analysis of recent history provides further
evidence. In particular, on savings policy, he asks what the Government
has actually done to encourage savings? The introduction of stakeholder
pensions, for example, ostensibly designed to get average earners
contributing more to pensions, has only really been good news for
top income groups. Wealthy grandparents saving for their grandchildren
and high earners providing tax sheltered saving for their non-working
spouses. Charges across all pension products have fallen, but the
price cap has locked middle income investors out of the advice process,
because advisers will not advise them within the 1% charge. This,
of course, means that the target group will be highly unlikely to
save.
The
student is also puzzled by the latest measures to increase the stakeholder
charge cap to 1.5%– including the new safe ‘Sandler’
products. Especially if accompanied by a simplified advice process,
this is great news for advisers and providers, who can make more
money out of helping the top income groups, but it could actually
make things worse for the target group. Middle earners will not
get any advice, and will also have no comeback if they buy the wrong
product. Yet, he points out, the Government has already designed
simple products, which would be ideal ‘safe’ Sandler
stakeholder products – National Savings. They have no charges
at all, can be either bond-like, or equity-like, and have a Treasury-backed
moneyback guarantee, which no financial company can match. The notion
of risk, for this group, is whether or not they will lose money,
not outperforming the competition or an index. National Savings
products are ideal for such investors. Why, then, is the Government
not using these to start encouraging savings, if it really wants
to do so?
If
the Government is really serious about getting more people to save,
he argues, where are the new incentives? There have been plenty
of policies to improve ‘supply’ – encouraging
cheaper, simpler products - but where are the policies that will
actually increase demand? If people do not want to save, or have
lost confidence in the savings industry – because of market
falls and constant scandals - they need encouraging and incentivising.
The only incentive is tax relief which is fine for high earners,
but nowhere near enough for the other 90% of the population. There
have been no new incentives to encourage employers to contribute
more to pensions (other than their own!) Even the limit on ISA’s
has been cut, as have the tax breaks on both ISA’s and pensions.
The
most damaging of this Government’s policies, he thinks, is
the Pension Credit. The Government said it launched this policy,
to ensure ‘it always pays to save’. However, in reality,
this is simply not true. Pension Credit actually undermines pension
saving for the majority of the population. About 80% of future pensioners
will be entitled to Pension Credit, rendering pensions ‘unsuitable’
for most people, since they risk losing at least 40% of their pension
income in the means test when they retire. In fact, the way the
policy works, those not entitled to full Basic State Pension (which
is most women) will lose all the first part of their savings, pound
for pound. No financial adviser can safely encourage the target
group to put money into a pension. So much for encouraging pensions!
This
poor student is left utterly confused about UK savings policy. He
is eagerly searching for someone to explain to him why his analysis
of the Chancellor’s possible personal desire to keep growth
strong at all costs as long as he remains Chancellor is wrong and
how this Government’s policies will really increase saving
for middle income groups, rather than just for top earners. I’m
afraid I couldn’t help him. Any ideas?
back
|