Ian Chapman-Curry
Legal Director
PSL legal director
Balados
5
After providing an overview of ongoing scheme funding in the last episode, here we delve deeper into contribution obligations when an employer departs from a scheme. We tackle issues including when an employer's debt is triggered, how much the debt is and explore lawful ways to avoid the debt.
NOTE: the legislation is simple in theory but in practice it is extremely complicated, not least because it keeps changing and being reinterpreted by case law. This fact card is a considerable simplification and omits points of detail that might be relevant in practice.
A section 75 statutory debt is triggered, owed by an employer to the trustees of that scheme, in relation to a pension scheme which includes salary-related benefits, in the following situations:
All current employers of active members count as "employers" for this purpose, and so do former employers, unless they have already paid such a statutory debt or are released from the obligation for one of the other specified reasons.
The debt is calculated by reference to the scheme's funding deficit on a buy-out basis. This is the shortfall between: (i) the value of the scheme's assets; and (ii) the amount of its liabilities (assuming the liabilities are secured by purchasing policies with an insurance company).
If there is more than one employer, the employer's debt is not the full deficit but the employer's share of it. The employer's share will cover the liabilities of the scheme that are attributable to the employer plus a proportionate share of the liabilities that cannot be attributed to any other employer.
The debt trigger that causes the most issues is (c) above, as this can be inadvertently triggered by normal activity. However the legislation does contain several mechanisms to prevent a debt being triggered in such circumstances. These include:
In normal circumstances, trustees should avoid allowing a section 75 debt to be compromised (except by one of the mechanisms set out above). This is because such a compromise would put at risk the scheme's eligibility for the Pension Protection Fund if its sponsoring employer(s) became insolvent.
There are occasions when a compromise is appropriate - usually as a part of a scheme abandonment with the support of The Pensions Regulator and the Pension Protection Fund - but these need careful handling.
CECI NE CONSTITUE PAS UN AVIS JURIDIQUE. L'information qui est présentée dans le site Web sous quelque forme que ce soit est fournie à titre informatif uniquement. Elle ne constitue pas un avis juridique et ne devrait pas être interprétée comme tel. Aucun utilisateur ne devrait prendre ou négliger de prendre des décisions en se fiant uniquement à ces renseignements, ni ignorer les conseils juridiques d'un professionnel ou tarder à consulter un professionnel sur la base de ce qu'il a lu dans ce site Web. Les professionnels de Gowling WLG seront heureux de discuter avec l'utilisateur des différentes options possibles concernant certaines questions juridiques précises.