orangeblock

Industry to move to single vehicle pleasure by 2015

17 July 2013 | Retirement | General | Jonathan Faurie

While there is no doubt that the South African pension industry is one of the most sophisticated and functional industries in the world, the industry is still mired with challenges and if they are not resolved quickly, it will be in for a number of tough

While the Financial Services Board and National Treasury are working on a number of reforms which will hopefully facilitate meaningful improvement in the industry, ABSA Consultants and Actuaries, a division of ABSA, reports that financial advisors will need to come to terms with the fact that the most meaningful change will be the shift towards one retirement vehicle and that they will need to adjust their advice accordingly.

Coverage quagmire

Before we move onto the movement towards a single retirement vehicle and the benefits it can offer society, one must look at retirement coverage and the portion of the population that will actually benefit from the efforts of Treasury.

Treasury’s main aim is to see as much peopled covered in the country as possible. However, herein lays a significant problem. According to Cobus Strydom, head of consulting at ABSA Consultants and Actuaries, Treasury has a lot of ground to make up.

“There is a significant coverage problem in South Africa. Only 50% of the formal sector belongs to retirement vehicles. Of the 50% that does not belong, 80% are below the tax threshold which means that there is no real incentive to contribute towards a retirement vehicle. A further 70% are employer groups of 50 people or less which means that costs will not make it worthwhile to offer a retirement vehicle while the remaining 40% of the uncovered sector belong to the farming, domestic and construction sector where there not a strong relationship between employer and worker which is needed with a retirement vehicle,” he said.

Different strokes in one

Logistically, administrating the different rules governing different retirement vehicles is a nightmare. There is also the huge issue of leakage whereby workers that move from one job to another are allowed to draw their retirement savings and then are tempted to spend it before reinvesting it into another scheme.

This however is set to change in 2015.

“Come March 1 2015, annuitisation requirements of provident and pension funds will be aligned. A provident fund member will therefore have to convert at least two thirds of his benefit into an annuity on retirement. Vested rights of current provident fund members will be protected and annuitisation requirements will only apply to new contributions as well as growth on such contributions with effect from March 1 2015. Further, annuitisation requirements will not apply to individuals 55 years and older, provided they remain members of the same provident fund until retirement,” says Strydom.

Preservation Mandate

The main aim of this is to increase preservation. It will be easier for advisors to recommend preservation and it will be easier for government to enforce it. However, the public may not like the rulings.

“Government is still going to establish a ‘P-Day’ which will be in 2015. From an effective date, on or after P-Day, pension and provident funds will not be permitted to pay cash withdrawal benefits before retirement. Members must have their entire accrued benefits paid either into a default preservation fund, a sectional preservation fund, the fund of the new employer or a preservation fund they have chosen themselves,” says Strydom.

This doesn’t mean that members will not be able to draw any money out of the funds. Members will, at any time, be able to withdraw in cash portion of initial amount deposited by them on joining preservation fund to which vested rights apply. Preservation fund members will be able to withdraw each year greater of state old age grant limited at either R15120 or 10% of initial amount deposited by them on joining preservation fund, excluding any portion to which vested rights apply. Any unused withdrawals may be carried forward to following year, but to reduce administrative costs, members will be limited to one withdrawal per calendar year or part thereof.

“This again will open the door for administrative headaches. I feel that the 10% will be an easier benchmark to police than the R15000 and Treasury should be really concentrating on that,” says Strydom.

Editor’s Thoughts:
We all know, and have hopefully come to terms with, the administration problems that regulators face in the retirement industry. However, the truth of the matter is that one retirement vehicle will be easier to police and administer than multiple vehicles. But this puts pressure on financial advisors who need to consult with fund holders on a continuous basis in order to advise them on the best vehicle to acquire. How do you think this will impact the industry? Please comment below, interact with us on Twitter at @fanews_online or email me your thoughts[email protected].

Comments

Added by Ayanda, 17 Jul 2013
Dear Jonathan, This is what you seem to be recommending:- 1. Government legislates that ALL employers MUST have a pension fund for their employees. (This is their stated intention - No doubt they will demand that the pension contribution is paid all or in significant part by the employer.) 2. SARS is to collect all above contributions along with PAYE tax. (SARS will sit on this money for months while their accounts are "reconciled" - Imagine how many billions of extra 'tax' this will represent whilst your money rolls from month to month!) 3. SARS will 'accredit' certain pension funds to whom one may send one's pension money via the SARS system. A government 'default' pension fund is also to be established for those cases where one has failed to nominate a private fund or where the nomination has suddenly disappeared from the system. Should such pension funds and their shareholders / managers fail to tow the government line, (or even dare to criticise it) they will find their 'accreditation' rescinded. This will lead to their closure in due course. 4. Now in full control of these pension funds, the government will effectively be in control of their investment management decisions - and thus in control of the JSE and hence a major lever of the national economy. (i.e. Nationalisation by regulation and stealth...) The current administrative complexities to which you refer will seem like a Sunday picnic and will in no way be eliminated. The so called 'single vehicle' will certainly not be "a pleasure" for anyone other than a rapacious political class.
Report Abuse
Added by Gavin, 17 Jul 2013
Yep Ayanda what you say is 100% correct. Govt wants to get control of the billions held in retirement funds. A field day will be had by the cadres - the mind boggles. And who will be the losers? The marginalized will remain marginalized. One has to have a job, hence an income before any thought can be given to saving. Retirement fund contributions don't come out of thin air. And the millions who have had the foresight and disciplinbe to put aside for retirement will be prejudiced. So as a whole the country, with the exception of those on the gravy train, will be worse off. One only has to look at Eskom, SAA, Aurora, and anything else the government "runs" or interferes with, to make this prediction. Wherewill it end? Look north to Egypt and Morocco for the answer
Report Abuse
Added by Mike R., 17 Jul 2013
I am in total agreement in that I view this approach with complete scepticism. While we in the private sector only have ourselves to blame because we have not acted with the necessary care and responsibility, I include all parties in this including prospective clients and members of pension funds, I don't feel this is a solution and I firmly believe it is just a ploy to nationalise assets for own use by government as usual and a stated objective in certain circles. The challenge for the financial advisor is how to advise clients going forward bringing the politics into the equation. Interesting territory.
Report Abuse

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

quick poll
Question

If you had to hazard a guess, when do you reckon the COFI Bill will be signed into law?

Answer