
New Pensions Commission to tackle widespread under-saving that will make future retiriees poorer
It says nearly half of working age adults are saving nothing at all into a pension - despite the success of auto enrolment into work schemes - and nearly 15million people are under-saving for retirement.
If nothing changes, retirees in 2050 will be living on £800 a year or 8 per cent less in private pension income than those in retirement now, it predicts.
Lower earners, the self-employed and some ethnic minorities are particularly at risk, and there is a stark 48 per cent gender gap in private pension wealth, according to the joint statement by the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions.
The move to revive the first landmark Pensions Commission, which issued a report in 2006 that laid the groundwork for auto enrolment, is intended to devise plans to address these problems.
It will explore the 'complex barriers stopping people from saving enough for retirement', and report back in 2027.
The Government says:
- A woman currently approaching retirement can typically expect a private pension income worth over £5,000 less than that of a man, or just over £100 per week compared to just over £200 a week;
- More than three million self-employed people are not saving into a pension;
- One in four low earners in the private sector are saving into a pension;
- And one in four people from a Pakistani or Bangladeshi background are saving into a pension.
It adds that despite the introduction of automatic enrolment boosting the number who are saving, around one in two workers in the private sector only put aside the minimum contribution level.
Employers have to put a minimum of 3 per cent of your earnings between £6,240 and £50,270 into your pension, while workers put in 4 per cent and the Government adds 1 per cent in tax relief - adding up to 8 per cent.
However, many employers are willing to make 4 per cent, 5 per cent or 6 per cent in matching pension contributions if you opt to save a higher proportion of your income.
People aged 22-66 who earn at least £10,000 a year are eligible for auto enrolment.
New rules extending auto enrolment to young workers aged 18-21 and to lower earners to let them save from the first pound of earnings were passed into law in 2023, but have not been implemented yet.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall says: 'People deserve to know that they will have a decent income in retirement – with all the security, dignity and freedom that brings.
'But the truth is, that is not the reality facing many people, especially if you're low paid, or self-employed.
'The Pensions Commission laid the groundwork, and now, two decades later, we are reviving it to tackle the barriers that stop too many saving in the first place.'
Chancellor Rachel Reeves says: 'We're making pensions work for Britain.
'The Pension Schemes Bill and the creation of pension megafunds mean an average earner could get a £29,000 boost to their pension pots.
'Now we are going further to ensure that people can look forward to a comfortable retirement.'
Pensions Minister Torsten Bell says: 'The original Pensions Commission helped get pension saving up and pensioner poverty down.
'But if we carry on as we are, tomorrow's retirees risk being poorer than today's. So we are reviving the Pensions Commission to finish the job and give today's workers secure retirements to look forward to.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

South Wales Argus
16 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Treasury has ‘got the balance right' on taxing wealthy, says Reeves
The Chancellor said tax decisions would be announced at a future budget 'in the appropriate way', after former minister Anneliese Dodds said it was 'important' for the Government to consider evidence set out by the Wealth Tax Commission. Ms Dodds, who resigned as a Foreign Office minister in February over the Government's decision to cut overseas aid to fund a defence spending boost, said the commission's work 'has changed the debate'. Ms Reeves told the PA news agency: 'In the budget last year, we got rid of the non-domicile status in our tax system, so people who make Britain their home have to pay their taxes here. 'We introduced increased taxes on private jets, on second homes, and increased capital gains tax, so I think we've got the balance right in terms of how we tax those with the broadest shoulders, but any further decisions will be ones that are made at a budget in the normal way.' Asked about Ms Dodds' suggestion, the Chancellor had earlier said: 'Decisions around tax are decisions that are made at a budget and we'll make those decisions in the appropriate way, but the number-one priority of this Government is to grow the economy. 'And that means bringing more investment into Britain, creating more good jobs paying decent wages here in Britain. 'We've got to get the balance right on taxation because we want that investment, we want those jobs to come here. 'That's why we're reforming the planning system, secured three trade deals in the first year of this Labour Government, cutting back on unnecessary regulation, and reforming our pension system to unlock money for businesses to be able to invest here in the UK.' Speaking to Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction, Ms Dodds said this week that the Wealth Tax Commission 'looked at the operation of lots of different wealth tax, they looked at all of that evidence and set out how it would be possible to deliver something like that in a UK context'. The Oxford East MP added: 'I would hope that the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence as well as other changes that have been put forward. 'We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions. I think it's important for all of those to be considered now.' On Ms Reeves' approach to welfare, Ms Dodds called for a 'longer-term approach' and said: 'An attempt was made to deal with a quite immediate problem, but I don't think you can, particularly via cuts, actually deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary.'


North Wales Chronicle
16 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Treasury has ‘got the balance right' on taxing wealthy, says Reeves
The Chancellor said tax decisions would be announced at a future budget 'in the appropriate way', after former minister Anneliese Dodds said it was 'important' for the Government to consider evidence set out by the Wealth Tax Commission. Ms Dodds, who resigned as a Foreign Office minister in February over the Government's decision to cut overseas aid to fund a defence spending boost, said the commission's work 'has changed the debate'. Ms Reeves told the PA news agency: 'In the budget last year, we got rid of the non-domicile status in our tax system, so people who make Britain their home have to pay their taxes here. 'We introduced increased taxes on private jets, on second homes, and increased capital gains tax, so I think we've got the balance right in terms of how we tax those with the broadest shoulders, but any further decisions will be ones that are made at a budget in the normal way.' Asked about Ms Dodds' suggestion, the Chancellor had earlier said: 'Decisions around tax are decisions that are made at a budget and we'll make those decisions in the appropriate way, but the number-one priority of this Government is to grow the economy. 'And that means bringing more investment into Britain, creating more good jobs paying decent wages here in Britain. 'We've got to get the balance right on taxation because we want that investment, we want those jobs to come here. 'That's why we're reforming the planning system, secured three trade deals in the first year of this Labour Government, cutting back on unnecessary regulation, and reforming our pension system to unlock money for businesses to be able to invest here in the UK.' Speaking to Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction, Ms Dodds said this week that the Wealth Tax Commission 'looked at the operation of lots of different wealth tax, they looked at all of that evidence and set out how it would be possible to deliver something like that in a UK context'. The Oxford East MP added: 'I would hope that the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence as well as other changes that have been put forward. 'We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions. I think it's important for all of those to be considered now.' On Ms Reeves' approach to welfare, Ms Dodds called for a 'longer-term approach' and said: 'An attempt was made to deal with a quite immediate problem, but I don't think you can, particularly via cuts, actually deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary.'


The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
Rare coin seller claims former staff used confidential information to set up rival business
A rare coin seller is in a High Court battle with seven former staff members who it claims accessed its confidential information to set up a rival business. Hattons of London alleges that the ex-employees were behind a 'co-ordinated and clandestine conspiracy' to use its 'valuable confidential information' from a customer information database to set up The Knightsbridge Collection, which they wanted to 'emulate and ultimately cannibalise' Hattons. At a hearing earlier this month, barristers for Hattons asked to block Knightsbridge and seven men – Andrew Pickerill, Alexander Jeffery, Daniel Farmer, Mohammed Kashif Aziz, William Shore, Nick Harvey and Benjamin Bradshaw – from trading in competition against Hattons until a trial of the claims at a later date. The former staff all deny the allegations, telling the hearing in London that they accessed the database while on sick leave, and met together at their homes and the Knightsbridge company offices, to discuss a collective grievance against Hattons. In a ruling on Thursday, Jonathan Glasson KC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, granted an injunction preventing Knightsbridge and the seven men from competing against Hattons for one month. Daniel Northall KC, for Hattons, previously said in written submissions that the company operates within a 'specialist market of individual collectors' and 'depends upon repeat business', but also spends around £5 million a year on marketing and advertising. The former staff, who were all account managers, had access to Hattons' 'most valuable asset', a database that stores customer data and purchase history, during their employment. He said: 'The claimant avers that, rather than develop its customer base lawfully and organically, (The Knightsbridge Collection) has instead misappropriated the claimant's customer data as a quick, cheap, but ultimately unlawful shortcut.' Earlier this year, customers began to contact Hattons to say that they had been contacted by Knightsbridge. Hattons then hired a private investigator who found that some of the men were seen at the Knightsbridge offices in June, while a forensic IT investigation found that some of them had also accessed the database from various addresses while off sick, Mr Northall said. He continued that investigations showed Mr Jeffery had accessed it 87 times in around 10 days. Nicholas Cobill, for Mr Farmer, said his client had already undertaken not to compete against Hattons, meaning an injunction was unnecessary, and that the former staff had a 'legitimate grievance'. Ghazan Mahmood, for Mr Aziz, also said an injunction against his client would be 'utterly disproportionate'. Mr Pickerill, who represented himself, said: 'I completely deny all the allegations made against me. I did not unlawfully access the company's information.' He continued that he had 'never worked for The Knightsbridge Collection'. In his ruling, Judge Glasson said: 'In my judgment the claimant has been able to show unlawful use of its confidential information; that the defendants thereby gained an unfair competitive advantage over the claimant; and that the advantage still exists at the moment and will continue to have effect unless the relief sought is granted.' The judge said he did not accept all of Hattons' claims, 'in particular those inferring dishonesty', but that the injunction would be the 'least irremediable prejudice'.