Despair and Disappointment at Europe’s New Pension Rules

(March 28, 2014) — Pension advisors have expressed their dismay at the latest update to the Europe-wide directive on retirement schemes.

Yesterday, the European Commission released the latest version of its Institutions for Occupational Retirement Provision (IORP) directive—much of its detail was immediately picked apart by experts.

“Whilst the National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF) strongly supports initiatives to ensure that pension funds are well run, this new directive simply adds further costs and administrative burdens without delivering practical benefits for members,” said Joanne Segars, chief executive of the NAPF.

These costs come in the form of a one-off implementation fee of €22 per member, which the NAPF estimated to hit the UK’s pension funds alone by £328 million. An additional annual cost of up to €0.80 per defined benefit (DB) member and €3 per defined contribution (DC) member angered others, who cited recent moves by the UK government to make DC pensions more cost effective and attractive to savers.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news. 

Dave Roberts, senior consultant at Towers Watson, was disappointed that after much “leaking” of documents suggesting the contrary, cross-border pensions would still be expected to be fully-funded at all times.

Roberts said the move went against the European Commission’s own assessment that it would “hamper IORP’s willingness to engage in cross-border activities”.

A call for better member communication was widely applauded, but Jane Beverly at Punter Southall saw irony in the regulation document.

“There is much to admire… but the proposal as it stands is fundamentally flawed,” said Beverly. “It requires the statement to fit into two pages of A4 in characters of an ‘easily readable size’ and then proceeds to take six pages of A4 to describe what should go into it! It also includes a requirement for graphical representations of the risk and return profile of each investment option.”

While all sides agreed that the basis of the directive—putting effective systems of governance and risk management at the heart of a pension—it attracted more criticism than praise.

The most damning reproach came for the impact assessment that was published a few hours after the original document. This document formed the basis for the establishment of the new rulings.

Towers Watson’s Roberts said that the assessment had collected responses from just three UK pension funds—out of a possible several thousand—was deplorable and made the conclusions “meaningless”.

“The impact assessment paints a picture of regimes not fit for purpose. The reality is that the impact assessment is not fit for purpose,” he said.

The full text of the European Commission’s report can be found here.

(March 28, 2014) — Hewitt EnnisKnupp has told investors that now is a good time to build exposure to emerging market dollar-denominated debt in their growth portfolios.

Having suffered a dreadful 2013, emerging market debt that is denominated in a major external currency—known as hard currency—is experiencing a comeback.

In a white paper, the consultants said: “We believe that emerging market countries are on a stronger footing to cope with US monetary tightening than in the 1990s when US rate hikes triggered emerging market losses. The move to floating exchange rates, lower external debt levels, and higher currency reserves all provide greater resilience in the face of a crisis.”

In addition, despite rising US yields being expected to cause a drag on emerging market hard currency debt returns, Hewitt EnnisKnupp still expected positive returns of around 4% to 5% a year over the medium-term, making them far more attractive than US corporate bonds, for example.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news. 

Hard currency-denominated corporate bonds also outperformed sovereign bonds in the recent market sell-off, as they were supported by their lower sensitivity to interest rate moves and the global rally in credit spreads, the consultants continued.

But emerging market bonds issued in local currencies performed worse than hard currency bonds in 2013, as concerns over economic fundamentals led emerging market currencies to depreciate.

Many investors will feel concerned about how rising rates in the US could draw capital away from emerging economies. While Hewitt EnnisKnupp agreed that investment into emerging market bonds may well occur at a more cautious rate than in previous years, it argued that new investors would be attracted by emerging market bonds’ higher yields and solid strategic benefits once the current high levels of negative sentiment faded.

“We are further reassured by the fact that it has been retail investors that have been selling while institutional investors have remained invested,” it added. “We expect investor interest in emerging market bonds to resume in 2014 as the appeal of high yields at a reasonable reward for risk taken remains a driving market force.”

Having said this, investing in emerging market hard currency debt across the entire universe could result in some painful experiences. Countries with current account deficits are dependent on external financing, and as such emerging market hard currency sovereign bonds from these countries are consequently most vulnerable to rising US yields, Hewitt EnnisKnupp advised.

“These debtor countries with high inflation have been dubbed the ‘fragile five’, but there are other countries, such as those with high domestic credit levels that will also struggle with interest rate hikes.”

Therefore, the consultants recommended that investors interested in this space should only consider active managers. “There are good opportunities for managers to outperform emerging market debt benchmarks. This is particularly the case now. Emerging market bonds currently have a broad range of return prospects, driven by varying economic situations, policies, and sensitivities to factors such as interest rates and commodities.”

The full paper can be requested here.