TPR: Market oversight report and new guidance on data
The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has published a report following its recent regulatory initiative and engagement with schemes on member data, together with revised member data guidance, as TPR intensifies its engagement with the industry in this area. Key themes arising from TPR’s market oversight report include:
- While most schemes have made progress on cleansing personal data used for dashboards matching, value data—used to calculate benefits—is often overlooked. This value data will be a key focus for TPR in its next phase of industry engagement on dashboards data.
- Improvement plans tended not to be up to the standards set out in TPR’s guidance; they were frequently informal or fragmented, with vague timescales.
- Although some trustees showed good governance, including quarterly discussions on data at trustee boards and sub-committees focused specifically on administration (including data), many showed an overreliance on administrators.
What are the key themes of the regulator’s new member data guidance?
The revised guidance consolidates all data-related guidance (previously referred to as "record-keeping") into one place and sets out clearer expectations (including best practice examples) to help schemes achieve better data management. It includes sections on:
- roles and responsibilities (emphasising the duties of trustees/governing bodies, even where there is delegation to administrators);
- defining scheme member data (in particular, identifying essential, scheme-specific data)
- assessing member data quality—the need for a data review exercise should be assessed at least annually, in line with the General Code, to ensure that data remains of high quality. The frequency with which the quality of data is measured in practice will depend on the size, nature, scale and complexity of the relevant scheme—larger or more complex schemes may need to review this more frequently
- data quality improvement plans—this section sets out detailed guidance on the Regulator’s expectations as to the content of these plans, including clear timelines, milestones and outcomes
- maintaining data quality, including working with the employer, administrator, members and IT systems.
Read the market oversight report and the new guidance.
Linked to TPR’s new guidance, the Pensions Administration Standards Association (PASA) has published guidance on "The Six Data Quality Dimensions for Pension Scheme Member Data" and a Data Improvement Plan (DIP) Template.
Read the PASA resources.
Court of appeal rules unfunded pension liabilities were not tax-deductible
The Court of Appeal has upheld decisions of the Upper and First-Tier Tribunals that pension promises made to directors and key employees of two companies were unfunded unapproved retirement benefit schemes (UURBS) and that provisions made for liabilities under these arrangements in the companies’ accounts were not tax deductible: AD Bly Groundworks and Civil Engineering Limited & Anor v. The Commissioners for HMRC.
The Court of Appeal has upheld HMRC’s primary argument that the amounts in question were liabilities incurred for the purpose of a tax avoidance scheme, rather than expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of trade, meaning that corporation tax deductions should be denied. The First-Tier Tribunal had found that the primary purpose of entering into the UURBS was to reduce the companies’ liability to pay tax without incurring any actual expenditure. The Court of Appeal agreed that the provision of pensions via the UURBS was "at best" an incidental aim; the principal purpose of the arrangements was tax avoidance and therefore the provisions in the accounts were not deductible under section 54 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009.
What does this ruling mean for other employers?
HMRC is understood to have challenged arrangements of this type that had been marketed to a number of companies. The arrangements were notified to HMRC in accordance with the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes provisions in the Finance Act 2004. The letter of engagement provided by the companies’ adviser included a warning that the arrangements might be perceived as "aggressive tax planning" and that HMRC was very likely to raise enquiries on the matter, but it did not appear that the companies had obtained appropriate financial, pension or tax planning advice. The case is a reminder that HMRC and the courts will look closely at the surrounding facts and circumstances to determine whether arrangements are bona fide (including seeking tax-efficiency) or in reality a strategy to avoid tax and therefore not deductible.
Read the decision.
TPR publishes details of 2026 DB/hybrid scheme return
As trailed in its recent regulatory round-up, TPR has updated the scheme return questions for DB and hybrid pension schemes. The 2026 return will require:
- (for schemes with total protected liabilities for PPF purposes of GBP1.5 billion or more) a more detailed breakdown of the unquoted/private equity asset class, including sub-categories such as venture capital and private equity, along with a UK/non-UK split
- further information on arrangements supporting leveraged liability-driven investments, including details of how they prepare for collateral calls under extreme market conditions, with details of pre-agreed asset sale plans and the asset classes they would sell under these plans.
Scheme return notices will be sent in early 2026 and must be returned via Exchange by March 31, 2026
Read the new scheme return information.
ECCTA: Guidance on non-compliance with ID verification requirements
Companies House has published guidance on its approach to enforcement where individuals do not comply with new identity verification requirements for directors, LLP members and people with significant control (PSCs) which came into force on November 18 (for more on the requirements, read our briefing). The guidance notes that Companies House will "be guided by value for money and the principles of using our powers proportionately, consistently, transparently and in an evidence based and targeted way." It outlines enforcement options and how it will assess which is the most appropriate to each situation.
Read the guidance.
PPF consultation on 2026/27 levy
The Pension Protection Fund (PPF) has published its 2026/27 levy consultation. It intends to maintain a zero levy for conventional schemes, but this is dependent on the passage of provisions in the Pension Schemes Bill which will allow the levy to be reduced (including to zero) without restricting the ability of the PPF to increase the levy in future years. If sufficient certainty is not reached about those provisions, the PPF proposes to re-use the 2025/26 levy rules and data as a fallback, maintaining the levy estimate at GBP45 million, but with the possibility of recalculating the levy to zero. The PPF proposes to continue to charge a risk-based levy for Alternative Covenant Schemes, with some refinements. The consultation closes on January 5, 2026.
Read the consultation documents.
