I
Irn Bru 4 Hangovers
Member
A couple of past questions give answers along the lines that if a pension scheme becomes financially unmanageable to a sponsor then the Trustees should consider setting TPs to, say, buyout level in order to increase the scheme's call on the Company's assets in the event of the Company becoming insolvent.
However, wouldn't such a debt in any case be calculated on a s75 type basis based on a proxy to buy-out cost? If so, then how relevant are the scheme's TPs here?
I can see how the larger deficit might give the Trustees more leverage to accelerate funding (which may be some use depending on how poorly the sponsor is). I can also see how the gilts-based discount rate may be more in line with the likely investment strategy in this case. But I'm just not convinced by the creditor (bump up the call on assets) argument - I like the idea of it but I'm not sure how it would affect the scheme's standing as a creditor in practice.
Have I missed something here?
However, wouldn't such a debt in any case be calculated on a s75 type basis based on a proxy to buy-out cost? If so, then how relevant are the scheme's TPs here?
I can see how the larger deficit might give the Trustees more leverage to accelerate funding (which may be some use depending on how poorly the sponsor is). I can also see how the gilts-based discount rate may be more in line with the likely investment strategy in this case. But I'm just not convinced by the creditor (bump up the call on assets) argument - I like the idea of it but I'm not sure how it would affect the scheme's standing as a creditor in practice.
Have I missed something here?