The picture is not uniformly grim though, with food inflation holding at 1.3% and services inflation stuck at 3.4%, while core CPI, which strips out volatile food and fuel moves, remained at 2.6%. But there will still be concerns that businesses will start passing higher energy costs on as higher prices for goods and services.

Given this ramp-up in consumer prices, the pressure on the Bank of England to raise rates is mounting, although a hold at 3.75% is still expected tomorrow. The bigger shift is happening in expectations for the months ahead, with markets now pricing in multiple hikes as the energy shock threatens to keep inflation elevated. That is going to pile on the financial pain for those looking to remortgage or get onto the housing ladder. With energy costs rising and borrowing costs looking set to surge higher, there looks set to be a fresh squeeze on spending, so consumers are going to become even choosier about where they spend their available cash.

Nevertheless, it appears investors have become used to this cycle of warnings about inflationary pressures, and are set to shrug off this latest snapshot. The FTSE 100 is set for some gains in early trading, while Wall Street futures also point to a sanguine opening even as attention is trained on the upcoming Fed meeting, with another hiking cycle in central bankers' sights. The chronic energy crunch, combined with accelerated spending on the AI build-out, risks tipping stubbornly high inflation even higher. The feeling is that the Fed won’t be able to sit on its hands, and now an increase is widely expected – with a 92.4% chance of at least a 25-basis-point U.S. rate hike today being factored in. The big question is how high could they go – with multiple hikes now expected over the next year.

But there is a little relief on the energy front this morning, with crude prices dipping after US inventories unexpectedly rose. American crude stocks increased by 7.1 million barrels last week, confounding expectations for a draw, while gasoline and distillate inventories also climbed. Brent slipped briefly back below $108 a barrel as a result but has begun climbing again.

So there's been some respite, but it was a small breather rather than the start of long-term relief. The underlying supply picture remains extremely tight, with a halt to crude exports at the Saudi port of Yanbu, due to drone attacks, adding to the concerns over how much crude can actually reach the market.

Every day appears to bring a fresh development in the conflict, making the supply picture even more fragile. Saudi Arabia’s air defences shot down a Houthi drone south of Mecca, with the threat to the holy city another ominous twist in the conflict. The Houthis deny targeting Mecca, but the incident brings the war into stark reality for the kingdom, showing that the threat is no longer confined to oil installations and shipping lanes, but is now reaching towards the heart of the country’s religious life.”

Geoff brings with him over twenty years of experience in pensions. He joins TPT from Bank of America where he was Head of Pensions for UK & Ireland. Following pension consulting roles at WTW and KPMG, Geoff moved to O2 as Pensions and Benefits manager, later progressing to Head of Pensions at Virgin Media O2. Geoff is a qualified actuary.

Commenting on the appointment, Andy O’Regan, Chief Client Strategy Officer at TPT Retirement Solutions, said: “Geoff joins TPT at an important stage in our growth, as we continue to broaden the range of pension solutions we offer to schemes and employers. As our business grows, maintaining high governance standards will be critical and Geoff will be instrumental in ensuring we continue to deliver for our members.“

Geoff Tookey, Head of Trustee Services, at TPT Retirement Solutions, said: “It is an exciting time to join TPT. It has a clear and innovative vision for the future of pensions, and I look forward to working closely with our trustees to deliver better outcomes for our members.”

The report, From Scale to Impact: A Blueprint for the Future DC Pensions Market, explores how consolidation and pension reforms could reshape how default funds invest. It sets out how larger schemes could build more diversified portfolios and increase exposure to private markets.

With a long-term outlook, the research projects that the UK workplace DC market could be dominated by 10 to 15 larger pension schemes by 2035, each managing more than £50 billion of assets. Under this scenario, default funds could potentially allocate between 15% and 30% of assets to private markets during the growth phase of retirement saving, compared with around 2% to 4% today1.

It’s also anticipated that the range of private assets within defaults will broaden. Rather than concentrating exposure in a single asset class, the blueprint sets out a scenario in which future default funds invest across a broad mix of private market assets. Private equity and venture capital could account for 30% to 50% of private market allocations, private credit 20% to 40%, and infrastructure and real assets 20% to 40%2. This mix could support more diversified portfolios and stronger long-term outcomes for savers by combining different sources of return and risk.

The report suggests private credit is likely to play an increasingly important role in helping schemes manage liquidity and downside risk. Infrastructure investments could provide long-term, inflation-linked cashflows and diversification benefits, helping to smooth returns over time, while private equity and venture capital are expected to remain important drivers of long-term growth and value creation.

The findings indicate that UK DC schemes could begin to look more like their international counterparts. Australian superannuation funds currently invest around 17% of assets in private markets, with some growth-stage strategies allocating up to 40%, while Canadian public pension funds allocate around a quarter of assets to private markets. However, the composition of those allocations differs. Australian investors have tended to place greater emphasis on infrastructure and real assets, while Canadian funds typically allocate more heavily to private equity and venture capital. The blueprint suggests future UK default funds are likely to draw on both approaches, combining infrastructure's diversification and inflation-protection characteristics with the growth potential offered by private equity and venture capital.

While maintaining global diversification, the report argues that future schemes are likely to retain a meaningful domestic bias within their private market allocations. It estimates that 30% to 50% of private market investments could be allocated to UK opportunities, compared with around 5% to 10% of listed equity investments. As private market allocations grow, this could materially increase the volume of pension capital flowing into UK infrastructure, businesses and other productive assets.

By 2035, the report estimates that between £40 billion and £200 billion of DC pension assets could be invested in UK private markets under this approach, compared with an estimated £2 billion to £3 billion invested in private markets by today’s master trusts.

Jenny Holt, Product Director at Standard Life, said: "Interest in private markets has grown significantly in recent years, but adoption across the workplace pensions market is developing at different speeds.

"This research explores how the DC market could evolve over the longer term if schemes continue to consolidate and gain greater scale. In that environment, larger schemes may be better placed to access a broader range of investment opportunities and build more diversified portfolios.

"Ultimately, the focus should not be on allocation targets alone, but on the value private market investments can deliver for members. Different schemes are likely to take different approaches as the market develops, but any investment strategy should remain focused on improving member outcomes, delivering value for money and being supported by strong governance and a clear investment rationale."

Joe Ahern, Director of Policy at WPI Economics, said: “Scale changes what pension schemes can invest in and how they invest. Larger schemes are better positioned to access a wider range of opportunities, build specialist expertise and construct more diversified portfolios across different private market asset classes.

“The challenge now is ensuring the wider regulatory and commercial environment supports schemes in accessing those opportunities while maintaining a relentless focus on delivering value for savers.”

The report argues that greater scale, a stronger focus on value rather than cost, and reforms to support investment in illiquid assets will be necessary if schemes are to adopt these strategies at scale while maintaining a focus on delivering good pension outcomes for pension savers.

Balz Grollimund, Head Catastrophe Perils at Swiss Re, said: "The Atlantic hurricane season has been relatively quiet so far this year, but it only takes one major storm making landfall in a highly exposed area to turn a quiet season into a costly one. One hundred years after the Great Miami Hurricane, the question is not simply how powerful the next major hurricane will be, but what it will encounter when it reaches shore. That lesson extends well beyond Florida: as populations and asset values increase in areas exposed to natural catastrophes, so does the potential for large insured losses."

A century of population and property growth has transformed the potential impact of a hurricane striking Miami-Dade County. Just over 100,000 residents lived there when the Great Miami Hurricane arrived in 1926, compared with around 2.8 million in Miami-Dade today. More than two million homes in the Miami metropolitan area, with a combined reconstruction cost exceeding USD 600 billion, are now at moderate or greater risk of hurricane wind damage.

Where a hurricane makes landfall is critical. Hurricane Andrew struck around 20 miles south of Miami as a Category 5 storm in 1992, largely sparing Miami's much larger concentration of insured property. Swiss Re Institute estimates that the same track today would cause close to USD 100 billion in insured losses. By contrast, a Category 5 hurricane striking Miami or Tampa Bay could cause insured losses of USD 300 billion or more.

The centenary is also a resilience story. Traditional and alternative reinsurance capacity can be more effective when supported by catastrophe modelling, disciplined accumulation management and effective mitigation. Stronger building codes and wind-resistant construction can help reduce hurricane losses. Updated standards helped newer homes in Florida withstand Hurricane Ian in 2022, while replaced and storm-proofed roofs further reduced vulnerability.

Monica Ningen, CEO US P&C Reinsurance at Swiss Re, said: "Florida’s growth has transformed the risk landscape, making it increasingly important for insurers, communities and policymakers to understand how exposure is changing. Stronger building standards have improved resilience, but continued population and property growth in exposed areas means the potential for severe losses remains significant. Effective mitigation and risk modelling can help manage that risk, while reinsurance helps insurers absorb the volatility of severe events."

The English version of the sigma insights "The Great Miami Hurricane at 100: hurricane loss potential could exceed USD 300 billion"

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “There’s no let-up in the volatility rippling through financial markets, with energy prices staying painfully elevated and worries swirling about the knock-on effect for inflation and interest rates. A sea of red could be set to wash over indices, just as attention turns to the Red Sea and mounting threats to shipping and oil exports. The FTSE 100 is turning lower in early trade, and the sell-off hitting US markets this week, exacerbated by concerns about high risks of rapid AI advancements, looks set to continue.

Brent crude has climbed back to highly unwelcome levels, above $107 a barrel as supply concerns are back front and centre. There are more twists in Iran’s story of retaliation, with escape routes for exports blocked off and passing the Strait of Hormuz remaining highly risky. Saudi Arabia’s pipeline stretching from the East of the country to the Red Sea port of Yanbu is closed due to drone attacks, with repairs forecast to take weeks. Houthi rebels have seized the key Hanish islands, which now threaten ships’ passage through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the vital shipping route linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden, raising the risk of further disruption to global oil flows. Given the can of worms which has been ripped open, with fresh threats popping up all over the place, it’s not surprising it’s adding another layer of pressure to highly watchful markets. The conflict has become more entrenched, with Iran clearly in this fight for the long haul, and it’s led to fresh worries that higher energy costs will become embedded in economies, leaving companies with little choice but to hike prices on a vast range of goods.

That’ll be concentrating the minds of the raft of central bankers meeting this week on both sides of the Atlantic to decide on rate hikes. The bond markets are reflecting concerns that the only way is up, and the worries that the ascent could be a steep one. 10-year gilt yields remain highly elevated at levels not seen since the Great Financial Crisis. It’s a fraught picture for US Treasuries, with the 10-year Treasury yield also creeping over the psychologically important 5% mark, flirting with a rate not seen since 2007.

Corporate debt is proving to be a formidable rival to government debt offerings, with the hyperscalers increasingly tapping bond markets to fund the enormous cost of data centres, chips and computing capacity.

The latest jobs figures add another awkward piece of the picture for the UK economy, which may keep central bankers puzzling about how to react. Payrolled employment has fallen by 145,000 over the year, with another 26,000 people dropping off payrolls in August, while vacancies have slipped to 702,000, which is the lowest level outside the pandemic since 2014. Unemployment is holding at 4.9%, so while this is not a jobs market in freefall, businesses are clearly becoming more reluctant to take people on as labour and other costs remain painfully elevated.

Pay growth is cooling too, with regular earnings growth (including bonuses) easing to 3.9%, but that is hardly enough to make the inflation problem disappear. This snapshot points to a 3.9% rise in the state pension next April under the triple lock, with average earnings growth, the measure used for the calculation, being pushed higher by particularly strong public sector pay growth. Public sector pay is running at 6.3%, more than twice the 2.9% pace in the private sector, which reflects the impact of pay awards and the timing of them.

That’s likely to reignite the debate around the triple lock, particularly when government debt is already so high, and the cost of servicing it is painfully expensive. It may be even more controversial given that a pay measure which has been boosted by public sector wage awards is helping drive up the state pension bill at the same time as the government is already under pressure to contain spending and borrowing.

With inflation already stubbornly above target and energy prices surging again, the UK is facing an increasingly uncomfortable combination of a jobs market losing momentum at the same time as another inflationary shock is potentially building, and pressure on public spending is mounting.

So the spectre of stagflation is still looming over the UK economy. Although the latest growth figures surprised on the upside, there will be concern that GDP is not robust enough to sustain a drop in confidence among households and consumers if the energy crunch continues. Fewer vacancies, falling payroll numbers and cautious employers point to an economy losing some of its hiring power, just as higher energy costs descend. Policymakers at the Bank of England will be mindful that the economy is struggling to gain momentum, yet some are increasingly concerned about the rising inflationary risks. While a pause still looks likely on Thursday, four interest rate hikes are now being priced in, and those expectations will show up in higher borrowing costs in the mortgage market, so households are already bracing for high bills ahead.”

Helen Morrissey, head of retirement analysis, Hargreaves Lansdown: “Pensioners stand to be almost £490 better off next year as today’s earnings figures have a huge impact on next year’s state pension. The data, alongside September’s inflation figure and 2.5%, is a key component of the triple lock formula used to increase state pensions. With CPI inflation currently sitting at 2.9% it seems increasingly likely that today’s 3.9% increase in average earnings will be the figure used. This would put someone on the full new state pension on course to receive £250.70 per week from next April – up from the current £241.30 per week. Someone on a full basic state pension would receive £192.10 per week – up from £184.90. This will be a welcome boost to pensioner incomes but remember that the state pension is the foundation of your income and will only cover the essentials. HL’s Savings and Resilience Barometer shows only 43% of households are on track for an adequate retirement – the state pension will get you some of the way, but not all of it. If you want more from your retirement, you need to take your pension planning into your own hands. Taking advantage of tools such as online calculators lets you see how much you are on track to have and how much income that is likely to give you when you retire. If you have a gap between what you have and what you need then taking small actions, such as boosting contributions every time you get a pay increase or promotion could have a big impact over time. If your employer is willing to increase their contribution if you increase yours – known as the employer match – then this can also make a big difference. This steady drip feed of contributions invested over the long term can transform your retirement.”

The Triple Lock, introduced in 2011 by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition government, guarantees that the State Pension rises each April by the highest of average earnings growth, September CPI inflation or 2.5%. It replaced a system under which the basic State Pension had for decades been largely linked to inflation, meaning that while pensioners were protected against rising prices, the value of the State Pension had gradually fallen behind average earnings.

The key May-July earnings figures published by the Office for National Statistics today shows earnings rising 3.9%. Unless September inflation subsequently comes in higher, earnings are therefore likely to determine the April 2027 increase in the State Pension.

Earnings growth at 3.9%, means the full new State Pension would rise from £241.30 to around £250.70 a week - taking annual income to approximately £13,036. Someone receiving the full basic State Pension under the pre-2016 system could see their weekly payment rise from £184.90 to around £192.10.

This particular calculation applies to those receiving the full State Pension, but it illustrates the wider tension: as the State Pension rises while tax thresholds remain frozen, more pensioners are pulled into the tax net and the Exchequer effectively takes back part of the increase it has just awarded.

The State Pension is taxable income, although it is normally paid without tax being deducted at source. Pensioners with additional income from workplace or private pensions may therefore find more of their retirement income caught by income tax as the State Pension rises while tax thresholds remain frozen.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance, PensionBee, comments: “An inflation-beating State Pension rise will be welcome news for millions of pensioners, particularly those struggling with the cost of everyday essentials. But there is an increasingly obvious contradiction at the heart of the system: the Triple Lock is pushing the State Pension up while frozen tax thresholds are pulling more pensioners into the tax net.

“A rise of 3.9% next April would take the state pension above £13,000 and notably above the tax-free £12,570 Personal Allowance.So we increasingly have one arm of the government raising pensioners’ incomes while another claws some of that increase back through tax.”

The Triple Lock was introduced after decades in which the State Pension had fallen behind average earnings. Its role in rebuilding its value means PensionBee believes the debate should move beyond a binary choice between keeping the current system forever or simply scrapping it.

Currie comments: “The Triple Lock has done an important job. For three decades before its introduction, the State Pension was largely linked to price rises. While that protected its purchasing power, it meant pensioners progressively fell behind the earnings of working households. The Triple Lock helped reverse that decline and rebuild the value of the State Pension.

“But it was designed as a catch-up mechanism, not necessarily a forever policy. Because it always chooses the highest of inflation, earnings growth or 2.5%, over time this formula can ratchet the State Pension up faster than any one of those measures taken alone. Recent periods of volatility have highlighted the ratchet effect of the Triple Lock. The State Pension rose by 10.1% in April 2023, reflecting the previous September’s inflation rate, and by another 8.5% in April 2024, in line with earnings growth. Because each increase becomes part of the pension’s new baseline, these unusually large rises are effectively locked in and compound future spending.”

The OBR estimates that, because inflation and earnings have proved much more volatile than initially anticipated, the Triple Lock has cost around three times more than originally expected.

“After 15 years of the Triple Lock, calls for its reform are growing as the cost continues to rise and questions of generational fairness become harder to ignore. The UK has around one million young people not in employment, education or training, persistent child poverty and a generation of workers facing high housing costs and a heavy tax burden, while also being asked to fund an increasingly expensive retirement system,” says Currie.

She adds: “However, pitching pensioners against young people is the wrong answer. We all rely on younger generations to work, build businesses and pay the taxes that ultimately support the State Pension. The challenge is to protect pensioners from poverty today without steadily passing an unsustainable bill to the working generation.”

“People make retirement decisions decades ahead, so you can’t move the goalposts overnight. Any reform of the Triple Lock needs to be clearly signalled years in advance so people understand what is changing and have time to plan,” .

But the debate over the Triple Lock should not happen in isolation. PensionBee believes policymakers need to take a more holistic view of retirement provision, considering the level of the State Pension alongside the State Pension age and the adequacy of private pension saving.

Auto-enrolment has successfully brought millions more people into workplace pension saving, but there are growing concerns that minimum contribution levels will not provide many workers with enough to maintain their standard of living in retirement. Millions more remain inadequately served by the system, including many self-employed and gig workers, and lower earners.

“The Triple Lock protects the baseline income of today’s retirees, but we also have serious structural gaps in private pension saving. Millions of tomorrow’s retirees risk reaching later life with nowhere near enough to maintain their standard of living,”

That makes the question of intergenerational fairness much broader than whether today's pensioners should receive a particular increase in their State Pension.

“This cannot descend into a young-versus-old argument. We need a State Pension settlement that today’s pensioners can rely on, while making sure today’s 20-, 30- and 40-year-olds are building enough private pension wealth and can reasonably expect the State Pension to still be there when they retire.

“The Triple Lock has helped repair the State Pension. The next challenge is much bigger: designing a retirement system - State Pension, State Pension age and private pension saving together - that is both adequate and sustainable for the next generation.”

These kinds of questions were at the heart of the agenda at a recent Willis cyber risk event, which brought together cyber risk and insurance specialists, legal professionals and cybersecurity experts to explore cyber risk management as a strategic imperative.

In this, the first of a series of articles based on insight from the event, we look at what recent incidents, the influence of AI and claims experience tell your business about better resilience and stronger recovery.

Should your systems go down, your organisation will want to know it can keep your customers informed, restore critical activity, manage suppliers, protect cash flow and make fast decisions with incomplete information. That means finance, legal, operations, risk management and executive leadership all need to understand what a cyber event would mean for the business to better prioritize investments in cyber resilience and how it will recover should an incident hit.

Our recent Cyber in Focus report showed ransomware incidents are disrupting organisations for an average of 25 days, with business interruption often driving a significant share of losses. The 2025 Jaguar Land Rover cyber attack, for example, lasted weeks, reaching UK factories, overseas operations, suppliers, business partners and local communities.

Without the right preparation supported at the highest levels, your teams may struggle to sustain manual workarounds and may uncover dependencies and insurance gaps they haven’t fully mapped.

Willis cyber specialists have seen attackers use AI to enhance impersonation, social engineering, credential misuse and deepfakes, making attacks easier to launch and harder to spot. One reported agentic AI-powered attack showed malicious actors using AI to identify vulnerabilities and exploit them with very little human input.

Every organisation needs disciplined cyber risk governance, tested response plans and clear recovery priorities. It also needs robust vendor management and supplier backups with a detailed understanding of which providers support critical activities, what your teams would do if those providers became unavailable and how long your business could keep operating without them.

Cyber insurance also has a role in helping your organisation quantify cyber risk and connecting your specific exposures to the operational disruptions and financial losses your board needs to plan for above all others.

Your organisation can get the most value from cover by using cyber risk quantification to set the appropriate limits and structure your policy around your specific operating exposures. Calling on insurers and brokers to align wordings, decide on approved vendors and refine incident response processes before an event hits will also help the business maximise insurance value alongside its resilience and recovery capabilities.

Discover more practical perspectives on maximising value from cyber insurance. Access Willis’ Cyber in Focus 2026 report.

Victoria Roberts, Senior Client Manager and Cyber and Data Lead at ZEDRA, commented: “The pensions industry has an important perspective to contribute to the Government’s call for evidence, given the abundance as well as sensitivity of member data and the number of organisations typically involved in its collection, processing and use. With AI changing how data is collected, processed and used, it is important that the regulatory framework keeps pace to ensure it remains fit for purpose. For pension schemes, this is particularly relevant. Large volumes of member data can move across a complex network of trustees, administrators, advisers, technology providers and other third parties, while trustees remain accountable for ensuring that members’ interests are protected. For example, where the risk settlement industry is so active within DB pensions, large amounts of detailed personal data are being transferred and accessed.”

Roberts added: “Any future approach to data regulation needs to recognise this reality and provide clarity around accountability, governance and the appropriate use of data across these relationships. Trustees need to be able to understand not just what data and where data is held, but how it is being used, including where AI-enabled technologies form part of the process.

“As the Government considers the evidence, the pensions industry must ensure its experience is part of the conversation and shares insights from its collective experience. Getting the balance right will be important in enabling schemes to benefit from AI, such as more efficient processes and automation, while maintaining the trust and protections members expect.”

Roberts concluded: “AI has the potential to vastly improve how pension schemes operate and how members are supported, but innovation needs to be underpinned by effective governance and guard rails that adequately protect members interests. The current call for evidence is a great opportunity for the pensions industry to ensure the regulatory framework supports responsible use of AI without creating unnecessary uncertainty for schemes.”

Today’s data shows GDP grew by 0.4% in July, according to the ONS, comfortably beating expectations for a contraction and following growth of 0.3% in June. Over the three months to July, the economy expanded by 0.4%, marking the eighth consecutive three-month period of growth.

While it's far from a rip-roaring recovery, it does suggest the UK economy has more staying power than feared, particularly given the pressure households and businesses are facing from scorchingly high energy prices and elevated borrowing costs.

Services are once again doing the heavy lifting, growing by 0.6% over the three months to July, with professional, scientific and technical activity and information and communication among the strongest performers.

AI also appear to be providing a bounce, with computer programming, consultancy and related activities jumping 3.5% in July. Many businesses with the largest turnover in these areas were involved in activities related to artificial intelligence and cloud computing.

It’s a sign that the AI spending boom is starting to feed through into the wider economy, as businesses invest in the computing power, software and expertise needed to put the technology to work.

But there are still plenty of warning lights flashing. Production and construction both contracted by 0.5% over the three months to July, while consumer-facing services fell 0.4% in July, suggesting households are still cautious.

So, while the spectre of outright stagnation looms more faintly over the economy, the danger is that with crude and gas prices racing higher again and borrowing costs escalating, they will squeeze households and businesses, just as growth appears to have built a bit more momentum.

The bond market has switched into panic mode, with investors demanding sharply higher returns to lend, with 10-year gilt yields reaching levels not seen since the summer of 2007. While oil prices have retreated a little from the painfully high levels yesterday, when Brent nudged 108 a barrel, they are still painfully elevated, keeping inflationary concerns front and centre.

Interest rate decision

For the Bank of England, today's stronger-than-expected GDP figure makes an interest rate increase this year a touch more likely. Nevertheless, given the volatile times decision-makers are meeting in, it’s still likely they will once again press the pause button next week and await more data. The MPC held Bank Rate at 3.75% in July, with policymakers split 6-3, with three members voting for a hike.

The big worry is that higher energy costs will be passed on as higher prices by businesses and consumers, but it’s likely that the committee will want to see more evidence of that before triggering rate hikes. Given the turmoil in energy and bond markets, however, there is an expectation that we could see three to even four rate hikes over the next year. However, if the economy slows and consumers turn more cautious, that reticence may do some of the inflation-busting work for the bank.”

As markets soften rapidly in 2026, the importance of technical pricing will increase. Firms need to monitor closely how far they allow rates to fall relative to technical adequacy, and there comes a point where the technical rates need to “bite” and prompt conversations about limiting premium volumes on a particular class of business.

The best firms have detailed “retreat plans” for each class, and for the overall portfolio mix. As one underwriter recently told me “anyone can reduce volume in a soft market, but it’s all about knowing where to reduce that volume.”

It’s especially important in a soft market to capture data on underwriting decisions versus technical prices. This data needs to differentiate between instances where the underwriter accepts the technical price but cannot realistically achieve that rate in the market, versus cases where the underwriter has a different view on the technical price itself.

Over time, this dataset can reveal whether model weaknesses, inconsistent underwriting, market pressures or strategic choices are driving pricing outcomes. This is potentially even more valuable than the underlying policy and claims data for refining pricing models over time. Only a minority of firms are doing an effective job in this area, so it is a potential angle for generating competitive advantage in difficult market conditions.

Other firms have pricing actuaries working closely with underwriters but reporting into a central actuarial pricing function. This can provide a better combination of independent challenge and business-as-usual assistance. Importantly, it can be helpful for each pricing actuary to have visibility of multiple classes of business. This enables them to spot differences in underwriting approaches and to highlight risks to the central pricing function.

The remit of PMTs varies a lot from firm to firm. A common approach is for PMTs to do a lot of work on “thematic” issues like inflation or silent cyber risk, as well as deep dives on problematic classes of business. This is in addition to the core function of helping management decide how to allocate capital or premium volume “budget” between classes.

In other cases, PMTs play different roles, like “translating” between the actuarial pricing function and underwriters, developing new pricing models or helping with new product strategy.

A pitfall for firms to watch out for is creating the sense that the “exciting” pricing work is all going to the PMT, leaving only repetitive daily pricing work to the actuarial pricing team. This can affect performance and retention – rather, the actuarial pricing team and PMT should work closely together to ensure that both benefit from the insights generated by the other.

A key current focus for many firms is using LLMs to automate the ingestion of submission data into the underwriting system. The smallest firms are some way from achieving this, because of lower business volumes (meaning that there is less money to be saved) and lack of resources. The largest firms are tending to pursue this on an “enterprise” scale, which ultimately may be very efficient but may take a couple of years to implement. This may create an opportunity for well-resourced mid-tier firms: they can test focused use cases more quickly than firms pursuing enterprise-wide transformation, while still having sufficient scale for the savings to matter.

An obvious challenge to LLM-assisted data ingestion is “won’t the LLM get things wrong or hallucinate data?” These concerns are valid but, when firms have backtested these solutions against past data, it turns out that humans were making plenty of data ingestion mistakes in the past!

We are still a way off from deep integration of AI into underwriting decision-making itself. The potential gains are clear, but specialty underwriting involves such a high degree of judgement that there will be a high bar for models to add real value.

One way forward is a model that observes underwriter behaviour and identifies decisions that are inconsistent with past practice. This could lead to better decisions over time. Some firms already have simple solutions to help with this, such as automatically showing the underwriter 3-5 examples of similar risks that they have underwritten recently, before they make their decision on the risk at hand.

London Market underwriting is a business that is massively driven by relationships and expert judgement. This makes it a particularly exciting area to apply the actuarial skillset to help manage risk, unlock efficiencies and ultimately maintain competitive advantage. Pricing actuaries will need to continue to innovate in order to achieve this.

Reporting its update for August 2026, the Broadstone Sirius Index found that both schemes held steady throughout the month with the ‘growth focused’ scheme seeing only 0.6 percentage points between the highest and lowest funding level. The ‘matching’ scheme showed a narrower range, as expected, staying in a 0.4 percentage point range.

Overall, the ‘growth focused’ scheme saw a marginal improvement in funding which rose from 94.1% to 94.2% through the month, while the ‘matching focused’ scheme dropped by 0.1 percentage points to 89.8% at the end of August.

Andy Knight-Stephens, Investment Director at Broadstone, commented: “August saw gilt yields reach levels not seen for decades. The move was part of a broader global government bond sell-off, driven by persistent inflation concerns and renewed focus on fiscal sustainability.

“Growth assets, particularly equities, delivered positive returns over August, with most major equity markets advancing in Sterling terms, despite the continued uncertain macroeconomic backdrop.

“Pension schemes will have seen mixed results over the month depending on their composition of fixed and inflation-linked liabilities and approach to investment strategy.

“Looking ahead we could see collateral calls for LDI arrangements, and schemes should consider asset allocation rebalancing needs in light of recent growth and matching asset performance.”

As automation deepens, organisations face increasing scrutiny around oversight, accountability and patient safety. At the same time, cyber, clinical, technology and compliance risks are becoming more interconnected, while workforce competency becomes ever more critical to maintaining trust and delivering care in a tech-fuelled environment.

Against this backdrop, digital health business leaders now see fast and reliable claims handling and payment as the most important factor when choosing an insurance partner.

Carolyn Conners, Head of Healthcare at Beazley, said: “As the digital health sector matures, the growth story is becoming more complex. While AI investment continues to accelerate and create significant opportunities, it is also raising important questions about standards of care as companies embed AI and other technologies more deeply into patient services. This makes robust governance, clear policies and procedures, effective human oversight, and well-defined guardrails more important than ever. Partnering with insurers that help organisations manage interconnected risks, proactively prevent losses, and respond effectively when incidents occur will be key to building long-term resilience and sustainable growth.”

Beazley Report on Digital Health 2026

"More specifically, the central bank will be concerned regarding the sharp increase in regional natural gas prices which are now significantly above the are now significantly above the E45/MWh level identified in its own pessimistic outlook scenario published back in June. Confirmation that the region’s gas storage level stands at just 65% against a 90% target by end-November and the onset of winter, points to a structural supply problem risking another sharp upward price spike not unlike that witnessed in the autumn of 2022.

"The Governing Council will not want a repeat of the 2022 regional gas supply shock which saw headline inflation rise in excess of 10% and the euro hit parity against the US dollar, thus a strong imperative exists for rate-setters to act pre-emptively even though underlying consumer price pressures appear subdued with few indications, as yet, that higher energy costs are being passed through.

"President Lagarde is likely to face questions in her ensuing press conference regarding how the Governing Council views the recent surge in regional government bond yields. In part, the bond market sell-off is being driven by international factors over which the ECB has no control, however, the adjustment is being driven, in further part, by rising fiscal concerns, notably in relation to France and Italy. Mme Lagarde is highly likely to emphasise that the adjustment is not (yet) as pronounced as during regional crises of the past and that its armoury has been subsequently strengthened, particularly through the as yet unused Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI).

"Nonetheless, senior ECB officials will not want to be criticised for “falling behind the curve”. The highly regarded Executive Board member Ms Isabel Schnabel put it well stating recently that, “It is critical to prevent the occurrence of second-round effects early on because acting late could necessitate more (policy) tightening (in the future”.

"Beyond the justifications lying behind this week’s likely rate hike, much will hinge on the ECB’s perception regarding the outlook and the evolution of price pressures in particular. Financial market futures anticipate two further 25-basis point rate hikes, taking the Discount Rate to 3.00% by spring 2027. Without delivering any specific guidance other than the reiterated commitment to be guided by incoming data and a preparedness to act as necessary, senior officials are unlikely to want to close the door on further rate hikes in coming months."

Crucially, severe flooding is increasingly occurring in locations not historically classified as high risk, prompting renewed scrutiny of exposure and preparedness.

Recent flooding illustrates how once-in-a-lifetime events are now occurring in rapid succession. The United States’ Texas Hill Country floods, with more than 500 millimetres of rainfall in two days, exemplified this shift, resulting in substantial loss of life and revealing gaps in emergency response and insurance coverage. Further evidence of this intensification has been seen in Pakistan, Spain and elsewhere. The persistence and clustering of such extremes align with trends clearly established in 2023 and 2024. Climate change is increasing rainfall intensity and expanding flood hazard footprints, while societal exposure continues to outpace preparedness.

Flood impacts arise from three principal mechanisms: 1) fluvial flooding, when rivers exceed capacity and inundate surrounding land; 2) coastal flooding, when tides, low-pressure systems and wind-driven surge raise sea levels; and 3) pluvial flooding, when intense rainfall overwhelms drainage capacity.

In the U.S., FEMA produces flood maps, which are used to underpin many risk management activities including administration of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). One of the mapped flood extents is the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) which delineate the 1-in-100-year flood outline. However, all but the most recent versions of these maps do not account for pluvial flooding.

Pluvial flood risk is more difficult to map than fluvial or coastal flooding because it can occur far from rivers or coastlines and requires precise elevation data and knowledge of drainage capacity. The largest uncertainty stems from estimating intense rainfall: long-term rainfall records on which this assessment is based are often limited and climate change makes the problem a moving target. Consequently, many countries have been slow to develop or publish pluvial flood maps, leaving significant gaps in risk assessment and planning.

According to a recent study led by the University of Michigan, in the United States, pluvial claims typically result in smaller individual payouts than catastrophic river floods (median damage is about $9,500 per claim versus $51,000 for major events) but their sheer frequency makes them costly in aggregate. In lower risk areas outside SFHAs, pluvial flooding accounts for most claims and casualties. The same study reported that 87% of claims from properties outside FEMA’s SFHAs were due to pluvial flooding. Between 1978 and 2021, the NFIP paid $4 billion for pluvial flood claims outside of the SFHA, compared to $2.3 billion for major river floods in the same zones. These figures exclude uninsured losses, which are likely several times higher.

Assess exposure by using government tools like the Environment Agency’s flood risk map or FEMA’s Flood Map Service Center. Do not assume flood risk is zero outside of formal flood zones. Evaluate surface-water risk, especially in urban areas. Consider upstream and downstream dependencies: suppliers, logistics hubs and critical infrastructure.Where possible, register for flood warnings (river and coastal) and explore local alert systems for surface-water flooding. Develop a comprehensive flood plan that assigns clear responsibilities, identifies vulnerable assets and plans to relocate critical equipment above likely flood levels. Establish communication and evacuation protocols. Test and update plans regularly: treat them with the same rigour as fire safety drills. In England, for properties within the 100-year flood plain, a flood is five times more likely than a home fire.Prepare for recovery. In the home, this might mean resilient construction but also simple measures like keeping important papers safe and moving key belongings to safety. In business, this might also mean preparation for five key loss types: premises, people, equipment, IT systems and suppliers.Make sure that insurance coverage is adequate and covers the correct risks including property damage. Be certain that business interruption policies include flooding as a covered peril. Check limits, sub-limits, deductibles and occurrence clauses — flood events often span multiple days, complicating claims.

About the Authors: Neil Gunn, Head of Flood and Water Management Research, Willis Research Network; and Hayley Fowler, Professor of Climate Change Impacts, Newcastle University.

These concerns are showing up as warning lights in the bond markets, especially with Norway’s sovereign wealth fund proposing to cut its US Treasury holdings by potentially tens of billions of dollars. A decision by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to ramp up bond buybacks landed like a damp squib. It signalled the administration is worried about yields, but the scale of the buyback suggests it isn’t prepared to throw serious financial firepower at the problem. Steamy energy prices appear to be the trigger for these latest moves higher in yields, but there’s been an underlying structural shift in the global flow of money for some time as some of the world’s biggest institutional investors rotate away from Treasuries to seek returns in corporate debt, with a huge stream issued by AI hyperscalers. Add in the prospect of higher defence spending as geopolitical tensions rise, and there is potentially an even bigger supply of bonds looking for buyers.

And what happens in Treasuries doesn’t stay in Treasuries, with the pressure spilling over into other government debt, including gilts. Bond markets are closely connected, with investors constantly comparing the returns available from US Treasuries, UK gilts and other major sovereign debt. The European Central Bank meeting is in sharp focus today, with a hike in interest rates widely expected. Although the decision in itself is not set to be a market mover, President Christine Lagarde's comments will be closely watched for the direction of travel ahead. While she's stressed a future hiking path isn't set in stone, with Eurozone inflation staying creeping higher and hotter energy prices building, speculation is building about future hikes ahead.

There is specific UK pressure building as well, with investors looking ahead to the looming Budget, with government finances already under considerable pressure. Higher oil prices threaten to keep inflation elevated, while higher borrowing costs are already eating into the government’s fiscal headroom. The UK has already had to pay its highest yield on a 30-year gilt since the Debt Management Office was established in 1998, at 5.82%, underlining just how sensitive the public finances have become to higher borrowing costs. But demand for the debt was still strong, with investors putting in orders worth more than £87 billion for the £4.25 billion being sold, showing that investors are still willing to buy UK government debt, but at a very high price.

For households and businesses, the consequences eventually filter through in the form of more expensive mortgages, loans and corporate borrowing, potentially weighing on investment and growth, which is why there’s so much caution around on equity markets too.

Lacklustre trading has helped propel fast fashion giant Primark into making a U-turn it’s resisted for years. Primark is finally joining the home-delivery party, despite a record of repeatedly insisting that its cheap prices made online shopping too expensive to make sense. The retailer now says the success of Click & Collect, improving digital capabilities and a highly automated fulfilment centre in Sheffield have changed the maths, which is why it’s lurched into this U-turn. So customers will be able to get their fashion fix delivered when Primark spins off from parent company ABF, with the demerger targeted for the end of 2027.

The economics of home delivery have shifted, with customers also more used to having to pay fees for returns, and the dominance of Shein set to be eroded with the tax treatment of small parcel imports set to change. Primark has benefited from a loyal customer base, and its social media presence keeps them across new styles landing in stores, but its agility has been stifled given that it’s been so slow to adapt to the biggest shopping trend this century – e-commerce. Gone are the days post-pandemic when huge queues snaked round the block to snap up bargains once shops re-opened. It’s facing much tougher competition from high street rivals who can keep the digital tills running and parcels landing when conditions turn more inclement. The rolling heatwaves are likely to be partly why Primark’s sales have come under sharp pressure as customers have stayed away from scorching high streets amid stifling temperatures. Like-for-like sales are set to be down 3.0% in its fourth quarter to September 12, and UK and Ireland have fared a little better, with sales up marginally by 0.4%, while it’s been a struggle across continental Europe where they fell 4.3%. The European market arguably also needs a home delivery boost, but it’ll have to wait as the new delivery service is only reserved for the UK, for the meantime. So there’s no quick fix available yet for Primark’s sliding sales in key markets, while the rollout of the home delivery system in the UK won’t come cheap. So investors are turning increasingly sceptical about Primark’s prospects, with ABF shares down by more than 9% in early trading.

And the going has got tougher for John Lewis as it's squeezed by challenging consumer behaviour. Sales fell 2% to £2 billion in the six months to August 1, despite revenues across the wider Partnership rising 2%, helped by Waitrose. Shoppers are becoming increasingly cautious about big-ticket purchases, while extreme heat also kept people away from heading out on big shopping sprees. While the soaring temperatures over the summer might have boosted online sales of fans and outdoor goods, and picnic treats, it's made shopping a less attractive hobby as households found ways to cool off instead. When they do want to browse online or in-store, shoppers, with increasingly tight budgets, are being more choosy, looking for bargains or discount sites for a retail fix.

The department store concept is clearly past its prime. In its heyday, they sat at the head of the high street table, but their dominance has been eroded by more agile players, quicker to spot trends and more competitive on price. Shoppers now demand a bigger experience than five floors of goods with the odd demonstration and café thrown in, and John Lewis is struggling to demonstrate its relevance in the new retail landscape.”

"For insurers, the anniversary of the September 11 attacks reinforces the importance of managing exposure concentrations, catastrophe scenarios, and contract certainty, including those caused by cyber terrorism", said Marcos Alvarez, Managing Director of Global Financial Institution Ratings.

"In a more volatile geopolitical environment, cyber operations could broaden the transmission of political motivated disruption. A destructive attack on shared cloud services, payments infrastructure, or electricity networks could generate correlated losses among geographically dispersed policyholders."

Morningstar DBRS Commentary Terrorism Insurance: 25 Years After September 11

“Competition among insurers remains exceptionally strong, demand remains high from schemes and the market continues to offer attractive opportunities for schemes of all sizes.

“The depth of insurer appetite has been particularly evident for small and medium-sized transactions. There have been fewer multi-billion-pound transactions in the market, so more insurers have turned their attention to smaller transactions to meet targets - and more insurers have launched dedicated small-scheme propositions this year.”

On key themes across the market in 2026

Dominic Grimley, Partner in Aon’s Insurer Due Diligence team, said: “One of the defining features of the market in 2026 is how quickly it continues to evolve. Market growth has demanded a wider search from insurers for attractive asset opportunities, with many insurers now having strong relationships with global asset firms. In the latest of these, Standard Life has recently announced a new proposed partnership with several major investment firms, to provide the capital and asset backing to compete for the market’s largest transactions.

“Innovation is also extending to member experience. For the most advanced insurer services, members can increasingly manage their pension digitally while the insurers’ call centres can provide enhanced support for vulnerable customers and potentially utilise live calculations.

“There’s now more variation in deal structures - developed to address particular client demands. For example, that can be to support a particular desired buyout timing, utilise scheme surplus or to provide members with a potential share of future asset gains.

“One of the other facets of the market that we are seeing, is that trustees are placing greater emphasis on evaluating insurers, given how their propositions are evolving through innovation and becoming increasingly sophisticated and differentiated.

“Factors such as member experience, financial strength, ESG credentials and cyber resilience are increasingly important points of comparison. Aon's Insurer Due Diligence service has helped trustees and sponsors assess these across over £100bn of transactions, ensuring that trustees can make fully informed decisions.”

Early consideration of the accounting implications, supported by proactive auditor engagement, can help sponsors avoid surprises and ensure the chosen strategy is reflected appropriately in their financial reporting. In this article, we explore the key endgame options for defined benefits (DB) schemes, their typical accounting treatments under IAS19 and FRS102, auditor perspectives and considerations sponsors should keep in mind.

The accounting outcome will depend on the route chosen, whether that is buy-in, buy-out, superfund transfer, run-on or another form of external capital support.

Surplus sharing under run-on can create a positive outcome for both sponsors and members. However, sponsors need to understand the potential P&L impacts. If this deters sponsors from considering run-on, it could work against the government’s ambitions to support growth investment by removing barriers to surplus extraction. Careful structuring of the sharing mechanism can mitigate this impact. Our previous article explored the accounting implications of surplus sharing in more detail:

In the absence of change, companies will need to navigate the current landscape carefully. Early engagement with auditors is key to ensuring the chosen approach is reflected appropriately in financial statements and supported by the necessary documentation. By understanding the implications upfront, sponsors can make informed decisions and focus on the strategic benefits of their chosen endgame route.

Accounting shouldn't determine your endgame strategy, but it should form part of the evaluation process. If you'd like to discuss how the accounting implications of different endgame options could affect your organisation.

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “The FTSE 100 has opened lower as investors assess a toxic cocktail of inflationary pressures, with Brent crude nudging towards $100 a barrel and the US-Canada trade war escalating, adding another potential brake on global growth. Far from showing signs of resolution, the conflict in the Middle East appears to be becoming more entrenched, creating chronic supply concerns around crude and gas, while intensifying trade battles threaten to push up the cost of goods just as central banks are trying to get inflation under control.

This may be a bonus for energy companies, with Shell and BP rising in early trade, but it’s highly painful for companies and consumers, and puts more pressure on central bankers to raise interest rates. Given the sustained impact of higher energy prices, the worry is that firms will have little choice, other than to raise prices, which risks creating another inflationary spiral. The prospect of higher rates is showing up in the bond markets, with gilt and Treasury yields shifting up yet again, making borrowing more expensive for governments, increasing the prospect of higher interest payments on the huge debts already piled up.

Brent Crude has raced higher, hitting $100 for the first time since July, after Iran ratcheted up its offensive on the US and its allies, hitting two American vessels and firing missiles towards Jordan, while threatening crews in ports in Bahrain and Kuwait. More oil tankers have been struck, and Houthi rebels have also been attacking Saudi Arabia’s Jazan refinery, heightening supply worries about energy shipments. It comes after the US military targeted infrastructure on the key Iran export hub – Kharg Island. While other oil-producing nations have increased production, it’s not enough to offset the disruption wreaked across the Middle East, with prices looking set to stay stubbornly around $100 a barrel. UK and European gas prices have also risen again to levels not seen since December 2022. Usually, weaker demand for gas and lower prices during the summer months means stocks can be replenished, but the crisis has kept this process on go slow, and as we head towards the colder winter months, storage levels in the UK and Europe are the lowest for 13 years, keeping nations reliant on imports of expensive supplies. It’s set to add to the bill burden of households this winter, with domestic energy prices set to ramp up if a resolution to this conflict remains elusive.

The trade war between the US and Canada has also moved up a gear, with Washington banning a range of Canadian imports, including dairy and alcohol, after Canada imposed retaliatory tariffs on US goods. It’s another unwelcome inflationary jolt, as tariffs push up the cost of goods and leave businesses and consumers footing more of the bill. And at a time when oil prices are already surging, the combination of more expensive energy and more expensive goods is a particularly nasty cocktail, threatening to squeeze consumers, dent business investment and put another drag on global growth. While the TACO trade - ‘Trump Always Chickens Out’ is still alive to some extent, with investors used to expecting threats to be softened or reversed, but this more capricious approach to policymaking is highly disruptive. Even when trade deals are struck, other countries can’t be sure they’ll hold, making businesses more reluctant to invest and plan ahead.

However, there are pockets of resilience amid all this uncertainty. Fashion lovers seem to have shrugged off worries about conflict and climate change and spent big on wardrobe refreshes. Zara owner Inditex has reported a record €19.8 billion in first-half sales, up 7.6%, with profits rising 6.8% to just under €3 billion, while sales in August and early September jumped 9%.

It’s a pretty strong fashion statement and a badge of honour for Zara’s design and merchandising teams who are on the money when it comes to creating the looks to make shoppers part with their cash, even when household budgets are under pressure. There’s still appetite for retail therapy, particularly if the price is right, with Bershka and Stradivarius delivering double-digit sales growth. These brands are at the slightly cheaper end of Zara’s wardrobe of fashion names, and seem to be touching the sweet spot when it comes to a desire for style updates, while keeping an eye on tighter budgets. Sportswear brand Oysho also saw sales grow by more than 20%, capitalising on the desire to get fit and the growing gym scene.

The Gym Group has been flexing its pulling power among young fitness fans, with sales jumping even though it put up its fees. Membership prices increased by 10%, but the numbers signing up still rose by 5% in the first half. The Gym Group has now reached around a million members, showing that going to the gym has become a deeply embedded habit. It’s also the price point that matters, because even after the recent increases, memberships remain around the £25–£30-a-month mark at many sites, which is a fraction of the cost of premium health clubs such as David Lloyd. The Gym Group’s average member is around 30, with Gen Z now making up 44% of its membership. It’s clear that the gym is increasingly becoming a crucial part of social lives rather than simply somewhere to go and work up a sweat. It’s a sign of changing spending habits and priorities among younger consumers, with a gym bench rather more appealing than a pub bar.”

TT Club warns that the consequences extend well beyond individual vessels. Reduced carrying capacity can disrupt port throughput, create inventory imbalances at warehouses and generate sudden demand for alternative rail and road capacity. The resulting disruption can cascade through interconnected supply chains.

In Romania, authorities faced difficult choices over the allocation of limited water resources, balancing the requirements of navigation with those of critical infrastructure, including energy generation. As climate pressures intensify, governments may increasingly need to balance water use between drinking supplies, agriculture, energy production and transportation.

This presents a less-recognised climate-related supply chain risk. Businesses dependent on inland waterway transport could be affected not only by low water levels themselves, but also by broader societal decisions when water becomes scarce.

Neil Dalus, Risk Assessment Manager at TT Club, commented: “Inland waterways remain an essential component of efficient, lower-emission freight transport. However, the assumption that these corridors will always provide a dependable alternative to road and rail must now be challenged.

“Drought should no longer be considered a rare environmental issue. It is a business continuity risk with the potential to affect vessel capacity, route availability, port operations and the wider transport network. The question for operators is not whether low-water conditions will occur, but whether they have the visibility, flexibility and contingency arrangements required to manage them.”

Organisations should therefore move beyond planning based principally on historical water levels and incorporate climate-informed decision-making into their wider risk-management processes.

TT Club recommends that operators consider priority measures including:

Mapping dependencies on inland waterways and identifying vulnerable transport corridors

Monitoring river levels and incorporating drought forecasts into cargo and fleet planning

Establishing alternative road, rail and storage arrangements before restrictions arise

Stress-testing supply chains against prolonged periods of reduced vessel carrying capacity

Reviewing contractual, inventory and contingency arrangements for recurring low-water disruption

Using real-time data, remote sensing, predictive analytics and operational intelligence to support earlier decisions

Dalus continued: “The most resilient organisations will be those that understand their dependencies, can activate alternative transport options quickly and have already considered how their supply chains will perform under persistently constrained conditions.”

TT Club concludes that organisations must combine sustainability ambitions with a clear understanding of climate-related operational risk, building the flexibility needed for a future in which water itself may become one of supply chains’ most important constraints.

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “Trade tensions and geopolitical stalemate are adding to inflationary concerns – pushing prices up across a large basket of commodities, which will feed through to household and business costs. The moves are adding to the note of caution reverberating on financial markets, as investors assess the likelihood that interest rates may have to stay higher for longer to keep a lid on consumer prices.

Tariff wars have reared up again after Canada slapped billions of dollars of retaliatory tariffs on American goods, after talks with the US administration collapsed. The former trade allies have turned foes, with President Trump turning up the heat, and the latest measures are likely to add another layer of uncertainty for businesses and consumers. Canada’s retaliatory tariffs on around $20 billion of US goods came into effect today, with duties ranging from 15% to 50%.

Even the threat of further tariffs is distorting market prices, with copper futures reaching a record high as US importers stash the metal in warehouses amid expectations of higher duties ahead. Operational issues at major mines have also conspired to push prices higher, amid concerns about supply backlogs as demand surges for a metal so sought after for the world’s electrification drive and the build-out of AI infrastructure.

While this provides support for mining stocks, it’ll add to manufacturing costs, with gadgets small and large already set to rise in price due to chip shortages. Meanwhile geopolitical tensions are also adding to inflationary pressures. The lack of success in the Russia-Ukraine talks has led to renewed concerns over wheat supplies. Ukraine, known as the breadbasket of Europe, has already seen exports sideswiped by the war. With hopes dashed for a faster resolution, there are renewed concerns that export capacity will be constrained due to Russia’s denial tactics over Black Sea shipments. Conflict is colliding with the effects of El Niño-related drought, exacerbating potential crop shortages. This toxic combination of war and weather risks driving up food prices next year, just as consumers are already feeling the squeeze from higher energy and other household costs.

Oil and gas prices are painfully elevated, with Brent crude heading above $98 a barrel and wholesale gas prices shooting sharply higher as the market prices in heightened risks around the Strait of Hormuz. Talks between Iran and Oman to manage shipping through the key Strait of Hormuz appear to be making good progress and while that’s encouraging in the short term, it could allow Iran to wield much more control over this key waterway in the future, paving the way for potential future disruption. President Trump has previously threatened to bomb Oman if it got in the way, and although he’s gone quieter on the subject recently, the US still appears determined to call the shots when it comes to transit through this vital waterway.

Iran has continued attacking US allies, with Saudi Aramco’s facilities in Jazan near the Red Sea hit again yesterday and Tehran threatening further attacks on infrastructure in the region. This has again heightened worries about future supplies, particularly gas heading towards Europe and Asia.

European gas storage levels are below the seasonal average, leaving the market vulnerable as winter months approach. Qatar’s extension of its suspension of shipments means that those levels can’t easily be replenished, with supply concerns amid high demand pushing European and UK gas prices back up to levels not seen for three and a half years. For now, gas prices are still way below the spike we saw in the months following the outbreak of the Ukraine war, and Brent has so far failed to breach the psychologically important $100 threshold. Alternative export routes, some oil still moving through the Strait of Hormuz, rising production from outside OPEC and softer demand are helping to cushion the supply shock to some extent.

Higher energy, food and manufactured goods prices look set to put fresh pressure on finances, increasing the political pressure on governments to step in and help shield households and businesses from the hit. But ministers are in a tight spot, with borrowing costs still elevated, with yields on government debt stubbornly high. So they have little room to offer more support without raising taxes or squeezing spending, both of which could put another brake on an already fragile economy. Still there are glimmers of resilience with data over the past week showing the services sector continued to expand in August, while the eurozone economy is also holding in expansion territory, with manufacturing showing signs of improvement. Across the Atlantic, the US looks particularly robust, with employers adding 162,000 jobs in August, helped by a surge of construction activity partly fuelled by the mega data centre build out to power the AI trade.

So while the latest energy and trade shocks are clearly a threat to growth, there appears to be some underlying momentum across economies, which could help absorb some of the price pressure.’’

It demonstrates to investors, lenders, customers, and other stakeholders that the business understands its risks, has a plan to manage them, and possesses the financial resilience to withstand unexpected setbacks.

Strong governance, robust internal controls, business continuity planning, cyber resilience, and appropriate insurance arrangements all play an important role in reducing uncertainty. Together, they provide reassurance that management has identified its key risks and taken sensible steps to mitigate them.

For investors, this translates into confidence. For growing businesses, that confidence can make a meaningful difference when seeking funding, attracting strategic partners, negotiating lending facilities, or preparing for a future exit.

Together, these disciplines help protect a business's ability to generate revenue, serve customers, and respond effectively when challenges arise. Insurance may help mitigate the impact of losses, enabling businesses to absorb significant losses without jeopardising future growth plans, cash flow, or stakeholder confidence.

As a result of its business interruption insurance arrangements, Vertu Motors secured a £3.9 million settlement, delivering a net recovery of £3.4 million after excess. The outcome directly enhanced the company's expected profitability and highlighted the important role insurance can play in protecting earnings when unforeseen events occur. While the cyber incident itself was outside Vertu's control, the financial impact on the business was significantly reduced because the appropriate protection was already in place.

Although the business was able to maintain many customer-facing operations, reports later suggested it did not have comprehensive cyber insurance in place to recover a significant proportion of the associated business interruption losses.

The case has since become a notable example of the distinction between risk prevention and risk transfer. While investment in cyber security remains essential, even strong controls cannot eliminate risk entirely. Insurance exists to provide financial recovery when preventative measures alone prove insufficient. Individual claim outcomes will depend on the circumstances, policy terms and extent of cover in place.

This is why organisations should seek an insurance partner that offers more than policy placement. The right adviser should anticipate changing insurance requirements, provide market insight, benchmark coverage against industry peers, support mergers and acquisitions activity, and ensure programmes remain aligned to business objectives. The objective is not simply to insure today's operation, but to support tomorrow's ambitions.

When aligned with a company's wider ambitions, insurance becomes far more than a transactional purchase. It becomes a strategic tool that can support wider business objectives, including helping demonstrate effective risk management and financial resilience to investors, lenders and other stakeholders. Insurance may be designed to protect against loss, but at its best, it provides something far more valuable: the confidence to grow.

For a generation now in their late 40s and 50s, that uncertainty is showing up in how they prepare for later life. More than half (56%) say they didn't seriously think about their pension until they were 46 or older, while nearly half (48%) feel they've left retirement planning too late.

Around one in ten (11%) Gen X respondents also say they feel indifferent about retirement – the highest proportion of any generation. Taken together, the findings suggest retirement remains a distant or hard to picture prospect for a significant slice of this generation, despite it moving increasingly close.

But for many, the issue wasn't a lack of interest, but a lack of financial headroom. Gen X savers who feel they started too late, four in ten (40%) say they simply couldn't afford to engage with their pension sooner, while almost one in five (18%) didn't know where to start.

As a result, many missed out on the years of automatic pension saving that younger generations will benefit from throughout most of their working lives. now take for granted. At the same time, many Gen Xers have become the backbone of the so-called “sandwich generation”, supporting ageing parents while still helping dependent or returning adult children. With mortgages, university costs and potentially care bills competing for the same money, their own retirement savings can easily slip down the priority list.

The wider evidence suggests Gen X has a particular reason to feel uncertain about retirement. The Government's Pensions Commission warned that around 15 million people are undersaving for later life, identifying Generation X as facing a particularly acute challenge. In its central scenario, 46% of Gen X are projected to fall short of the income needed to maintain their standard of living in retirement, the highest proportion of any generation. Almost a third (32%) of Gen X savers with defined contribution pension wealth have less than £50,000 saved, according to its findings.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance, PensionBee, comments: "You can't plan for a future you can't picture. Gen X are getting closer to retirement than any other working generation, yet for many it still feels abstract. When you can't see what you're aiming for, it's much harder to work out what you need to save to get there. to turn it into something you can plan, save and prepare for.

"Gen X have been squeezed from every angle. They came of age as final salary pensions were disappearing, meanwhile Auto-Enrolment arrived later in their careers. They have weathered repeated economic shocks while many have found themselves sandwiched between supporting children and caring for ageing parents. It's no surprise their own retirement has sometimes slipped down the priority list.

"But being behind doesn't mean being stuck. Gen X may have been born to retire, but they weren't necessarily given the easiest route to get there. The first step is to make retirement real. Find old pensions and bring them together, then use a pension calculator to put a rough number on the life you want in retirement. Once you can see the gap between where you are and where you want to be, you can start doing something about it.

“However this isn't just down to individuals. Gen X risks becoming the first generation to retire worse off than the one before. That should be a wake-up call for the government and policymakers. This is an overlooked generation that needs the tools, support and flexibility to catch up while there is still time.”

Highlights

Aaron Pang, PPF Acting Chief Actuary, said: “During August, movements in assets and liabilities were relatively modest across the PPF eligible universe. Asset values edged down by 0.1%, while liability values fell by 0.4%, resulting in a slight improvement in overall funding. The aggregate surplus increased to £273.6bn and the funding ratio rose to 133.4%, reflecting the continued resilience of DB scheme funding levels despite ongoing market uncertainty.”

View the September update and see the supporting data on the 7800 Index for 31 August 2026 here: The PPF 7800 index | Pension Protection Fund.

While higher crude prices are a bonus for oil majors, it’s a big headache for other industries, as the costs of keeping the light on, customers warm, and factories whirring becomes more onerous. They raise inflationary risks too, with the prospect of companies passing on the higher overheads as higher prices. Those hoping for relief from higher borrowing costs have been left sorely disappointed, with markets pricing in multiple hikes. The Bank of England is forecast to raise rates potentially three times over the next year, while the Fed is also expected to start another hiking cycle, especially after the strong jobs numbers which landed on Friday. Even if central bankers stay more cautious, and don’t end up hiking, to this extent, the damage of predictions is already done, as market pricing of future moves influences everything from business loan rates to mortgage deals and government borrowing costs. The yield on 10-year gilts, is staying painfully elevated, ticking up higher to £5.165, it means the government has to pay more to finance its debt pile, when it wants to raise more funds.

It’s a highly awkward backdrop for John Healey, the Chancellor to make his big speech later on revitalising growth in the economy. Crushing energy bills, fractious geopolitics, tense trade relations and the high cost of borrowing mean he’s walking a precarious tightrope. He’ll want to convince bond investors that he’s going to be prudent with the finances, and not lead to another bond market strop out, but at the same time is expected to show the government is serious about funding investment.

He’s set to unveil a £150 million fund for companies with high growth potential in the North of England. He’s also expected to make a pitch about how sparking regional growth will be a key driver of the government's economic strategy, using state money to crowd in private capital, while handing city regions more power to decide where investment should go. It comes at a time when a regional growth spurt is clearly needed. Although British tech appears to have had a renaissance this year in terms of raising capital, it’s highly skewed to the London region. The British Business Bank has already invested more in the last nine months than in the previous four years. Total investment is expected to scale to over £400m this year. It’s helped open the door, to a surge of UK venture capital investment, which reached £14.4 billion in the first half of 2026, with AI companies attracting the bulk of that, but the vast majority of them are based in the capital.

So, while the British tech scene remains highly promising and a source for future jobs, the regions are still set to struggle. The timing is particularly awkward given the fresh warning from Jaguar Land Rover. The carmaker has launched a voluntary redundancy programme as it targets around £1.7bn of savings over the next two years, with up to 4,000 jobs potentially affected. JLR is being squeezed by falling sales, US tariffs, rising costs and increasingly fierce competition from cheaper Chinese manufacturers. While investment in tech firms is welcome, job creation will lag, just as Britian’s industrial base in being battered by global competition.

It’s also raising fresh questions about how a new social contract is needed to give younger workers a leg up and reduce the generous uprating terms of the state pension. The argument to scrap the triple lock is again hitting the headlines with the British Chambers of Commerce arguing for it to be abandoned to save billions of pounds.

The universal triple lock does give an especially strong protection to one age group at a time when younger generations face high rents, struggle to buy homes and have a heavier tax burden to support an ageing population.

But all this speculation is potentially harmful as people need certainty to plan for retirement. Whether you're 30, 40 or 50, you need to have some idea of what the State Pension will provide so you can work out how much you need to save privately. If the triple lock is clearly becoming unaffordable and needs reform, there is a strong argument for making those changes sooner rather than later, rather than leaving people in limbo. Constant speculation muddies the playing field and makes it harder for people to know how much they will actually need to put aside for their later years.’’

For trustees, the focus may often be on whether members should take a share of the surplus assets. For sponsors, the discussion may centre on how surplus can be used most effectively, whether through a refund, supporting another pension arrangement or wider business investment.

The Government's proposed changes to DB surplus flexibilities could widen the options available to schemes. One area that will become key is trustees and sponsors understanding what methods of surplus distribution have worked elsewhere and why.

Drawing on our experience of supporting 150+ schemes through the post-transaction phase, we looked at cases where surplus was ultimately distributed.

Where surplus is shared, it is most commonly (but not always) shared equally between members and the sponsor

Interestingly, we found that in nearly a quarter of cases, sponsors redirected the surplus back into another group pension arrangement, including DC or “sister” DB Schemes with the same or overlapping DB memberships.

This reflects the reality of many surplus discussions. Trustees and sponsors are often looking for an outcome that recognises the interests of multiple parties, rather than directing all of the value to a single one. This can create opportunities to reach an outcome that works across a wider workforce, rather than viewing the surplus decision solely through the lens of the scheme being wound up.

However, this doesn’t mean that one-off uplifts are simply the Trustee’s preferred choice. Practical considerations can be just as important as the principle behind sharing surplus. Trustees and sponsors should consider whether an enhancement can be:

Insurer appetite and operational processes can have a significant influence on the options available. An attractive enhancement on paper may be less convincing if it is difficult to insure, creates additional data requirements or delays the transition to buyout and wind-up.

We expect that the additional flexibilities introduced in the Pension Schemes Act 2026 may impact some of the choices made by Trustees. Different options may become available before and after scheme wind-up, so care will need to be taken over the process. We are beginning to see more schemes opt to complete additional analysis before triggering wind-up to navigate this, and to support discussions between trustees and sponsors early on.

Again, the changes introduced by the Pension Schemes Act 2026 may provide additional flexibility to alter restrictive scheme rules. However, it remains to be seen whether Trustees will view this as appropriate in many cases, and what the legal advice will support.

Over the past 12 months, we have seen several cases where surplus was materially higher than expected, or where a surplus emerged late in the process. This can happen for a range of reasons, including changes in market conditions, insurer pricing, any unexpected data issues, and the final terms of a transaction. A scheme that assumed only a modest surplus may therefore find itself facing a much more challenging decision further down the line. Having discussions on these potential issues early can help avoid delays and more difficult conversations later on.

Questions to consider as part of these discussions could include:

Proposed changes to the surplus rules could bring these conversations forward. If schemes have greater scope to access surplus before wind-up, trustees and sponsors may need to address it as part of their wider endgame planning, alongside funding, investment, member benefits and the sponsor’s objectives.

The key is not to wait until the numbers are known. Agreeing the principles early gives trustees and sponsors a better chance of reaching an outcome that is fair, practical and able to stand up to scrutiny by both members and the Regulator.

Key Takeaways

TPT believes the regime should support larger, better-governed investment pools without overriding sound investment design, excluding assets that already contribute to scale, or weakening the accountability of trustee boards. Ultimately, TPT believes that scale should support better outcomes, not become an end in itself. TPT’s specifically calls for the regime to:

Include all assets contributing to the same investment scale: TPT welcomes the proposed Common Investment Strategy (CIS) definition as an appropriate way of identifying where assets share the same investment strategy and decision-making framework. However, where assets satisfy both CIS and same-scheme (connected) criteria, including common governance and investment decision-making, government must not create further arbitrary distinctions based on scheme structure and policy exemption status.

Avoid governance conflicts for connected schemes: The established common-control test is workable, but common ownership alone should not allow separate schemes to aggregate where independent trustee boards set different strategies. Any aggregation should reflect where strategic investment decisions are actually made and avoid creating conflicts between trustee responsibilities.

Define MSDAs by substance: Technical or inadvertent defaults, and differences arising only from charges, administration or sectional structure, should not split what is effectively a single investment proposition. However, genuinely distinct investment strategies should continue to be recognised separately.

Accommodate distinct ethical and belief-based defaults: Where a separate investment strategy is used to satisfy specific member and employer needs, smaller arrangements should be accommodated. The Government should provide greater clarity on what would qualify for this treatment, as forcing consolidation in these cases could move members out of an arrangement designed around those preferences without clear evidence that outcomes would improve.

Ruari Grant, Head of Policy at TPT, said: “We support the Government’s objectives regarding scale in principle, but the framework needs to recognise where scale already exists in practice. Where assets are invested under the same strategy, governance and decision-making framework, their legal or sectional structure should not prevent them from counting towards any scale measurement.

“Ultimately, scale should be a means to achieving better outcomes for members, rather than an end in itself. The rules therefore need to distinguish between artificial fragmentation and genuinely different investment propositions, while giving trustees sufficient flexibility to design strategies that effectively meet members’ needs.”

The government expects the executor of the will to ensure the right amount of IHT is paid on any unused pensions pots within six months of a person’s death. As most people hold several pensions over their lifetime, grieving families can find it difficult to identify all of these and ensure the correct IHT is paid within the six-month window.

Andrew Aston, pensions audit director at RSM UK, said: “Now is the ideal time for the government to apply some joined up thinking ahead of the pensions dashboard launch. Probate is already a complex and unwieldy process, which can create additional stress for families at an upsetting time. As IHT could be due on unused pension pots from April 2027, this adds yet more complexity. We’d like to see the government build in the ability for executors of wills to see all unused pension pots via the dashboard. This could simplify the probate process, enabling grieving families to meet the deadline to pay inheritance tax within six months of a relative’s death.”

Those who miss the six-month window to pay inheritance tax will face interest charges from HMRC on the amount owed. On large pension pots, this can mount up to significant sums.

“The scheme worked by cold calling people and persuading them to have a ‘pensions review’. During the process, they were recommended to invest funds in a security called Ethical Forestry Ltd. Around 3,000 UK investors took money out of their pension funds and invested in what they thought was an environmentally sound forestry scheme in Costa Rica.

“Unfortunately, while trees were planted, no money was set aside to manage or harvest them, so there could never have been a return. Instead, funds were used to pay for the lavish lifestyles of the company directors.

“It’s a variation on a worryingly common theme, where scammers offer high risk, unregulated investment opportunities, which often promise sky high returns over short periods of time. These will sometimes come with exorbitant fees and levels of risk that haven’t been made clear to investors. The fact that they’re not regulated by the FCA or protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), means you have little or no protection if things go wrong. In some cases, the investment doesn’t exist, or will never pay out, and your money is used to line the pockets of criminals.

Five signs of a pension scam

“This is why it’s so important to do what you can to protect yourself from fraudsters and be aware of five signs of pension scams:

Lauren joined Hymans Robertson in 2020 as part of the firm’s DB actuarial team and is a Senior Actuarial Consultant, advising a range of scheme trustees and sponsors. She has played a key role in developing the firm’s CDC proposition, with strong thought leadership involvement and engagement with policymakers.

Commenting on Lauren's appointment and the continued growth of Hymans Robertson's CDC practice, Jon Hatchett, Senior Partner and CDC Scheme Actuary at Hymans Robertson, said: “CDC has the potential to become an important new form of pension provision for UK savers. Lauren’s skills, energy and expertise make her the right person to lead its development within our firm.

“The next few years will be critical for the development of the UK CDC market. It's exactly the right time for us to be investing in our CDC capabilities. Policymakers, providers and employers are increasingly focussed on how to deliver sustainable retirement incomes. So, collective solutions are attracting significant interest. Our’ firm’s purpose is to deliver better futures. With the retirement adequacy and gender pension gap challenges facing the DC only generations of pension savers, I’m excited about the role Collective DC can play in improving these issues.

“Lauren's appointment and my CDC Scheme Actuary Practising Certificate strengthen our ability to help clients navigate this rapidly developing market and take advantage of the opportunities it creates.”

Commenting on her promotion and new role, Lauren said: “This is an exciting time for CDC pensions in the UK. After many years of policy development, the first multi-employer whole-of-life CDC schemes will start applying for authorisation over the next few months. Work continues on the legislative framework required to enable retirement-only CDC arrangements.

“CDC has the potential to transform retirement outcomes by allowing members to benefit from scale, longevity pooling and smoothing investment risk over time. By managing key retirement risks collectively, CDC can provide a more efficient means of generating sustainable retirement incomes than many individuals can achieve on their own.

“I am enjoying working with our clients, supporting them as they navigate this evolving market, designing whole of life and retirement CDC schemes to meet the needs of UK pension savers them I’m also looking forward to continuing to contribute to industry policy discussions and further developing our talented team of CDC specialists as demand for these solutions grows.”

When we reach retirement age the risk of dying remains, but for defined contribution pensioners, living longer, also comes into play.

I remember writing letters to retirees in the 1980’s wishing those people taking their pension “a long and happy retirement”. It’s what we all hope for. While I have been told that money doesn’t buy happiness, an adequate pension income is something we all aim to receive. As for the length of retirement, there is a growing recognition that savers need to insure themselves against having a retirement that is too long and running out of money. Research by Aviva and Age UK recently highlighted that many people underestimate just how long retirement can last, and the financial impact that comes with it. Today's retirees can easily spend 20, 25 or even 30 years in retirement. That's a wonderful achievement, but it creates a challenge: how do you make sure your money lasts as long as you do?

In many ways retirement income solutions are another form of insurance, where a mixture of insurance, investment expertise and actuarial skill can mitigate the risk of quite literally living beyond our means.

The most obvious, and currently the only guaranteed solution, is of course an annuity. Longevity risk sharing and a guarantee underpinned by appropriate investments and provider backing ensures that an annuity will pay out a level of income for the whole of the annuitant’s life.

The premium for this guarantee is the price of the annuity. This is increasing set based on detailed information about the customers health and lifestyle. The result is that consumers are more likely to get good value from their annuity, even if they are not in the best of health.

Underwriting is of course a common feature of any insurance, designed to ensure the cost of the insurance reflects the chance that that a risk will crystallise. If we are looking at the risk of outliving our pension pot, not everyone’s risk will be the same, and so a single conversion rate of pension fund to pension income cannot be right either.

While an insurance company guarantee provides certainty, there is the option to simply spread the risk across a population large enough to allow for self-insurance. If we have representatives from across the whole population then we know what the average experience is likely to be, barring any great scientific breakthrough. If investment risk is managed, the insured risk can be absorbed by the group, through an acceptance that income could fluctuate, and there we have collective defined contribution.

The cost of this lower value promise might be less, but there are two premiums that are payable. The first is the potential loss of a payment to loved ones should someone die before they have obtained full value, cross subsidy seems to be inherent within CDC solutions, requiring an acceptance that the risk of outliving your income is greater than the risk of early death. As to whether this is true, we should maybe ask an underwriter, but it will not be true of everyone.

The second cost is that the pension must increase by at least the consumer price index (CPI). This means that savers must accept a lower initial level of income, as a cost of insuring against inflation. While this may make sense to some, for those who don’t live as long, or those who might be more active in the early years of their retirement, a higher real terms income when they first retire might be preferable. This might allow them to enjoy life more when they are healthier and more able.

Insurance can be great, it can ease worries over unforeseen circumstances, but when it comes to retirement we need to guard against a singular focus on the risk of a long retirement and balance it with the need for a happy one.

However, PensionBee’s surveys of customers in its Global Leaders Plan (PensionBee’s ‘default’ fund for the under 50s) and 4Plus Plan (the default for those over 50) suggest many savers are unconvinced by the case for home bias, if it comes at the expense of returns.

Savers were told that the UK currently makes up around 3% of global stock markets, a weighting mirrored in PensionBee's all-equities Global Leaders Plan, and asked which statement came closest to their own view on UK investment. In response, 61% said they simply want the best returns, wherever in the world that is. A little over a fifth (21%) said they would support more UK investment, while only 16% had no strong view.

Among those who do back more UK investment, their support comes with conditions. Of those savers, more than half (52%) said they would only support it if it didn't reduce their returns, and 31% would need a better tax incentive. Only 16% of those who were broadly positive about investing in the UK said they'd support more investment at home, even if it meant lower returns.

On stewardship, savers ranked ending child and forced labour (47%) and paying real living wages (38%) as the issues that matter most to them, ahead of companies using fair tax practices (27%) and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (26%).

The survey also points to strong support for PensionBee's global approach more broadly. Over eight in ten (84%) respondents across both plans said they are satisfied or very satisfied with the plans that they are invested in, against just 3% who are dissatisfied.

Key findings at a glance:

Clare Reilly, Chief Investment Solutions Officer at PensionBee, said: “Our job is to seek the best returns for our default customers, wherever in the world they're found, which is why 84% of survey respondents told us they're happy with our global approach to growing their retirement savings. Our survey found little appetite for a greater UK tilt. And even among the minority who wanted one, most said they wouldn't accept it if it meant lower returns.

“If savers are telling us that they don't want their retirement pots steered towards the UK unless it leaves them better off, then these insights may give the Government pause for thought. Without a clear returns rationale or other tax incentives to sweeten the deal for savers in the workplace, then they are asking ordinary savers to shoulder the long term consequences of decisions made for them, not by them.”

Mr Thomas was a director and financial adviser at DPT Financial Solutions Limited. Over 5 years Mr Thomas advised 53 clients about 63 transfers out of defined benefit pension schemes and is believed to have earned more than £173,000 in fees.

Mr Thomas repeatedly misled clients and pension providers about his professional qualifications, destroyed client records and failed to co-operate with the FCA's investigation.

Mr Thomas’ firm was an appointed representative. This meant another firm (known as a principal) had responsibility for overseeing its actions. Mr Thomas provided misleading information to his principal firm about his involvement in the pension transfer cases.

It is not normally in consumers’ best interests to transfer out of defined benefit pensions because they provide valuable, guaranteed benefits which increase annually. That is why only those advisers with specialist qualifications and the correct permissions can advise people on whether to transfer out.

Therese Chambers, executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: "When you advise someone on their pension, you hold their future in your hands. Mr Thomas recklessly betrayed that responsibility. We will not stop acting against those ignoring our rules and unfairly putting people and their hard-earned money at risk.”

Trustees reported an average increase of 34% in running costs over the past 12 months, with the findings published in the second Insight Report from the TPT Retirement Solutions: DB Trustee Pulse 2026*. This year’s findings remain relatively consistent with the 2024 iteration of the research, when responding trustees reported average cost inflation of 37%, indicating that cost pressures remain a significant issue for many UK DB schemes.

Legal services were identified by 37% of trustees as the area seeing the largest absolute cost increase, followed by technology and data services (34%). However, analysis of the findings suggests that cost pressures facing schemes are broad-based as opposed to being driven by one dominant factor: governance and administration services were both cited by 28% of trustees, while major project undertakings such as GMP equalisation or Pensions Dashboard preparation, alongside covenant services, (also both 27%) all ranked close behind.

Cost pressures diverge with larger schemes reporting the steepest rises

Trustees across both scheme-size groups reported rising costs, with the largest increases more commonly reported by trustees overseeing larger schemes (see Graph 1).

The research showed that almost half (44%) of trustees overseeing schemes with £1bn or more in assets reported running cost increases of more than 50% over the past year, compared with just 7% of those overseeing schemes below that threshold.

The divergence was even more pronounced at the upper end of the range: none of the trustees overseeing schemes below £1bn in assets reported cost increases of over 76%, compared with almost one in five (18%) trustees managing schemes with assets above that threshold.

Jonathan Jackaman, Head of Client Relations at TPT Retirement Solutions said: “Rising scheme costs are no longer simply a budgetary concern but instead, are becoming a strategic challenge for trustee boards to navigate. Trustees are spending more on the building blocks of good governance, from legal support and administration to data and governance itself. And the data suggests that size alone does not insulate schemes from these pressures, with the steepest increases being reported among the larger schemes that responded.

“For some trustee boards, consolidation can be one way to manage that complexity more efficiently working to reduce duplication, improve cost certainty and provide access to specialist capabilities at scale. The aim is not simply to cut costs, but to ensure trustee time and scheme resources are focused where they can have the greatest impact on long-term strategy in order to improve outcomes and continue delivering for members.”

Some companies, including those advertising on social media, are offering to 'find' and claim Child Trust Funds on people's behalf – often for a hefty fee or a cut of the final payout. The FCA has seen cases where customers were charged £400 to locate the account and even seen some firms charging a monthly subscription for a one-off tracing service. But missing funds can be traced for free without losing a penny to a middleman.

Chris Knight, director of insurance at the FCA, said: "A Child Trust Fund can be a welcome source of extra cash at a time when many young people need it most. But you don't need to pay someone else to claim what's rightfully yours – tracing and accessing your own Child Trust Fund costs nothing, so think twice about handing over a chunk of your savings to a claims firm for a job you can do yourself."

Myrtle Lloyd, HMRC’s chief customer officer said: "If you’re between 15 and 24, you could be sitting on a savings payout and not even realise it. Just search 'find my Child Trust Fund' on GOV.UK to find your savings account today."

Tracing a Child Trust Fund might be offered by firms who are regulated by the FCA, for example as claims management companies. But the tracing service itself is not an activity that generally needs FCA authorisation. This means firms offering this service may not be covered by the FCA’s cap on claims management fees and customers may not be able to take complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

FCA review

The FCA is also launching a review into Child Trust Funds. This will look at issues including cases where young adults cannot be contacted when they turn 18 and risk losing touch with their savings altogether. It will also look at how firms are ensuring Child Trust Fund customers receive fair value under the Consumer Duty, and whether there are barriers to vulnerable young adults accessing their money. This will report next year.

While 46% of those still working expect to take their tax-free cash as soon they can, in reality 64% did this. This gap shows how priorities can change as retirement moves from a future plan to something more immediate.

Before retirement, 27% of workers expect to keep most of their pension invested and take a regular income, while 20% plan to buy an annuity. However, 28% of retirees actually choose an annuity, highlighting the appeal of a guaranteed income for life.

The research shows that four in 10 (41%) over-50s who are still working have little or no understanding of the different ways they can access their pension savings in retirement. Only a quarter (25%) feel confident they know all the main options available to them.

The gap is even more pronounced among women. Nearly half (46%) of women over 50 who have not yet retired say they have little or no knowledge of their retirement options, compared with just over a third (35%) of men.

The challenge is timing. Almost a fifth (19%) plan to seek advice only in the year they retire, leaving limited time to consider their options and put a plan in place. A further 15% do not know when they will seek help, while just 8% do not expect to seek advice or guidance at all.

Leaving decisions until the last minute increases the risk of unintended consequences, from larger-than-expected tax bills to lower income later in retirement.

Insight from Scottish Widows shows that people are open to new forms of support, with 42% saying they would use AI tools to help explain complex pension terminology and translate industry jargon into plain English.

By making retirement choices easier to understand and encouraging earlier engagement, technology has the potential to help more people make informed decisions and achieve better outcomes in later life.

Carolyn Jones, Retirement Director, Scottish Widows commented: “Turning 55 opens the door to pension savings built up over a lifetime, but while access to that money brings opportunity, it also brings important decisions that can shape retirement for decades to come.

“That's why we need to bring the conversation forward. Too many people only fully engage in their retirement planning when they approach the point of taking action. By then, valuable opportunities to plan, prepare and make informed choices may already have been missed.

“The industry is making progress. Targeted support, guided retirement journeys, digital advice and workplace education are all helping people navigate increasingly complex decisions. But we need to go further.

“Our rallying cry is simple - engage earlier, understand your options and seek advice sooner. And, as an industry, we have a shared responsibility to give every customer the knowledge and support they need. For example, Scottish Widows’ app helps customers better understand what they have in terms of pension savings, track lost pots and decide what to do with them in just three simple steps. The earlier people think about their income needs, the more choices and confidence they have to achieve the lifestyle they want.”

For example, people living in countries such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand do not currently receive annual increases and instead have their State Pension frozen at the rate they first receive.

Emma Furlonger, Managing Director for Workplace Pensions at Standard Life, said: "Returning home after a good summer holiday can make the idea of living abroad particularly appealing, and for some people that dream will eventually become reality. However, one thing many people don't realise is that where you choose to live can have a direct impact on your retirement income. While your UK State Pension can still be paid overseas, people living in certain countries won't receive future annual increases. Over a long retirement, missing out on those increases could make a significant difference to your income.

"Private pensions also bring their own considerations, from whether you can continue contributing to how you access your savings and the tax you may pay. Understanding the rules before you move can help avoid unexpected surprises later."

Emma Furlonger shares six key pension considerations for those thinking about moving abroad:

Beatriz Benito, Lead Insurance Analyst, GlobalData, comments: “The IKEA and Urban Jungle partnership reflects the continued market move toward greater convenience, as more partnerships emerge and the embedded insurance move continues to gain traction.”

IKEA customers purchasing furniture or home furnishings will be offered contents and buildings insurance cover in the same transaction—before many of them even thinking about the need for insurance—creating a frictionless and more-streamlined experience.

Benito continues: “The partnership differs from Amazon’s proposition, in which the online giant offered home insurance as if it were a price comparison website (PCW), requiring manual quote inputs, yet working only with a few underwriters. In contrast, IKEA’s partnership is solely focused on Urban Jungle’s products and is streamlined at the checkout, with no further input required.”

Benito concludes: “The rise of embedded insurance partnerships poses a continued threat to traditional distribution channels, particularly insurance brokers and PCWs. Both brokers and PCWs act as middlemen between consumers and insurance underwriters, but the embedded model removes the need for this by integrating insurance at the POS with other products, placing insurance directly in the customers’ primary journey. While insurers could potentially arrange their own embedded partnerships, the model will naturally disrupt intermediaries, particularly for less-complex cover.”

As Nvidia shares rose by almost 9% in reaction, the renewed enthusiasm spilled over into gains of 4.5% for Broadcom, 4% for Intel and 2% for SK Hynix, with the VanEck Semiconductor ETF ahead by 3% as concerns over whether the return on the extraordinary investment on capital will be achievable were put to bed – at least for the time being.

Elsewhere, software also had a stellar session with Salesforce spiking by almost 23% after beating revenue forecasts and announcing an expanded partnership to pair Anthropic’s Claude chatbot with its platform, with the news reading across to the likes of Adobe and Autodesk, whose shares rose by 5.7% and 6.2% respectively. Nor did the rallies end there – cybersecurity firms Okta and CrowdStrike saw gains of 28% and 20.5% after raising their outlooks and beating estimates, with the boom in demand due to AI at the centre of the additional growth.

The euphoria is set to wane, however, as investors turn their attention to Federal Reserve Chair Warsh will deliver his keynote speech at Jackson Hole. There is much anticipation over his comments on the current Fed thinking, although it has already been made quite clear that the new Chair is happy to eschew the forward guidance to which investors had become accustomed. While there may be a passing reference to the Fed’s determination to return the inflation rate to the 2% target, it may also provide less of a clue than is being called for. Indeed, he could disappoint if he simply sticks to the script, with the theme of the symposium being “Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and Policy”.

Even so, the Nvidia effect sent the main indices higher and edging once more to the records which each recently set. In the year to date, the Dow Jones has now added 11.5%, the S&P500 12.9% and the Nasdaq 14.2% with the broad tech gains sending the index comfortably higher yesterday.

Inevitably the FTSE100 missed out on the AI party given the relative lack of tech exposure among its constituents and the index limped to a weak close. Its appearance as a tracker without a real technology angle has been both a blessing and a curse this year, missing out on tech-led gains while coming back into fashion as a haven in times of turbulence in other markets. On balance, however, the FTSE100 has enjoyed a sturdy gain of 9.1% so far this year, with an average 3% dividend yield providing an extra boost to total returns.

The generally improved sentiment enabled the primary index to reverse some of the losses from yesterday, with a broad mark-up which encapsulated a cautious risk-on approach lifting the miners, while the banks also ticked higher and 3I Group rose after a broker upgrade. Losses were limited to a marginal decline in the likes of BAE Systems and Babcock International, and the gains hoisted the index to within 0.7% of the record closing high set in February.”

As policymakers now consider how the new surplus regime should operate as the consultation comes to an end, it will need to address a number of pitfalls, says Broadstone.

Greater clarity is needed on how surplus release should interact with a scheme's wider strategy. Decisions regarding surplus extraction should not be considered in isolation but alongside funding, investment and endgame objectives. While funding sufficiency is clearly important, trustees will also need confidence that surplus payments remain consistent with their long-term investment strategy and journey plan. Clearer guidance in this area would support more consistent and practical decision-making.

The supporting TPR guidance should place greater emphasis on operational readiness, including data quality, benefit accuracy and administration preparedness. Equally important is ensuring the regime remains proportionate and practical, particularly for smaller schemes and those seeking to release surplus on a recurring basis as part of a run-on strategy.

A key unanswered question remains how members are expected to benefit from surplus release. Greater clarity on the role of benefit improvements and the balance between employer and member interests would support more consistent trustee decision-making and help ensure the regime delivers fair and visible member outcomes.

David Brooks, Head of Policy at Broadstone, said: “The Government's objective of making run-on a credible option alongside buyout and consolidation is a positive step.

"However, the success of the reforms will depend on striking the right balance between member protection and practical usability. Greater clarity on member benefit-sharing, proportionality and operational requirements will be essential if schemes are to use these new flexibilities with confidence.

"Ultimately, the regime should be judged not only on whether surplus can be released safely, but whether it genuinely influences trustee and sponsor decision-making across the market.”

Morgan Stanley estimates the humanoid robotics market could reach $5 trillion by 2050, with nearly 1 billion robots in use. A more detailed discussion of the market outlook, growth drivers, and adoption trends is available in the companion article.

The technology is already being tested in the real world. In June 2026, Waymo recalled 3,871 robotaxis after reports that some vehicles entered closed freeway construction zones and continued driving at speed. While no injuries were reported, the incident highlighted a growing challenge for autonomous systems: software must interpret and respond to unpredictable physical environments, where road layouts, hazards and operating conditions can change rapidly.

The more AI moves from software into machines that interact with the physical world, the nature of risk changes. A software error that might once have resulted in an incorrect recommendation, biased output or data breach can now lead to bodily injury, property damage, operational disruption and complex liability disputes.

Examples illustrate these risks: warehouse robots colliding with workers, autonomous vehicles running red lights and crashing, a delivery drone dropping a package on a pedestrian, or an AI-controlled manufacturing machine sparking a fire. U.S. occupational data found 77 robot-related accidents from 2015–2022 that caused 93 recorded injuries, including finger amputations and fractures. As adoption grows, both frequency and severity of incidents may increase.

Many incidents originate in software failures. OSHA guidance shows accidents often occur during programming, testing or maintenance, when robots may activate unexpectedly due to control or state-management errors. This risk is heightened in testing environments, where safety mechanisms may be temporarily bypassed.

Cyber threats may also have physical consequences. A compromised robot may not simply lose data; it could disrupt operations, damage property or injure people. As robotics becomes more connected, the boundary between cyber, operational and physical risk continues to erode.

For example, in a warehouse accident where a humanoid robot drops a heavy box on a contractor, liability may fall on different actors:

This creates overlapping exposures across product, general, professional liability and cyber lines, complicating accountability and coverage.

Despite different regulatory approaches, the direction of travel is clear. Responsibility is increasingly being shared between manufacturers and the organizations deploying autonomous systems, placing greater emphasis on governance, operational controls and human oversight.

Key lines of coverage may include:

The convergence of risks creates overlaps and potential gaps. In response, insurers are clarifying coverage through exclusions and endorsements, developing robotics-specific products and exploring integrated policies combining multiple coverage areas. For instance, some cyber insurance policies now explicitly mention coverage (or exclusions) for AI-driven incidents like algorithmic errors or malicious use of AI.

Specialty underwriters are exploring coverage for autonomous fleets, combining elements of auto, product and cyber liability. Reinsurers are also examining systemic loss scenarios, such as software faults affecting large numbers of robots simultaneously. For example, a software update, cloud outage, navigation error or vulnerability in a widely deployed robotic platform could affect thousands of devices simultaneously. This raises accumulation concerns for insurers and reinsurers. Multiple organizations may often rely on the same operating systems, AI models or software suppliers. While such scenarios remain speculative, they underscore the need for agility in insurance.

Innovation is emerging globally. In 2025, China Pacific Insurance launched “Ji Zhi Bao,” a policy covering a robot lifecycle from production to deployment, including property damage, third-party liability and short-term testing risks for humanoid robots. Products such as these illustrate how insurers are moving beyond traditional silos, combining liability and asset protection in a single solution.

Robotics systems depend on specialized inputs such as semiconductors, sensors and batteries, creating exposure to geopolitical and supply chain disruption. Their high value also introduces transportation and logistics exposures, increasing demand for marine, cargo and transit insurance.

Environmental risks also become more important as deployment increases. Battery production, storage and disposal introduce potential pollution, fire and hazardous waste exposures and contamination that may not be fully covered under traditional property policies, increasing demand for specialist environmental liability cover.

As AI moves into these less predictable settings, questions around supervision, maintenance and responsibility for harm become significantly more complex.

This approach is increasingly reflected in international standards governing collaborative and autonomous robots. For example, emerging guidance ISO 25782-1 drafts robot safety for advanced use cases like bipedal humanoids, where they have fail safe mechanisms so a 100kg robot doesn’t topple onto someone during a power loss. Together, these place growing emphasis on human oversight, fail-safe mechanisms, safe human-robot interaction and robust operational controls, particularly as robots move beyond factories into public and domestic environments.

Evidence shows these measures are critical. A study from the New South Wales government on working safely with robots notes that incomplete risk assessments for collaborative robots (cobots) can leave hidden risks that only surface after an injury or near-miss. Risk managers may consider thorough hazard analysis before robots go live, proactively addressing questions like: What happens if the robot loses power or connectivity? How will human supervisors intervene if it malfunctions?

Organizations may consider the following key practices:

These measures reduce operational risk and may improve insurance outcomes. Insurers are increasingly incorporating questions on AI usage and controls in underwriting applications, echoing the way cyber insurers evolved questionnaires on IT security. Demonstrating robust AI governance and safety culture can help companies negotiate better terms or premiums, whereas poor controls might lead to exclusions or higher rates.

There is some relief on the energy front, however, with Brent crude falling back again to $87 a barrel. Hopes are growing that a framework being worked on by Iran and Oman could pave the way for safer shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, easing fears of prolonged disruption to global oil supplies. That is taking some of the geopolitical risk premium out of the price of crude, although the waterway is not yet fully reopened and the wider conflict remains far from resolved, so the risk of renewed volatility remains.

Bond markets have also been febrile, demanding higher yields amid concerns about unruly deficits and precarious levels of national debt. So investors are becoming more cautious about the global outlook, which could weigh on sentiment towards the internationally focused FTSE 100. Given its tech-lite nature, it’s also missing out on the renewed surge of enthusiasm for AI stocks after chip star Nvidia’s latest bumper set of results. Nasdaq and S&P 500 futures, however, indicate a stronger start for Wall Street, despite wariness about monetary policy, as investors pile back into technology.

The AI juggernaut is rumbling on with Nvidia smashing through expectations, amid voracious demand for the tech backbone of the AI revolution. The results solidified high expectations for the company’s mega revenues going forward, and shares firmed up, leaving behind the post-results wobbles seen after previous updates. Given the might of Nvidia, which carries the largest weight of any company in the S&P 500, the results are closely watched as a gauge of sentiment towards AI adoption, and the prospects for the index, which so many portfolios track.

Quarter by quarter Nvidia’s revenues are accelerating, landing at $96 billion for the second quarter, more than double a year ago, and the trend looks set to continue with revenue of $108 billion in the next quarter and strong demand stretching into 2028. Demand for its Blackwell chips has been particularly significant, showing that customers are continuing to spend heavily on Nvidia’s newest generation of AI accelerators rather than simply filling existing capacity. With demand still running ahead of supply, Blackwell is helping to power the next leg of the AI infrastructure build-out.

However, once the initial excitement settles, questions are likely to resurface about the durability of this boom in revenues. It’s becoming less about whether Nvidia can keep climbing the AI mountain, and more about how long it can sustain this extraordinary pace of ascent and whether the vast sums being poured into AI infrastructure will ultimately deliver the returns needed to justify the colossal investment.’’

“There are clear positives if AI can help make pensions feel simpler and more accessible. Among younger people who have used it for retirement information, 41% have turned to AI to understand how pensions work, a third (33%) have used it to navigate pension tax rules and 32% to explore how they could save more. However, this isn’t simply passive research - 62% say AI has influenced decisions they’ve made about their pension or retirement saving to at least some or a great extent. That underlines why accuracy, appropriate safeguards and knowing when to turn to trusted or regulated sources really matter, particularly at a time when scams and fraudulent activity are becoming increasingly sophisticated and technology can make it harder to distinguish credible information from misleading content.

“Used well, AI could have an important role in helping people engage earlier with their retirement planning, breaking down jargon and prompting questions they might otherwise never ask. At the same time, it should be a starting point rather than the final word. Pensions are long-term and often complex, and as use of AI grows, the priority should be helping people combine the convenience of new technology with reliable information, appropriate guidance, targeted support and, where possible, regulated financial advice.”

However, as a DB master trust, TPT thinks it is important that DWP and The Pensions Regulator (TPR) should provide additional guidance in a number of areas to ensure the regime can be implemented consistently and effectively across different scheme structures, including multi-employer schemes (MES). TPT also looks forward to engaging on the equivalent surplus release regulations for superfunds in due course, which it expects will largely reflect this regime.

TPT’s response focuses on a small number of areas where further clarity would improve the operation of the regime:

TPT also suggested that the Government could consider allowing schemes to release surplus to pay contributions into a scheme held in a separate trust. Schemes are already able to use surplus to pay DC contributions within the same trust, so TPT believes allowing surplus to be diverted elsewhere could be beneficial in some circumstances. This could include where an employer has open accrual in a CDC scheme that is separate from its closed DB scheme.

Ruari Grant, Head of Policy at TPT, said: “We support the Government’s objective of unlocking surplus in well-funded DB schemes while maintaining appropriate protections for members. The proposed regime will provide a workable framework, but greater clarity in a number of areas will be important if it is to operate consistently across the full range of scheme structures.

“In particular, the regulations need to reflect the practical complexities of DB master trusts, sectionalised arrangements and multi-employer schemes. As innovative schemes and solutions continue to change the market, regulations must keep pace to ensure there is adequate flexibility for these schemes to fairly and sustainably support their members.”

Commenting on what Sarah will bring to the role, Christine Cumming, Head of Buy-Out and Wind-Up Transition Services, Hymans Robertson said: "We are very pleased to welcome Sarah to the team. She brings a vast knowledge and experience from the insurer side of the market, having held a variety of leadership positions across bulk annuity pricing and operations. Her insight into how insurers assess opportunities, manage transactions and support clients post transaction will be invaluable as pension schemes continue to explore their endgame options.

“Sarah's appointment further strengthens our ability to support trustees and sponsors. Her combination of technical expertise, commercial understanding and operational experience will help ensure our clients continue to receive the high-quality, pragmatic advice they need to achieve the best outcomes."

Commenting on her new role, Sarah added: "I'm excited to be joining Hymans Robertson at a time when the pensions market is evolving rapidly and more schemes than ever are considering their long-term objectives. Having spent much of my career working within the insurer market, I'm looking forward to bringing that perspective to clients and helping them navigate an increasingly complex landscape.

“What stood out to me about Hymans Robertson was its strong focus on delivering the right outcomes for clients, combined with a collaborative and people-focused culture. I'm looking forward to working alongside colleagues across the business and helping clients make informed decisions about their future."

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “The Footsie is on the back foot in early trade, as investors assess the latest geopolitical moves pushing down crude prices. A sharp rise in copper prices is keeping mining stocks buoyant, but investors also have their eye on inflationary risks as energy bills are set to rise again in the Autumn.

Another winter of discontent could be looming for household finances, with energy bills set to rise again just as the colder months approach. Ofgem has increased the energy price cap by 4% from October, adding around £60 a year to the typical household bill and taking the annualised cap from £1,663 to £1,723. The regulator says the increase reflects higher wholesale gas prices, with international gas markets remaining the dominant driver of the change.

It’s another unwelcome step up for households, particularly after the sharp rise in the cap earlier this year. And while the Government’s decision to remove VAT from domestic electricity bills from October is cushioning the blow, it only provides limited protection against higher wholesale costs. Ofgem estimates that without the VAT intervention, the increase would have been around £45 higher.

The latest increase also shows how quickly geopolitical shocks can filter through into household finances. The Middle East conflict has pushed up international gas prices, while extreme heat across parts of Europe has also increased demand for electricity for cooling, adding to pressure on gas-fired power generation.

Consumers have already had to get used to higher prices at the pumps and have been adjusting their spending accordingly. July retail sales volumes fell 0.5% month-on-month, although sales remained relatively resilient overall and were still 1.6% higher than a year earlier. With energy bills rising again in the autumn, the crucial run-up to Christmas, so important for retailers and hospitality businesses, looks set to become tougher, particularly if households continue to prioritise essentials over discretionary spending.

That puts the Government in an increasingly tricky position. It has already intervened by removing VAT from domestic electricity bills, but if international energy prices remain elevated, there is only so much that fiscal measures can do to shield households from global markets.

There are, however, glimmers of better news in the energy markets this morning with Brent crude falling to $86 a barrel amid signs of encouraging diplomatic moves around the Strait of Hormuz. Iran and Oman are discussing a temporary maritime corridor and mine-clearance arrangements to help restore safer navigation through the strategically vital waterway. Trump hasn’t liked the US being left out of the discussions, with his irritation spilling over into threats against Oman, but this latest development hasn't prompted any further sabre-rattling. Tighter US sanctions on Iran are aimed at pushing Iran into concessions, and that’s also been having a downward effect on crude prices.

Meanwhile, CIA Director John Ratcliffe has travelled to Moscow for undisclosed meetings with Russian officials. The purpose of the trip has not been confirmed, so suggestions that it could be aimed at persuading Russia to distance itself from Iran or helping to advance a Ukraine settlement remain speculation. But any diplomatic progress on either front could potentially reduce geopolitical risk premiums embedded in energy prices.

Lower crude prices are pulling down energy giants in early trade, with Shell and BP under pressure. That is putting the Footsie on the back foot despite fresh gains for mining stocks.

Copper is gleaming, with the red metal hitting record highs as inventories outside the US tighten and production disruptions continue to constrain readily available supply. Trump’s tariff war is also distorting the market to some extent. Traders have been rushing copper towards the US ahead of potential tariffs on refined copper from 2027, attracted by the prospect of higher American prices. That has pushed US inventories to record levels while stocks elsewhere have become increasingly tight.

At the same time, there have been genuine supply disruptions, including mining problems and a smelter outage in Indonesia, adding to concerns about how quickly global production can respond to stronger demand. And demand for copper is increasingly being turbocharged by the AI revolution. Data centres require enormous amounts of electricity, and copper is crucial for the cables, transformers and power networks needed to deliver it. Electric vehicles, renewable energy projects and the wider electrification of the economy are adding further sources of demand.

This has all helped provide a bit of a tailwind for London-listed miners and demonstrates why the FTSE 100 can often show more resilience when other tech-reliant markets are struggling, given its heavyweight exposure to mining and commodities.”

Neil D’Mello, Client Director at Everywhen, said: “The growing number of calls to 159 demonstrates just how important the service has become, but the question businesses should be asking is: would your employees know when to use it? A scam call doesn't necessarily sound like a scam anymore. Fraudsters can be professional, knowledgeable and reassuring. The warning sign may only come when that trust turns into pressure to act immediately.

“If somebody is telling you there isn't time to verify who they are, that's exactly when you should stop, hang up and call 159!”

Launched in 2021, the 159 service provides a simple route for people receiving unexpected calls about financial matters to end the conversation and independently contact their bank. Working on a similar principle to 101 for the police and 111 for the NHS, callers dial 159 and select their bank before being connected safely. The service now connects customers representing more than 99% of UK retail bank current accounts.

For businesses, Everywhen says its importance lies not just in the number itself, but in the behaviour, it encourages: stop the conversation, remove the pressure and verify independently. That principle can also be applied to unexpected requests apparently coming from suppliers, IT providers, customers or senior colleagues.

Developments such as AI-assisted communications and voice cloning add another dimension to the threat, reinforcing why businesses should increasingly focus on verification rather than recognition. A familiar voice, professional manner or knowledge of an organisation should not automatically be considered proof that a caller is genuine.

Neil D’Mello added: “The question is no longer simply, ‘Does this sound like a scam?’ It should be, ‘Should I independently verify that this is genuine?

“Cyber scams continue to evolve in sophistication and can have significant financial and reputational consequences for clients. Brokers should understand how cyber-related information, alerts, and tools are being used within their advice and client service processes, and ensure appropriate oversight is in place. This can help reduce the risk of clients falling victim to fraud, phishing, social engineering, or other cyber threats”.

Ultimately, clients will continue to look to their broker for trusted professional advice and guidance, including risk management support, in helping them navigate an increasingly complex cyber risk landscape.

Neil concludes: “Cyber insurance can provide an important line of defence when an incident occurs, but resilience also depends on people and processes. Employees should feel confident stopping and challenging an unexpected request, regardless of how convincing the person making it seems to be. 159 is a simple example of that principle in action. It is well worth making sure that your employees are fully aware of these three very important numbers.”

But almost three quarters (73%) know that AI can provide inaccurate information. And 86% understood the need to check the sources referenced when using AI. It’s vital investors remember this when they’re using AI to research an investment.

General purpose AI chatbots are not regulated, although tools which are specifically set up to provide financial advice would be likely to fall within the FCA’s remit.

Lucy Castledine, Director of Consumer Investments at the FCA, said: “AI can help you research companies, understand jargon or explore options before you make a decision. But you need to understand how you’re protected and continue to use your own judgement. Our InvestSmart website can also help you make more informed decisions.”

Here are five tips for using AI safely when it comes to your money:

Learn more about investing and risk on the FCA’s InvestSmart website.

More than half of UK adults (56%) say they feel hopeful or excited about retirement. Most can picture what they want their later years to look like, with more time with family (59%), travelling (55%) and simply resting (51%) among the most popular ambitions.

Yet this emotional optimism is rarely matched by financial certainty. Just 16% have both worked out how much they will need and feel confident they’re on track to reach their retirement goals. More than a third (38%) have no idea how much their desired retirement will cost. 18% say they are confident they’ll achieve their retirement goals despite having no idea what those goals will cost.

This is a substantial gap because the State Pension only covers part of the cost. The full new State Pension is worth £12,548 a year in 2026/27, leaving £32,852 a year to be funded from other income and savings for anyone targeting a comfortable retirement. Pensions UK estimates that currently only around 9% of the working population is currently on track to reach that standard.

The financial pressure facing households helps explain why. Recent ONS data found that 35% of adults think they would be unable to save any money at all over the next 12 months, while 56% say their cost of living has risen in the past month.

The Pensions Commission has also warned that millions of working-age adults are not saving enough for retirement, showing that the gap between retirement aspirations and financial preparedness is not simply a question of individual behaviour.

At the other end of the spectrum, Gen X are the most likely generation to feel they have left retirement planning too late, at 48%. Across all age groups, 43% of adults say they did not seriously think about their pension until they were 36 or older, while for one in four (26%), nothing has yet made retirement feel real.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, said: “Britons aren’t short of retirement dreams. What they’re short of is confidence that their finances will make those dreams a reality. That’s the irony in these findings. People are far more certain about the retirement they want than they are about their ability to pay for it.

“For plenty of people, the barrier is money, not motivation. No amount of encouragement can fix a month that doesn’t balance. When the choice feels like paying today’s bills or funding a retirement decades away, today will win.

“But financial confidence can be built. For people who are in a position to take action, the first steps don’t need to be complicated. A retirement calculator can help put a rough price on the future they want. Finding out what they already have and bringing old pensions together can give them a clearer picture of where they stand. Turning a distant hope into something tangible that you can put a number on is a powerful first step. Once you know what you’re aiming for, you can start making a plan to get there.”

Gold in particular has been shining, hovering around a more than three-month high, as investors position for a weaker dollar amid concerns about US debt, government borrowing and the potential for currency devaluation. The so-called “debasement trade” is gathering momentum, with investors seeking assets that are harder to devalue through monetary policy. So, gold is regaining its lustre as a traditional hedge against weakening currency. At the same time, more speculative bets on Bitcoin are being placed as a digital alternative. Bitcoin has surged above $80,000 in one of its strongest multi-day rallies in years, as expectations of dollar weakness fuel demand. The US Treasury’s move to increase purchases of longer-dated government bonds in an attempt to lower borrowing costs appears to have fuelled the moves, with investors questioning whether this could ultimately put further pressure on the dollar. For the Footsie, it’s had beneficial knock-on consequences as higher gold and other metals prices are boosting the earnings outlook for mining giants, giving the index an advantage over more technology-heavy markets.

Energy prices are steadying, with Brent crude settling just under $92 a barrel, as traders assess the latest stage of the chronic crisis in the Middle East. Iran says it’s in it for the long haul as the US tightens the screws on its economy, attempting to clamp down on oil exports. President Donald Trump is giving Iran’s customers, including China, a deadline to cut their commercial ties or risk facing US sanctions of their own.

For investors, though, it’s still highly unclear whether this stance will force the conflict towards a breakthrough or simply add another layer of uncertainty and push back hopes of a deal and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tech investors are shifting uneasily in their seats ahead of Nvidia’s latest results tomorrow. The chip giant has fast become the financial pulse of the AI revolution and, given how heady valuations have become, it has to prove that demand is still accelerating. Its crucial customers are the hyperscalers - big tech names such as Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Alphabet, and investors will be looking for more signs of long-term commitment to the AI infrastructure build-out.

Bumps in the road ahead are becoming more visible. There’s a growing backlash against data-centre construction, there are worries about whether AI-fuelled returns will justify the spending, and Chinese chip rivals are marching in for business. Memory chip stocks have again come under selling pressure, after fresh cracks appeared in the incumbents’ hold on the market. Micron and SanDisk fell back sharply, while South Korea’s stars Samsung and SK Hynix suffered fresh declines. It comes amid reports that Apple is seeking permission to source memory chips from Chinese manufacturers, including CXMT, as it looks for ways to ease pressure from the global memory shortage. The Trump administration has publicly pushed back against the move, with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick saying Washington does not want Apple buying Chinese memory.

However, the capricious nature of the US administration’s policymaking, particularly when it comes to trade, makes it hard to see a clear path ahead. The US stance on Iran creates fresh geopolitical uncertainty for the semiconductor industry. If Washington follows through with secondary sanctions on countries and companies continuing to do business with Iran, the fallout could extend beyond energy markets and into corporate supply-chain decisions. With China already at the centre of the debate over memory chips, any escalation in US-China trade tensions may make Western technology groups even more cautious about sourcing critical components from Chinese manufacturers. At the same time, the memory shortage and the enormous demand generated by AI data centres are creating a powerful commercial incentive to look for alternative sources of supply. It leaves companies like Apple caught between cost, availability and increasingly complicated geopolitical considerations.

With geopolitics still so fraught, and US economic policy increasingly being questioned, it’s little surprise there’s been a continued drive to diversify away from US assets after such an eye-watering bull market run. One of Europe’s wealthiest families is providing a striking example of this shift. The Rausing family, heirs to the fortune built through Tetra Pak, has sold more than $1 billion of US equities in the second quarter, roughly a fifth of its US stock holdings. That included a 15% stake in Sensient Technologies worth at least $660 million, alongside more than 100 other US positions, including holdings in Wells Fargo, Chipotle and Abbott Laboratories.

Instead, the family has been building its position in Swedish private equity giant EQT, with its holding now around 6%, making it one of the company’s largest shareholders. It’s another example of how investors with long-term horizons are becoming more highly focused on diversification, given how stretched some valuations have become.

That doesn’t mean a correction is imminent, as markets can remain expensive for a very long time, but it does underline the growing concerns about US equities, particularly the technology sector, being priced for an exceptionally rosy future.

By increasing exposure to private equity, the Rausings’ actions also highlight the appeal of investing in businesses away from the daily noise of public markets. The shift towards EQT comes as the private-markets giant continues to return capital to investors, totalling almost €17 billion in the first half of the year, showing the scale of capital being recycled through private markets.

It’s clear that after a spectacular run in US equities, some of the world’s most established pools of private wealth are becoming more selective, taking profits and looking for diversification beyond the US stock market.”

But what do these concepts mean? And what implications do they have for life insurers and actuarial modelling platforms? This article explores the next stage in the evolution of AI systems.

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) addresses this challenge. MCP provides a standard way for AI systems to connect to external tools, applications and data sources. Rather than building custom integrations for each AI model and each application, organisations can expose capabilities through MCP connectors.

You can think of MCP as similar to an API (programming interface) for AI to use. An AI agent can connect to many different systems through MCP, just like an app can link to other systems via their APIs.

Instead of asking an AI model to explain how to run a process, users can ask it to execute the process directly using approved tools.

A more scalable approach is Agent-to-Agent collaboration. Under this model, multiple specialist agents work together.

Rather than relying on one enormously complex system, each agent focuses on a specific responsibility. This mirrors how human teams operate today.

With MCP, Agents can retrieve data, can update records, can trigger workflows, can access governed business applications and can collaborate across technology platforms.

The combination enables AI systems to move from "advising" to "doing".

In each case, humans remain responsible for decisions and governance, while AI reduces manual effort.

BPE solutions, such as WTW’s Unify, replay processes and workflows, including their interactions with other toolsets (via APIs) and humans. They’re robust and reliable, provide progress reporting, governance and clear auditability. If something goes wrong, they fail noisily.

Agentic solutions, on the other hand, solve the problem in a creative and dynamic way, again interacting with other toolsets (via MCP) and humans. They’re flexible, can cope with the unexpected to an extent; but if something goes wrong, they fail silently and you may never know.

Cost is another important consideration when evaluating Agentic AI against automation. Traditional process automation derives much of its efficiency from being deterministic, with known execution paths and predictable resource consumption. By contrast, agentic AI introduces dynamic decision-making, variable execution paths, and thus higher and less predictable incurred costs.

Agentic toolsets and application integrations can further reduce the low-value human workloads in both the modelling and reporting arena; including understanding requirements, maintaining documentation, validating changes, investigating issues, preparing reports and communicating the governance. Whether manual or automated, MCP-enabled agent ecosystems allow AI systems to support each stage of this process.

Users also need to be aware of costs. We’ve all heard anecdotes of AI spend costing more than the humans it replaced. You should consider:

“There are all sorts of reasons people might not be keen on the legalities. If the couple met when they were older, after one or both had a former spouse pass away, they may have death benefits they could lose if they tied the knot again.

“They may also have children from a former relationship and they want to protect their assets in the event the marriage came to an end. If that is the case, it’s worth keeping an eye on proposed changes to the rules around cohabitation, which are expected to give cohabiting partners some rights after they have lived together for a certain number of years. It may mean they don’t have the protection they expect.

“Regardless of why they choose not to get married, they are running some financial risks that could seriously damage their finances, especially in the event of a split, or if their partner passes away. As you get older you have more to lose, less time to make up for losses, and the chance of your partner dying increases. It means it’s vital to understand the risks and take steps to protect yourself.”

The trend also reflects a wider rethink about later life. Government research found that 55% of people aged 40 to 75 who had not yet retired said they would definitely or probably consider a Midlife MOT, designed to help people take stock of their finances, skills and wellbeing.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, comments: “For years, the words ‘gap year’ conjured up images of backpacks, hostels and young people heading off to see the world before starting their careers. But increasingly, it’s older generations who are taking time out.

“And rightly so - why should gap years be wasted on the young? After decades spent working, raising families, paying mortgages and saving for retirement, it’s understandable that more people want to enjoy some of that freedom while they’re fit and healthy enough to make the most of it.”

However taking a gap year at 58 is financially very different from taking one at 18. Time away from work can mean lost salary, missed workplace pension contributions and potentially a gap in your National Insurance (NI) record. For those considering dipping into their pension to pay for the adventure, there can be longer-term tax consequences.

Five money checks before taking a golden gap year.

Currie concludes: “A golden gap year is really about buying yourself something incredibly valuable: time. But you don't want the trip of a lifetime to leave a lasting hole in your retirement.

“Think of it as planning for two journeys at once. There’s the adventure you want to have now, and the much longer retirement still ahead of you. Check your State Pension, understand what happens to your workplace pension and think very carefully before dipping into retirement savings. With some planning, taking time out now doesn't have to mean sacrificing financial security later.”

Changes to pensions can cause a lot of uncertainty and that’s why it’s vital for companies to assess what has actually happened. In the 2025 Budget, the chancellor Rachel Reeves outlined forthcoming alterations to the salary sacrifice regime, which prompted widespread concern.

While some might argue the proposals - to cap the pension contributions that can be made free of National Insurance via salary sacrifice at £2,000 per employee per year - discourage long-term savings, the benefits of the policy have not been entirely eradicated.

That’s because even once the rule is enacted in three years’ time, salary sacrifice will still be available for firms to offer to their employees. And workers will still be able to sacrifice £2,000 of their salaries in this way without any tax implications.

Over and above that level, National Insurance contributions (NIC) will apply to both employers and their people, albeit even with the change implemented, pensions will still be fundamentally tax efficient.

Not only will income tax relief still apply, but salary sacrifice will still be available on the first £2,000 without National Insurance being liable. That makes salary sacrifice more tax-efficient than standard pension contributions, which trigger both employer and employee NIC in respect of the employee’s contributions.

There is a possibility that the public discussion that followed the announcement about the forthcoming salary sacrifice cap created confusion and disproportionate concern about the overall value of pensions. However, it is important for employers to ensure they fully comprehend what any changes actually mean, and then educate their workers about any potential impacts. It is encouraging that 55% of employers engage with their staff about their pensions at least annually, according to our DC MOT data.

In relation to salary sacrifice, it could be prudent for employers to provide guidance to their people here, particularly for more highly paid employees who could be the most exposed to the incoming cap on salary sacrifice NIC savings.

Download the full DC MOT Report 2026 here

With regards to the forthcoming salary sacrifice changes, there are a few legitimate structural and design considerations that can help mitigate the impact of the new cap. These will vary depending on a scheme’s profile, and we will be working closely with our clients to explore what approaches may suit their circumstances.

These will vary depending on scheme profile, and we will be working closely with our clients to explore what approaches suit their circumstances.

Using the invective the administration has become infamous for, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated in an interview that “economic D-Day is coming for Iran.” The emphasis is expected to be on isolating Iran economically and targeting its trading partners, with oil exports and the financial channels supporting Tehran likely to be central to the measures. But quite how effective this will be, given China is Iran’s biggest customer for oil, is far from clear. The reaction on oil markets has been muted, with Brent crude dropping slightly but still trading around $93 a barrel. There may be some relief that the threats have moved from military strikes to some form of super sanctions, but there is little confidence that a route to a peace deal will open up any time soon, with Iranian Supreme National Security Council secretary Mohsen Rezaei vowing to halt oil exports from the Gulf if the economic war continues. However, there are some hints that there may be splits opening up within Iran’s leadership about strategy and increased willingness among some to get back to the negotiating table.

Having stirred up a hornets’ nest in the Middle East, there may have been some expectation that the US administration would seek to bolster relationships elsewhere, but instead the opposite has happened. Relations between the USA and Canada have taken another fractious turn after trade talks collapsed, leading to 50% tariffs on some Canadian goods being imposed over the weekend. The new duties will affect around 5% of Canada’s exports to the US, covering a range of products including food, furniture, clothing, cosmetics and cement, and they come on top of existing tariffs on steel, aluminium, cars and timber. Canadian exporters will be bracing for a drop in sales if US importers try and find alternative supplies rather than paying the tariffs. But it’s likely many costs will be passed on through wholesalers and retailers and it will be American consumers who’ll end up paying more, with tariffs acting like a tax on imports. While the impact on inflation through this latest hike should be relatively contained, the cumulative effect of tariffs across multiple trading partners is an increasing worry, especially combined with higher energy prices induced by conflict in the Middle East.

The collapse in US-Canada trade talks could add another upward nudge to Treasury yields, with the trade row deepening concerns about US economic policy, mounting debt and inflationary pressures. The Trump administration has tried to sell tariffs as a way of bringing in huge amounts of government revenue and helping tackle America’s debt mountain. But the chaotic tariff regime has been beset with legal challenges and has led to mass refunds, so far from making a dent, the US deficit is heading towards $2.1 trillion this year and the national debt has just breached $40 trillion. Also, tariffs and wars are not just costly, they risk acting as a drag on growth while simultaneously pushing up prices, creating a toxic combination. Slower growth can also mean weaker tax revenues, making it harder for the US to grow its way out of its debt mountain. These are all concerns that will be playing on central bankers’ minds, ahead of the key Jackson Hole summit later this week, and investors will be looking for insights from Fed Chair Kevin Warsh about where interest rates could head given the highly tricky economic and monetary environment.

Also today, Shein is strutting towards its Hong Kong stock market debut, but after a stumble in its latest results, investors will be asking whether the fast-fashion giant can still command the fast-fashion catwalk. Shein is targeting a valuation of almost $27bn when it lists on 1 September, but it’s a far cry from the $100bn valuation it enjoyed back in 2022.

The IPO follows failed attempts to list in the US and London, amid regulatory scrutiny, and comes as the ultra-cheap fashion model faces a tougher runway. The pressure is already showing. Shein swung to a $99m loss in the first quarter, compared with a $395m profit a year earlier, as sales slowed and costs rose. Although the loss was also heavily affected by a $328m fair-value accounting charge on convertible preferred shares, the underlying picture is looking less flattering, with sales growth slowing and the US, its biggest market, taking a particular hit. The removal of the US de minimis tariff exemption, which allowed low-value parcels to enter the country without import duties, has hit Shein and rival Temu particularly hard. The change threatens one of the core advantages of their fast fashion model which is focused on sending huge volumes of cheap individual parcels directly to shoppers.

And the US isn’t alone in tightening the rules. The EU is also introducing new charges on low-value parcels, while the UK is further down the road but still planning to tighten its small-parcel customs regime, including removing the current £135 customs duty relief. That could gradually narrow the price gap between Shein and high-street rivals such as Primark and H&M, taking some of the sparkle out of its ultra-cheap offering.

At the same time, fast fashion is far less popular than it was a decade ago, with the rise of resale websites proving tough competition, given that shoppers can get their hands on higher-end brands, at a fraction of the price, to refresh wardrobes. Shein may still be one of the biggest names on the fast-fashion catwalk, but the IPO is going to be a harder sell, with plenty of investors questioning whether its low-cost formula still has the star power to deliver the growth they’re looking for.’’

Earlier this year, we introduced our Hazard Exposure Analytics and Trends (HEAT) dataset (Climate Risk Navigator - Physical Climate Risk Signals in Credit: Longitude, Latitude, and Exposure), showing how physical climate risk varies across locations, regions, and time horizons. In this commentary we look at the intensity of recent heatwaves and droughts, their potential economic impacts, and how the stacking of risks calls for further climate adaptation.

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

"With climate hazards adding up and droughts becoming more frequent and costly, assessing the various economic effects, is crucial. Climate adaptation and preparedness will have to keep up with the intensity and frequency of climate hazards", said Adriana Alvarado, Senior Vice President in the Global Sovereign Ratings Group. "In terms of the credit implications, for governments at various levels, we assess whether climate change and adverse weather events could potentially destroy a material portion of national wealth, weaken the financial system, or disrupt the economy".

Morningstar DBRS Summer of 2026: Heatwaves, Wildfires and Droughts

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, comments: “For pension savers, what happens in the economy and financial markets matters because your pension doesn’t sit in a vault waiting for retirement - it is invested. Millions of workplace and personal pensions hold a mix of shares, bonds and other assets, so when markets move, pension values can move with them. While that can be unsettling in the short-term, volatility is part and parcel of investing. The long-term nature of pensions allows for volatility to be smoothed and your investment to grow.”

With Burnham championing an economic philosophy he calls “Manchesterism” - described as “business-friendly socialism” and Chancellor John Healey’s first Budget due on 28 October, investors are watching closely. Rising inflation, concerns about government borrowing and volatility in global bond markets have put the new Government’s fiscal plans firmly in the spotlight.

So will Andy Burnham be bad for the stock market – and therefore impact for your pension savings?

PensionBee analysis of the FTSE 350 - representing 350 of the UK's largest listed companies - looked at its performance from Tony Blair's election in May 1997 to July 2026, shortly before Burnham entered Downing Street.

During that period Britain had eight Prime Ministers: three Labour and five Conservative. Despite changing political parties at the helm, political crises, recessions, wars, a global financial crisis and a pandemic, the overriding direction of the UK stock market over the period was upwards.

There were, of course, dramatic falls. Gordon Brown’s premiership coincided with the global financial crisis. Boris Johnson was in Downing Street when Covid-19 sent global markets plunging. Tony Blair’s time in office encompassed both the dot-com bubble and subsequent crash.

Those episodes demonstrate the danger of attributing stock market performance simply to the politician occupying No 10.

Even Liz Truss’s disastrous 2022 Mini-Budget, which sent the pound tumbling and triggered turmoil in UK government bond markets, had a much less dramatic long-term impact on the UK stock market.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, comments: “Prime Ministers come and go, but your pension will be invested for decades. It’s important to remember that pensions are generally invested globally and across multiple asset classes, so returns can be influenced by everything from US interest rates and technology stocks to oil prices, wars and the wider global political and economic landscape.

“Politics can move markets in the short term, but for pension savers, the bigger risk can be letting short-term political noise derail a long-term investment plan.”

PensionBee’s analysis of the S&P 500 over a similar period covers Democratic and Republican presidents including Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Again, there were substantial crashes and periods of volatility, but the long-term direction was upwards - regardless of which party occupied the White House.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, comments: “From AI bubble fears and conflict in the Middle East to higher oil prices, inflation and mounting government debt, there is plenty for investors to worry about. Markets can and do fall, but the bigger danger is turning short-term volatility into a long-term mistake.

“Your pension may navigate several Prime Ministers, Budgets, recessions and market crashes before you come to retire. The lesson from nearly 30 years of market history is simple: your pension is likely to outlast the politicians making the headlines.”

Five things pension savers can do when markets wobble

1. Stay diversified
Spread your pension across different geographies, sectors and asset classes so you’re not overly reliant on one market, economy or group of companies.

2. Keep calm and keep contributing
If retirement is still years away, avoid knee-jerk decisions when markets fall. Continuing regular contributions means you will also buy more investments when prices are lower, potentially benefiting when markets recover. Pension tax relief can give contributions an additional boost even before investment returns are considered.

3. Check your risk as retirement approaches
The closer you are to retirement, the less time you may have to recover from a market fall. Review how much investment risk you’re taking and whether it still suits when and how you plan to access your pension.

4. Give yourself a retirement buffer
If you’re already drawing an income, avoid selling investments at depressed prices where possible. Holding an appropriate cash or lower-risk buffer, or drawing from other available income or assets instead, can give your investments time to recover.

5. Remember that downturns don’t last forever
Historically, rising markets have tended to last longer than falling ones, although there are no guarantees. Staying invested means you remain positioned to benefit from a recovery.

More on how market volatility can shape your pension pot in this bonus episode of PensionBee’s PensionConfident Podcast

Source: Schroders Global Fixed Income team 14 August 2026 – Scenarios are framed around US Fed funds rates: Too Hot: +3 hikes, Warming up: +1-2 hikes, Just right: unchanged, Too cold: +1cut

Given our shift in probabilities, and with market pricing continuing to have a more hawkish skew than we do, we maintain our overweight score to global duration and upgrade the US to positive as we see less scope for underperformance here.

Events in the Middle East and the global energy outlook will remain key drivers, but valuations, in terms of outright global yields, are attractive.

Criticism of the last Fed meeting focussed on reduced forward guidance from new Fed chair Kevin Warsh. We disagree - we have no problem with reduced forward guidance. In fact, we endorse it. The quest for transparency often gives rise to information overload and false precision about inherently uncertain outcomes.

But we do believe that objectives must be explicit, even when reducing the level of guidance provided as to the tactics to achieve them. The last Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) confused rather than clarified these objectives. Which measure of inflation is most important to judge underlying inflation? Over what time-horizon should inflation return to target? What level is acceptable – 2% exactly, or 2%-ish? Either answer is fine, ambiguity is not.

Greater clarity from the Fed chair would be welcome, sooner rather than later. Until then, however, we are taking a neutral view on the yield curve. A more proactive Fed with stronger inflation-fighting credibility is a necessary component for a curve-flattening view, and that has become more questionable for the time being.

While the Canadian labour market has stabilised, with unemployment no longer rising, and growth being fine, the core inflation outlook is inconsistent with any policy change by the Bank of Canada (BoC). Yet, the market prices the BoC to tighten policy further than almost any major central bank in the next 12 months, which we believe is unlikely to be realised, creating a compelling opportunity in shorter-dated bonds.

In the UK, although core inflation dynamics have recently been very favourable, our concern is that inflation is likely to increase towards year-end. This means we are less positive on UK gilts but continue to believe the Bank of England is unlikely to deliver the hikes priced by the market.

We downgrade Japanese bonds on our view that the Bank of Japan will need to more aggressively tighten policy, given the inflation outlook and failure of currency intervention to turn the tide for the yen. Until it grasps the nettle, we believe Japanese government bonds remain vulnerable.

Elsewhere, we observe rising political risks in both France and Italy ahead of elections in 2027, but believe current valuation levels compensate better for these risks in French rather than Italian government bonds, given that Italy now trades with lower yields than its neighbour. Quite the turnaround given Italy commanded nearly a 2% yield pick-up over France as recently as 2022.

Finally, across the board, we remain neutral on corporate credit. The story here is little changed: the macro backdrop is good; valuations are not.

Understanding what that shift means for capital markets, portfolio construction and the clients we serve is the defining investment challenge of our time. The transition to “The New Paradigm” presents challenges, but also opportunities.

Over several decades, we have observed a growing number of challenges to the neoliberal paradigm – the return of China as a true global superpower and transition to a multipolar world, the displacement of parts of the labor force through globalization, waning trust in established institutions – although these slow-moving changes can get lost in the noise. But much like the fault line between tectonic plates, the surface may appear calm for extended periods belying the maelstrom of pressure building beneath. But after a while that tension becomes too great and we experience a rupture, an earthquake. We are now dealing with that earthquake as we transition to The New Paradigm.

In a world where the U.S. is no longer willing to underwrite the “global order” as it once did, and geopolitical risk remains structurally elevated, the role of the state is changing. We increasingly see countries seeking to provide greater support and investment to local energy infrastructure, strategic minerals, domestic supply chains and resource security. This reflects a motivation to align economic activity explicitly to national power and resilience.

Reactivity: What we are experiencing is not episodic volatility but higher systemic risk. These episodes are linked, and their frequency is likely to increase over time. More scenario testing, greater use of pre-mortems and a clear-eyed view of mission failure for each client are required. Portfolios and governance structures must be capable of responding quickly to new information, through high-quality data flows, clear decision-making processes and sufficient liquidity to act when circumstances change.

Resilience: In a world where equity-bond correlations may remain positive for longer, the traditional equity-and-bond portfolio loses a core structural advantage. Downside protection needs to be rebuilt on different foundations. Longer-horizon investors also need greater openness to high-volatility, high-skew strategies that can deliver the sustained returns required to meet long-run missions.

Renewed belief in active management and alternatives: The new environment also renews the case for active management. Alpha generated through manager skill is likely to become a more valuable component of portfolios than it has been in recent years, when all you needed to do was put money in equity markets. Infrastructure, hard assets and private markets carry renewed importance, both as sources of structural return and as assets harder to erode through inflation or geopolitical disruption. We also see a number specific portfolio-relevant implications, including:

Two-sided risk for inflation and interest rates
Large trade shifts are here to stay, but their inflationary impact is uncertain. China's continued success in growing high-value exports, now accounting for around 40% of global electric vehicle exports, for example, illustrates that deglobalization does not automatically mean higher prices everywhere. We see similar phenomena to the downside, as prior disinflationary forces appear to be weakening, all of which support our view that we need to prepare for more two-sided outcomes for inflation and interest rates going forward, rather than the largely one-way path lower over the last 40 years.

There are strong tailwinds for real assets and some commodities
There is an almost existential need for greater investment in defense, energy and resources by many countries – a structural, multi-decade opportunity. Whether some nations go further by restricting or redirecting foreign capital remains uncertain, but it's got to be higher risk than it was.

The implications for capital markets and investment strategy remain complex, however in our mind there are clear conclusions and opportunities:

Technology sector equity valuations are elevated, reflecting a combination of strong growth and future expectations. We do not believe this is currently in “bubble” territory, however as strong earnings expectations stretch far into the future, this effectively increases sensitivity to interest rate changes compared with recent decades.The significant capex spend is reflective of race towards recursively self-learning artificial intelligence, growing market share and significant revenue growth. The result is winner-takes-all dynamics and an urgency of investment that have few historical precedents, but nonetheless an environment where active management is likely to be well rewarded.Our view is that AI will ultimately be deeply disinflationary and that productivity gains will be significant and lasting. But the path there is uncertain, the near-term capex surge may prove inflationary before that dividend is realized. Combined with geopolitical forces, this reinforces a central conclusion: inflation and interest rate risks are now genuinely two-sided.

The structural transition underway creates genuine opportunities, in infrastructure, active management, private markets and the new choices available to clients.

Navigating them requires portfolios built for resilience, informed by clear analysis of what is knowable and what is not, and grounded in an honest reckoning with what risk really means for each investor.

The paradigm has shifted. The task now is to thrive in it.

"CGT receipts remain elevated following a record year for the Treasury, with higher rates introduced at the Autumn Budget 2024 and the fiscal drag drawing ever more individuals into the CGT net. While the OBR forecasts CGT tax receipts to make even larger contributions for the Treasury in the coming years, the increasing tax burden on gains from investments, property and business assets risks making the UK less attractive to internationally mobile investors, entrepreneurs and business owners, particularly when other jurisdictions are offering more favourable tax regimes.”

Higher energy costs are keeping up the inflationary pressures with Brent crude staying above $93 a barrel, up more than 5% this week. The US-Iran conflict shows no sign of abating, with the standoff over the Strait of Hormuz keeping a hefty risk premium baked into oil prices, while disruption to Russian energy infrastructure is adding another layer of uncertainty. With energy prices feeding through into transport, heating and the cost of goods, a sustained rise in crude could make the inflation battle even more difficult.

The turmoil in the debt markets continues despite efforts to calm feverish borrowing costs. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tried to throw cold water onto hot government bond yields by doubling the size of planned Treasury buybacks, but it’s not touching the sides of the deep-seated problem. Investors remain concerned about inflationary risks and the growing mountain of government borrowing, while at the same time, debt being issued by tech giants building out the AI revolution is offering stiff competition. Given the high ratings on the corporate bonds being pumped out by the hyperscalers, more capital has another attractive destination beyond Treasury markets, adding to the pressure on government debt. Higher yields are also giving equities a run for their money, with investors seeking out more stable returns compared to the risks inherent in equity markets, given the mega valuations out there.

The yields on long-dated Treasuries are back above 5.3%, having dipped on Thursday. Thirty-year gilt yields have been hovering around 5.8%, as concerns continue to swirl about the UK’s fragile fiscal position. The latest snapshot of UK government borrowing won’t do much to assuage fears that Britain is living beyond its means. Borrowing came in at £1.8 billion in July 2026, which was £0.7 billion more than in July 2025, and £2.3 billion above the Office for Budget Responsibility’s forecast. Even though the amount the Exchequer is pulling in through higher taxes grew, helped by a strong influx of self-assessed income tax revenue payments, it’s being outpaced by spending on public services, benefits and debt payments. Although debt interest costs were lower than in recent months, they are stubbornly higher than a year ago, which is keeping the new Prime Minister in a highly tricky position. It comes at a time when Andy Burnham is under pressure to deliver more meaningful support to households facing a cost-of-living squeeze, but he’s still operating under the highly watchful eye of the bond market. This is the latest borrowing data to arrive under new Chancellor John Healey’s watch and it is likely to lead to difficult decisions at the Treasury. Signs of greater profligacy with taxpayers’ money could set off another spiral higher in borrowing costs, limiting available funds even further, given the eye-watering cost of servicing the debt.’’

Rhys Jones, travel insurance expert at Go.Compare, said: "Travel anxiety is genuinely reshaping how Brits holiday in 2026. Gatwick alone expects 900 or more flights on its peak August days this summer. And the most practical antidote to travel stress isn't avoiding disruption - it's knowing exactly what you're entitled to claim when it happens. A few minutes spent checking your policy before you leave could save you hundreds if things go wrong."

One million more passengers flew through UK airports in Q1 2026 compared to the same period last year, putting more pressure on already stretched infrastructure.

Gatwick is the UK's most stressful summer airport, with an average departure delay of over 31 minutes, and the likelihood of experiencing a flight delay on any given journey is as high as 37%.

Rhys has shared his top tips on how to reduce travel anxiety before you fly:

The major Treasury buyback intervention was launched after a feverish jump in long-dated debt yields, which was making the US debt mountain even more expensive to maintain. It was also threatening to push up the price of borrowing for companies, given how loans are linked to bond market movements. America’s national debt has more than doubled in a decade to reach $40 trillion dollars, just as the war with Iran has pushed up energy costs and threatens to spill over into knock-on price rises for goods and services. Brent crude, the benchmark, is still hovering around $91 a barrel as the Middle East situation remains at a stalemate.

So, the Treasury Department will at least double the size of its liquidity-support buyback operations for longer-dated debt from $2 billion to $4 billion per operation, between September 9 and November 4. The move has helped settle nerves, with the 30-year Treasury yield easing back to around 5.18%, after hitting a 19-year high of 5.34% earlier this week, while the 10-year yield has also pulled back.

But this could prove to be a sticking plaster which could be rapidly ripped off, given that bond vigilantes are on such high alert. The Treasury says the move is designed to provide greater liquidity support to the longer end of the market, and that can help dampen volatility and bring borrowing costs down in the short term. But it does not change the fundamental picture of rising government debt, persistent deficits and inflationary pressures.

And the latest minutes from the Fed show increasing wariness about those inflation risks. Several policymakers indicated they were prepared to raise rates if inflation fails to move down towards the 2% target, with many saying higher borrowing costs could ultimately be needed to prevent price pressures becoming entrenched. They are particularly concerned about energy prices and developments in the Middle East, while there are also worries that the huge investment boom in AI could keep inflation elevated through higher demand for chips, electricity and other infrastructure. But the same Fed minutes showed risks to employment and growth are viewed as being skewed to the downside. And the latest jobs figures will reinforce this concern, which is why policymakers may resist slamming on the brakes and opting for immediate rate hikes, given the weakening US labour market, with payrolls falling unexpectedly by 23,000 in July. So the Fed is caught between a rock and a hard place, with inflation risks picking up just as the labour market is weakening. The spectre of stagflation is hovering, with weaker growth, a softer jobs market, high government borrowing and renewed inflationary pressures.

A loan note or mini-bond usually involves lending money to a company for a set period in return for interest. If that company fails, consumers could lose every penny.

The FCA permanently banned the marketing of speculative illiquid securities, including mini-bonds and loan notes, to retail investors from 1 January 2021.

But consumers may still come across adverts for loan notes and mini-bonds in everyday places, including social media, online adverts or websites promoting high fixed returns.

The adverts can look simple and safe, but warning signs include pressure to act quickly, unclear explanations of how money could be lost, or claims that an investment is “asset-backed” without clear evidence of what stands behind it.

Examples of the practices the FCA sees include:

Lucy Castledine, director of consumer investments at the FCA, said: "Big, fixed returns are a warning sign, not a guarantee. Loan notes, mini-bonds and other speculative illiquid securities are high-risk investments and are not suitable for most people. Ordinary retail investors should only invest through regulated firms because if they invest through an unauthorised firm, they may have little or no protection if things go wrong. We are working hard to prevent harm, but consumers should still stop and check before investing.”

The FCA encourages anyone involved in distributing or funding high-risk investments to report anything suspicious. This includes regulated firms, banks, payment firms, lawyers, accountants and auditors who may be involved in getting these investments to consumers.

The FCA has issued more than 1,200 warnings so far this year, told firms to stop unlawful promotions and referred cases to other law enforcement agencies where further action may be needed.

But scams can be complex, fast-moving and hard to stop, especially when run from overseas or designed to avoid regulation.

To address the harm, regulated firms like banks and payment providers, regulators, government and law enforcement need to continue to work together.

Consumers need to be alert to the risk of harm and protect themselves using the tools available, like the FCA’s Firm Checker.

Consumers can help too by reporting any concerns to the FCA if they see a suspicious investment or think they’ve been contacted by a fraudster or unauthorised firm.

Notes to Editors

The Trustees selected M&G following a competitive process, citing its financial strength, proven track record and the flexibility of its BPA Plus proposition. The deal also marks the first use of Aon and Eversheds Sutherland’s Pathway platform with M&G, helping to create a more streamlined approach for future business. Aon provided broking, investment and actuarial advice, while Pinsent Masons and Eversheds acted as legal advisers to the Trustees.

M&G is a founding member of the BPA market with over 25 years of experience implementing and administering bulk annuity transactions, backed by a robust balance sheet and a firm commitment to meeting our customers’ needs. Building on the launch of BPA Plus, a key differentiator for M&G in the market, the business expects to achieve £3–£4 billion of annual BPA sales by 2027.

This transaction was executed by the Prudential Assurance Company Limited (“Prudential”), M&G’s wholly owned subsidiary providing life and pensions solutions.

Rosie Fantom, Head of Bulk Annuity Origination & Execution at M&G, said: “We’re pleased to support Altro and the Trustees in securing the long-term future of their 740 members. This transaction highlights the value of ‘BPA Plus’, combining the security of a bulk annuity with the potential to offer greater outcomes over time. It’s a strong example of how we can work with trustees and their advisers to deliver practical, member-focused outcomes, and we look forward to continuing to support the scheme in the years ahead.”

Andrew Elliott, Chair of the Trustees, and representing ZEDRA said: “Protecting our members’ benefits has always been the key objective for both the Trustees and Company, and we’re proud of the way that we have worked together to achieve long-term security for our members through the transaction with M&G – made possible by strong collaboration between all of our advisers. The potential for additional benefit to our members in future on top of the insurance regulatory framework, through M&G’s innovative ‘BPA Plus’ offering, is further upside.”

Joanna Davies, Senior Consultant and Risk Transfer Adviser at Aon, said: “This transaction was efficient throughout but made even more so by the use of our ‘Pathway’ approach, agreed with M&G for the first time. This will also pave the way for more schemes to benefit from our streamlined process. In this case, it enabled us to move swiftly for the Trustees and complete a quick execution, securing a favourable outcome to the benefit of the members.”

After 13 years this award has grown in popularity and enjoyment. A wonderful opportunity to pause and recognise all the hard work and talent within the actuarial market. The winner will grace the cover of our winner’s magazine and two runners-up will also receive an award and all finalists are celebrated. Who do you think has worked exceptionally hard this year or achieved something great? Who do you think will be making an impact on the market in five years’ time.

Antony Buxton FIA, Managing Director, Star Actuarial Futures Limited: Star Actuarial is again delighted to support and champion the Stars of the Future award. The world (of actuaries) continues to be transformed by (amongst other things) AI, demographic change, climate risk, digital-first customers, data-driven personalisation and regulation.

Against this backdrop, there is significant opportunity for actuaries to make the world a better place. This award is a chance to celebrate the early-career actuaries who are already making a real difference, and indeed any actuary about to set the world alight in a pioneering area of actuarial work.

We can’t wait to hear about the contributions of all of the nominated candidates. Good luck to everybody!

You can now nominate someone for Stars of the Future 2026 here

Paul Ring, Stars of the Future 2025 winner: Honestly, I couldn’t believe that I was nominated for this award, and winning it is an even bigger surprise. I’ve never been nominated for an award like this before, so it genuinely caught me off guard in the best possible way. I’m incredibly thankful to those who put my name forward for this award and to everyone who voted for me.

In contrast, river flooding is much less frequent but much more severe when it does occur, equating to double the severity of surface water flooding. In addition, 30% of flood claims are from rivers breaking their banks, and 12% of these claims are over £25k in value.

By contrast, river, or fluvial, flooding accounts for 30% of flood claims, making it far less common than surface water flooding. However, when river flooding does occur, it is twice as severe, with 12% of claims exceeding £25,000.

The analysis, using LexisNexis® Precision Claims, offers new insight into the insurance sector’s experience with surface water flooding claims vs. river flooding claims. Distinguishing surface water risk from river, or fluvial, flood risk at the individual property level is becoming increasingly critical for insurance premium pricing, underwriting decisions and property flood risk assessment.

According to the U.K.’s National Housing Federation using Environment Agency data, eight in ten homes now classified as high-risk of flooding are in England's towns and cities — equivalent to 839,000 homes. Separately, the organisation found that the number of properties at risk from surface water flooding has tripled since 2018.

Long periods of heat can leave soil dry and less able to absorb sudden heavy rainfall, increasing the likelihood of surface water flooding. Following June heatwave conditions that saw record temperatures[iii], the country experienced severe thunderstorm activity, and flash flooding disrupted the capital's transport network, including a section of the Elizabeth Line. In London and cities such as Brighton, basements represent one of the biggest risks to insurance providers from flash flooding.

Caroline Elliott-Grey, senior product manager, U.K. and Ireland insurance, LexisNexis Risk Solutions, says: “While these statistics are from home claims, they may shed some light onto commercial property risk as well, especially as we head into a softer market. A property exposed primarily to surface water risk presents a very different claims profile to one exposed to river flood risk. Treating these as a single undifferentiated "flood risk" category can create opportunities for mispricing and poor portfolio management at exactly the moment climate volatility is accelerating.

“With a more comprehensive view of the market’s claims experience through LexisNexis® Precision Claims, insurance providers can look at flood scoring and explicitly factor in flood risk type when assessing risk, along with additional factors such as the presence of a basement or the elevation of the property. These insights can help insurance providers make more informed underwriting decisions; price risk more precisely and better manage potential loss severity.”

The jagged line of price increases has taken another painful twist upwards, with households facing a fresh squeeze as higher energy bills push inflation further away from the Bank of England’s target.

Consumer Prices Index inflation climbed, unhelpfully, to 2.9% in July from 2.6% in June, as the 13% increase in Ofgem’s energy price cap fed through into household bills. The average annual dual-fuel bill has risen by £221 to £1,862, with gas prices particularly responsible for the upward pressure.

For households, this is a particularly unwelcome page turn in the inflation story. And the financial pain may be sharper because private-sector regular pay growth has slowed to 2.8%, so wages are now rising more slowly than prices overall. Workers are therefore having to stretch their pay packets further simply to stand still, with less left over after covering essential bills.

There are, however, some welcome signs of easing elsewhere in the inflation basket. Petrol prices fell by 3.1 pence a litre in July, while diesel dropped by 8.8 pence, helping to pull annual motor fuel inflation down to 15.5% from 21.3%.

There was also some relief for holidaymakers, with European air fares helping to push transport inflation lower. It appears the flash of uncertainty caused by the war with Iran and concerns about jet fuel shortages prompted more holidaymakers to book later, intensifying competition between airlines and pulling down the price of some tickets.

Price rises for food and non-alcoholic beverages also appear to have been going in the right direction, with inflation easing to 1.3% from 1.7%, its lowest rate since September 2021. But it could be the lull before the storm, given worries are intensifying that prolonged heat and drought across the UK and Europe are threatening crop yields, with concerns over supplies of cereals, fruit and vegetables. If shortages build, higher agricultural costs could eventually feed through to supermarket shelves, putting renewed pressure on food prices later this year and into 2027.

So the headline rate may be concerning, and there are niggles of worry about what could be ahead, but if you strip out volatile food and fuel prices, then the core rate of inflation has held steady at 2.6%. This will be more reassuring for the Bank of England, especially with services inflation easing from 3.6% to 3.4%. Policymakers will also have an eye on the cooling labour market, with vacancies falling and public-sector pay increases easing. Right now, two interest rate hikes are still priced in by financial markets, but forecasts have changed wildly, and much will depend on the data in the months to come.

But the Iran crisis remains a huge wildcard, and right now the heat is still being felt in energy markets, with Brent crude hovering close to $92 a barrel with hostilities continuing and negotiations for a long-term solution remaining elusive. If tensions keep oil and gas prices elevated for months rather than weeks, higher energy and transport costs could start to feed through into the wider economy, potentially triggering renewed wage demands.

At the same time, a pressure cooker is building in bond markets, with yields becoming increasingly steamy amid concerns about persistent inflation, heavy government borrowing and the sheer scale of debt being issued. Global long-term bond yields have climbed to multi-year highs, adding to the sense that investors are demanding more compensation for taking on the risk of holding government debt.

That is creating turbulence for equities because higher yields make bonds more attractive relative to shares, while also raising borrowing costs and reducing the present value of future corporate profits. The effect is particularly uncomfortable for highly valued technology stocks, where valuations are highly reliant on expectations for future earnings. That’s why turbulence continues to hit the tech sector, with South Korea’s chip stars particularly affected as optimism seeps away, with SK Hynix and Samsung again seeing sharp falls.”

Jenny Holt, Customer Savings & Investment Director at Standard Life said: “Inflation heading back up is an unwelcome reminder that the cost-of-living squeeze hasn’t gone away. The 13% increase in Ofgem’s energy price cap from July is feeding higher bills into household budgets, with the increase equivalent to around £18 a month for a typical household. With inflation at 2.9%, everyday costs are still rising faster than the Bank of England’s 2% target. Andy Burnham’s planned temporary removal of VAT from household electricity from October should provide some welcome relief, but it is likely to offset only part of the recent increase in energy costs. Prolonged hot and dry weather could also put further pressure on some food prices later in the year, meaning households may continue to feel the squeeze across several areas of everyday spending. When more of the monthly budget is absorbed by essentials such as energy and food, it can also become harder for people to put money aside, whether that's building emergency savings to cover unexpected costs or contributing towards longer-term goals like saving for retirement. Renewed inflationary pressure could also make the Bank of England more cautious on interest rates. While cooling wage growth may ease some of the pressure, a more persistent rise in prices could keep borrowing costs higher for longer. For savers, it is also an important reminder that the headline interest rate on savings only tells part of the story - what ultimately matters is the return they are earning after inflation. For people approaching or already in retirement, even relatively modest inflation can make a meaningful difference over time. Rising prices steadily reduce what a fixed level of income can buy, making it harder to balance today’s household costs with longer-term plans. Regularly reviewing retirement plans and considering how changing costs could affect the income needed in later life can help people understand whether their savings remain on track.”

Vulnerabilities confirmed as actively exploited and added to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency's (CISA) Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog rose only 10% over the same period, a gap that further amplifies an already difficult prioritization challenge facing security teams. Read the full report at: Quarterly Threat Report: Second Quarter, 2026

While dramatic, these headlines did not change how most intrusions actually started. Compromised credentials used against internet-facing VPN and remote desktop services accounted for 67% of ransomware intrusions investigated by Beazley Security. This is down from 74% in Q1 but is still dominant by a wide margin.

Law enforcement efforts to disrupt infostealer families have had success but are proving to be short-lived. Within four days of an Operation ENDGAME takedown, StealC malware authors shipped a new version of the malware and offered the previous source code for $60,000. Public ransomware leak-site postings fell slightly to 2,268 but remained nearly 60% above Q2 2025.

Alton Kizziah, CEO of Beazley Security, said: “The headline this quarter is that AI made the security industry's job noisier without making the attacker's job fundamentally different. But AI assisted attacks are gaining in both frequency and effectiveness, and we seem to be watching the attackers learn in real time. As AI adoption in the enterprise increases, and as attackers continue to evolve tactics, clients need to remain vigilant and attend to cybersecurity basics. We also recommend organizations consider AI assessments to monitor what AI capabilities are in use across the organization, how these tools are being used, and what is needed to improve management and control frameworks.”

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “With economic uncertainty so high, and payroll taxes increasingly onerous, it’s not surprising many UK employers are staying cautious, and unwilling to take the risk of hiring new staff. The trend is showing up once again in the latest labour market snapshot from the ONS.

Payrolled employees fell by 78,000 over the year to June, while the early estimate for July shows a further annual decline of 94,000. The number of vacancies has also slipped to 707,000, the lowest level outside the pandemic period since late 2014, with the ONS reporting feedback that some smaller firms are holding back on recruitment because of higher labour costs and other operating expenses.

Regular pay growth edged up to 3.5% in the year to June, from 3.4% previously, which may spark fresh niggles of concern among Bank of England policymakers. However this is being largely driven by higher pay deals in the public sector. Even so private sector companies may come under pressure to keep up with demands for better deals from their staff. Policymakers will watch closely for signs that this could lead to higher payroll costs being passed on as higher prices for goods and services. Right now markets are currently pricing in two interest rate hikes over the next year, given the potential rise in inflationary pressures.

This snapshot shows that businesses are hunkering down and trying to deal with a storm of higher costs, rather than taking a punt on expansion, which doesn’t bode well for UK growth prospects. It’s not just taxes and payroll costs which are weighing heavily, higher energy bills are also causing havoc with budgets, with fears of secondary price increases rising amid fresh fractures in geopolitics.

Brent crude has climbed above $91 a barrel as tensions have frayed again in the Middle East, raising fears of yet more supply disruption. Trump’s inflammatory language towards Oman, threatening to bomb the US ally, has sparked this latest rally. There’s disappointment that the temporary ceasefire with Iran has expired without a deal, and the US president for now claims he’s not interested in reaching one. He’s clearly irked that Oman and Iran are in negotiations without the US to reopen the crucial Strait of Hormuz, and unable to control the situation, is reverting to threats of fresh military action instead.

Higher energy prices risk feeding through into transport, manufacturing and household bills, making the battle to bring down inflation harder to win. That is forcing markets to reassess how long interest rates will stay elevated.

Bond markets are flashing amber across the globe, with investors demanding ever-higher returns to lend to governments as fears grow that inflation may prove much harder to shift. The yield on the US 30-year Treasury has pushed above 5.32%, its highest level in almost two decades, while UK gilt yields have also surged back towards levels not seen since the aftermath of the financial crisis. France is also feeling the heat, with 30-year borrowing costs having climbed to their highest level since 2008. Investors are increasingly demanding a bigger premium to hold long-dated government debt as higher oil prices threaten to keep inflation elevated and concerns mount about the sheer scale of government borrowing.

The yen is caught in the crossfire of these concerns. Japan has also seen its own bond yields leap to multi-decade highs as investors anticipate further rate rises from the Bank of Japan. Normally that would be enough to give the yen a lift. Instead, the currency remains stubbornly weak because Japanese interest rates are still well below those available in the US and other countries, so the risk is that the yen stays caught in this doom loop, with investors chasing higher returns elsewhere. We may have seen a remarkable bout of currency intervention, with Japan selling dollars and buying the yen, and the US Treasury also stepping in to support the currency. But the effect has proved short-lived, with powerful currents in global bond markets continuing to overwhelm those efforts.”

Add it up and it should come out roughly equal. It doesn’t. The UK Pension Commission’s own modelling shows that someone who starts saving at 40 needs to contribute around 13% of their pay to hit a target replacement rate. Start at 22? You need just 7%. The same retirement outcome. Nearly double the contribution rate required because of the delay getting started. This is a key reason why financial education and pension communication can be so challenging. The numbers that matter most – what happens in the third or fourth decade of saving – feel abstract and unreal to a younger saver, while the near-term cost of contributions feels concrete. Our brains weight the linear present over the exponential future.

I modelled a saver from age 25 to 65 on a starting £27,000 salary, contributing 9% annually with reasonable investment return and salary growth levels assumed throughout their working career.

Final pot: £510,000. Total contributions: £194,000. The remaining £316,000 — 62% of the entire pot — came from investment returns compounding quietly over four decades.

Using the same assumptions, the chart below illustrates this nicely by looking at how the contributions made within each five year age cohort compound over a 40 year working career. Time is a valuable commodity for anyone saving for their retirement and this is highlighted when we consider the contributions in the earliest age cohort (25-29) grow more than 7x by age 65 whereas contributions made in the 55-59 age cohort only have the opportunity to grow by 1.4x by age 65. The total pot accumulates to £510,000 but almost half of this was generated from contributions made in the first 15 years (when the base salary was lower!).

The central tenet that beginning your savings journey early is one of the key ingredients to a successful retirement outcome holds true. This decision can ultimately swamp the impact from a host of other factors that are designed to incrementally improve outcomes for pension scheme members. The UK’s Pension Schemes Act 2026 is largely about driving those incremental improvements (e.g. greater scale facilitating lower charges and enabling access to potentially higher-return investment opportunities). However, rather than seeing these targeted improvements as peripheral to the key decision around when and how much a person saves into their pension, they should be viewed as another crucial part of an individual’s compounding journey.

Take our modelled example above, a 1% improvement in annual returns (due to lower fees and/or better investment returns) results in the final pot at age 65 being £130,000 higher. And that extra £130,000 has the potential to further compound in retirement to meaningfully improve the annual income a person can sustainably withdraw throughout their retirement years.

Ralph Waldo Emerson said: “The years teach us much, which the days never knew”. In a retirement savings context, this quote could reasonably be edited to replace ‘years’ with ‘decades’ and ‘days’ with ‘years’. Small differences in net returns, charges, or time invested can look modest year to year but persistence and patience over decades allows the exponential power of compounding to shine.

With income tax, VAT and employee National Insurance rate rises all but ruled out by the Labour government’s manifesto pledge, wealth, property and capital taxes look the most likely route to raising revenue. This is also where the current government’s voting records are most consistent.

But as with investing where past performance is not a guarantee of future returns, past voting records are no guarantee of future tax policy. Backbench votes cost little and don't always survive when coming into contact with the government.

Andy Burnham has almost always voted against welfare cuts and for higher taxes on top earners and capital gains. This record points away from benefit cuts as a way to close the gap.

John Healey has voted consistently for a mansion tax and further capital gains tax rises, and against VAT increases, suggesting a wealth-focused Budget.

Emma Reynolds, who runs the spending review as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, has almost always voted for capital gains tax rises and stamp duty increases.

Pat McFadden, who owns the welfare budget, has almost always voted against benefit spending cuts, suggesting any DWP savings are more likely to come from benefits reform rather than headline cuts.

Torsten Bell, who was brought into government as Pensions Minister, naturally has the most pension-specific record: consistent support for capital gains tax and stamp duty rises, and as Minister, defended the already-legislated £2,000 salary-sacrifice pension cap (from Budget 2025) against a Lords attempt to raise it.

Becky O’Connor, Head of Pensions at PensionBee, said: “The past is history, tomorrow is a mystery’ is an inspirational quote that can certainly be applied to second guessing Budget decisions. Although it’s hard to ignore the voting records of key ministers that point towards tax rises and away from welfare cuts, history shows that voting records and government policy don't always match up.

“The same caution applies here: a decade of backbench votes tells us about instinct and ideology, rather than intent. Just as ‘feelings aren’t facts’, fevered speculation is not policy announcement.

“When it comes to wealth or income tax increases, the way measures affect pension savers, in particular those already retired, is a minefield when it comes to actually achieving any wealth redistribution goals. This is because taxation geared towards pension wealth - as with more income tax for higher earners - does not always have the intended effect of making the wealthiest pay more, but can instead end up penalising those who have worked hard, saved diligently and made net economic contributions but are not necessarily wealthy.

“Savers should avoid making key decisions that may have long-term consequences for their own financial future based on rumours, historical voting records or assumptions.

“The sensible approach is to wait for the actual details set out on 28 October, and speak to a financial adviser if needed, before acting. Damage has recently been done through pension savers moving on speculation, particularly in relation to pension taxation. It’s best to wait until the facts are known and the impact

Helen Morrissey, head of retirement analysis, Hargreaves Lansdown: “Average wage growth plus bonuses stood at 4.1% between April-June. This could prove to be an interesting figure for state pensioners as next month’s data is a key part of the formula for the state pension triple lock.

The triple lock aims to increase the state pension by whichever is highest of average wages (May-July), September’s CPI inflation or 2.5%. With inflation standing at 2.6%, this suggests, barring a shock inflation spike over the next couple of months or collapse in average wage growth, that wages will be the element used.

Should next month’s figure remain the same as today’s, this would put someone on a full new state pension on around £251.20 per week, up from £241.30 per week. Someone on a full basic state pension would see their weekly amount rise from £184.90 per week to around £192.50 from next April.

While an inflation-busting increase will be good news for pensioners, the fact remains that the state pension on its own does little more than cover the essentials. If you want more from your retirement, then you need to make the most of your workplace and personal pensions.

Auto-enrolment has done a great job in recent years in getting more people saving into a pension. However, for many, saving at auto-enrolment minimums will not enable them to maintain their lifestyle in retirement. To prevent a nasty shock, it pays to consider what you want your retirement to look like and then you can calculate how much it might cost. A nice retirement means different things for different people – some may want to travel the world; others may want to stick closer to home but spend more time with family and friends.

Make use of online tools from your pension provider, such as online calculators. These can tell you how much you are on track to receive. If you aren’t quite where you want to be, you can also model the impact of increasing your contributions over time. Taking small steps, such as increasing your contributions every time you receive a pay rise, can make a huge difference. You can also make the most of employer contributions. Many businesses contribute at auto-enrolment minimum levels, but others contribute more if you do – the so-called ‘employer match’. If you’ve got the extra cash, then the extra boost from your employer can make all the difference to your lifestyle in retirement.”

The wildfires are still ongoing in France and could get considerably worse if they get even closer to cities such as Bordeaux, where they have already caused a great deal of disruption.

Ben Carey-Evans, Senior Insurance Analyst at GlobalData, explains: “It is yet more evidence that insurers around the world should be extremely concerned by climate change and the impact of severe weather events. A GlobalData poll on Verdict Media sites in May 2024 found that 25.0% of respondents believed severe weather events to be the greatest risk to the insurance industry, which placed it second behind cyber threat. While this is a couple of years old, severe weather events is only more of an issue now and it highlights how it has been a key concern for insurers over a long period of time.”

Reportedly, wildfires in France are not covered by its state-backed compensation scheme (which only covers floods and droughts). Therefore, all the burden will fall on insurers.

Carey-Evans concludes: “The long-term risk here is that insurers pull away from personal and commercial policies in high-risk areas and large areas of land and population become uninsurable.

“This is one of the most-pressing issues in insurance, with more serious events becoming increasingly likely every year. Insurers and governments will need to work out how they can continue to insure increasingly large areas, with many communities and businesses at risk.”

“It could mean any relief on inflation is temporary. As markets seek to divine the likely trajectory of both rates and prices, UK inflation figures and minutes from the latest Federal Reserve meeting – both set for the middle of this week – could be instructive.

“In London, miners clawed back some of the ground they lost last week, helped by strong precious metals prices, with weakness seen in consumer-facing stocks.

“A notable rise for Johnson Matthey followed a share consolidation taking effect as it paid out a bumper special dividend from the sale of its Catalyst Technologies arm.

“Budget retail chain The Works continues to face pressure from activist investor Kelso – which is now questioning the work-from-home approach taken by the company’s New Zealand based chair Stephen Bellamy. This is unlikely to be the last word in the tête-à-tête between management and Kelso ahead of a crunch shareholder meeting next month.”

This is probably provable in closed-form by a better mathematician than me, but I can show it with simulations. Suppose we have a portfolio of 10 stocks, each 50% correlated with each other, and each with a geometric 8% return and 30% (ln) volatility. We run it for 10 years, with no rebalancing.

If we never sell a stock, and just take the final value, the IRR and returns are, by definition, identical (at 10.4%) – so far so good. But what happens if we start selling part way through?

Suppose the manager sells any individual stock that outperforms an N x return each year. For example, if a stock in year 4 is worth more than 4 times its original value, then it gets sold.

This is a sensible thing to do, at least within the assumptions of this simulation, as it limits concentration, and therefore reduces volatility, and so increases both diversification and geometric returns. In this example though, while hard to quantify precisely, we can cap the effect. The maximum benefits of rebalancing would be attained by full annual rebalancing, and we can estimate this by comparing the theoretical volatility of a fully rebalanced portfolio (22%) with the simulated, non-rebalanced portfolio (25%), and using exp(Vol^2/2) we know this effect is less than 0.8%. In all likelihood it’s materially less, as the residual portfolio after any sales would also be quite far from equal weighted. So, we might expect a boost of about half, or 40bps.

The IRRs, meanwhile, shoot up to 12.4%, meaning the IRRs are about 2 percentage points higher than the underlying returns, or 1.5% even allowing for some rebalancing advantage. And by construction, this isn’t from any skill in selection, this is just from the maths of IRRs. By getting paid early, the IRR looks higher, even though there was no way to keep that reinvestment rate.

Of course, it’s hard to know what the underlying volatility of a private asset really is, in any unsmoothed, economic sense. What’s easier is checking the sensitivity of this “IRR pickup” over returns. Fundamentally, the impact of volatility here is really how likely any stock is to breach a sale point. If we raise it to 40%, the returns are 12.3%[1] and the average IRR is 16.3%. At 50% volatility, these jump to 14.6% and 22.3%, a whopping 8% pickup in expected IRR over expected returns.

This isn’t an attack on private assets, which can and often do deliver outsized returns. This isn’t an attack on managers either. Many of the assumptions, such as the sale points, are arbitrary, and the results are not intuitive to interpret- the values we’re considering are the expected values of IRRs given the expected returns on the underlying assets. However, it highlights a mathematical quirk, which gives another reason to give pause when assessing an investment, and to not give too much weight to any spectacular historic IRRs.

[1] The reason a higher vol assumption drives a higher return is we assume the 8% is geometric, so it makes the arithmetic return per stock higher, and gives a larger pickup from diversification

The anxiety of access: bridging the gap between mental health and financial services identifies three widespread issues:

1. People do not feel safe being transparent: 79% of customers believe that sharing mental health information with insurers will lead to higher costs and 65% fear declined cover. This creates a lack of trust and leads to non-disclosure of mental health conditions.

2. Support falls short at the most important moments: While the majority of respondents felt supported when claiming, they identified multiple opportunities to improve the claims experience, suggesting that current processes do not yet fully meet the needs of vulnerable customers.

3. Everyday interactions are harder than they should be: 66% find routine interactions stressful, with a strong preference for digital, flexible channels over phone-based communication.

Looking specifically at insurers, the industry has an opportunity to redefine the trust contract with consumers by: building transparency into underwriting to reduce fear and encourage disclosure of conditions; prioritising dignity and reasonable adjustments over speed of response in claims; closing the accessibility gap through multi-channel, flexible communication, and protocols that mean customers do not need to keep repeating details of mental health conditions.

Emma Hickey of the IFoA Mental Health Working Party, said: “When we began exploring mental health in the context of disability insurance, we wanted to understand how people experience interacting with financial services while managing a mental health condition.

This report highlights that non-disclosure is largely a rational, defensive behaviour. As an industry, we need to give customers confidence that disclosure will not automatically result in higher premiums or declined cover.

The same principles apply in claims. Taking the time to communicate in the ways people need, can transform often stressful interactions into supportive experiences.

If we design systems around trust, empathy and accessibility, we will better serve vulnerable customers and strengthen the perception of the industry as a whole."

Paul Sweeting FIA C.Act, IFoA President, said: “Being able to access financial services is a vital part of our day to day lives, but when people feel excluded by the way the system is set-up, this leads to imbalances across society. I encourage actuaries and those working in the financial services industry to act on the measures outlined in this report, to protect, empower and reassure customers.”

For some households, an adult child earning and contributing to bills can strengthen the family’s finances. But for many others, the flow of support runs in the opposite direction. Parents who might otherwise be increasing pension contributions or preserving retirement savings are instead using their income and capital to support the next generation.

This creates a blind spot in how retirement adequacy is often measured. A household may appear financially secure on paper, yet that security depends on one generation continuing to support another. Equally, a parent with an apparently healthy pension may be quietly compromising their own retirement by reducing contributions or drawing on savings to help an adult child.

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance, PensionBee comments: “Retirement adequacy isn’t simply about how much money sits in a pension pot. It’s also about the financial commitments that continue throughout our working lives. Supporting children is often one of the biggest of those commitments, and it's becoming an increasingly important part of the retirement picture.”

According to the report, while divorced men appear to retain larger pension pots after separation, divorced women consistently hold less pension wealth than their married counterparts. The gap widens in the years before retirement, reflecting the cumulative impact of lower earnings, career breaks and caring responsibilities, with many women appearing to draw on their pensions early simply to make ends meet.

Maike Currie comments: “Divorce is one of the biggest emotional and financial events in a person’s life with pensions often treated as an afterthought. People naturally focus on the family home because it’s tangible, but retirement can last 20 or 30 years. Giving up pension wealth without understanding its long-term value can have consequences that last a lifetime.”

The Pensions Adequacy report argues that better support for carers could help reduce these inequalities. Options include state-funded pension contributions during periods of unpaid care, pension top-ups linked to recognised caring responsibilities, or measures to help maintain pension saving during extended leave. While each would involve costs and practical challenges, the report concludes they could help protect retirement outcomes for people undertaking socially valuable but unpaid work.

Maike Currie comments: “The hardest conversation many of us will ever have with our parents isn’t about inheritance, but care. Yet too often that conversation only happens after a crisis, when choices are already limited. Women are particularly exposed. Many experience the motherhood penalty in their thirties, only to encounter the good daughter penalty in their forties and fifties as they become the default carer for ageing parents. The timing is brutal, arriving just as careers and pension saving should be accelerating.

“Caring is one of the biggest hidden risks to retirement adequacy. If we value unpaid care, and we should, we also need to think about how we protect the long-term financial security of the people providing it.”

As demand for short-term lets peaks over the summer months, more homeowners living in tourist hotspots are cashing in by renting out their spare rooms (or entire home). But Uswitch home insurance experts are warning homeowners about the overlooked risk of renting a room out: without the right home insurance policy in place, you could invalidate your cover if something goes wrong.

In 2025, the UK saw nearly 101 million guest nights spent in short-term lets, 14% (14,143,560) of which took place in August alone. Those offering home rentals may not realise that standard home insurance is designed for owner-occupiers, not paid guests, and hosting without informing your insurer, or not having a specialist short-term rental policy in place, could leave you both out of pocket and uninsured.

If you rent out a room or your whole home to guests - even for a single weekend - your insurer may not cover you for accidental damage, theft or injury caused by a guest. In some cases, it could even cancel your policy altogether if you didn't declare that you were hosting.

While rental platforms like Airbnb offer their own protection, Uswitch experts say this isn’t a substitute for home insurance, and it’s important to ensure you have appropriate cover. Airbnb's AirCover for Hosts offers up to £2,234,250 in host damage protection and £744,750 in host liability cover, but it won't cover events such as lost booking income or high-value items.

Uswitch insurance expert, Leoni Moninska, comments: “Renting out a spare room or your home, even if it’s just a short-term rental, could invalidate your home insurance. Most standard policies don’t cover short-term rentals, as they are designed for people living in their own home full-time and the risks associated are different.

“If you’re looking to make additional income through renting out a room or your whole property, you should contact your home insurance provider and inform them, but also look into holiday or short-term let home insurance policies.

“Platforms like Airbnb do offer some protection, but there are limits. Their cover won't replace lost income if a booking falls through, and it may not stretch to your most valuable belongings. Having the right insurance in place helps avoid invalidating your policy and ensures you’re protected if something goes wrong, so you can enjoy the extra income from hosting without the worry."

Yet expectation and impact are often misaligned. The real problem is that AI is transforming work faster than organizations can redesign it and true employee AI adoption is lagging.

AI is reshaping how work gets done and how decisions are made. The challenge is no longer getting AI into people's hands. It's understanding whether the conditions exist to make that adoption stick at scale. So the questions have shifted. Which behaviors matter most? How do we know whether adoption is creating value? And how do we demonstrate ROI and business impact beyond usage metrics?

AI changes what’s possible but people and behavior determine what’s realized. The gap between the two is where organizations struggle. Deployment isn’t adoption, and adoption isn’t value. That’s a distinction many AI strategies gloss over, at real cost.

Many organizations are still missing the foundational elements that make AI transformation credible at scale: clear transformation objectives, a compelling workforce vision, visibility into how work is changing, an intentional focus on accelerating behavior change from the outset and a refined employee value proposition. When those pieces are missing, AI shows up as a scattered set of tools and random ad-hoc experimentation, rather than a coordinated shift.

This disconnect becomes visible quickly. Leadership direction feels unclear. Trust and confidence start to wane. Skills and support do not match the pace of change. AI still feels bolted on rather than built into the workflow.

Organizations that treat these signals as noise and respond with another round of generic training and enterprise-wide communications often struggle to move value beyond the pilot stage.

This is where the gap between AI activity and business value tends to widen. Most organizations are good at putting tools into people’s hands. Far fewer are systematic about turning that activity into sustained performance.

These AI adoption profiles exist in almost every organization; each group faces different barriers and requires a different intervention. And that's not all, segments within an organization clearly differentiate on the prevalence of these behavioral profiles. Responding to all four with the same playbook is one of the fastest ways to stall progress.

Four conditions consistently shape AI adoption:

The challenge is knowing whether those shifts are actually happening, and this is where a data-driven diagnostics becomes critical. Usage data can show activity, but it is critical to understand the perceived value employees see in using AI. You need intelligence related to the four conditions to fully understand how behavior is changing across the organization. Where are new ways of working taking hold? Where is adoption stalling? Which conditions are accelerating progress and which are slowing it down? Diagnostics should lead to action.

If some groups are already creating value, study what they are doing differently and scale those behaviors across the organization.

The same logic applies to the conditions that shape adoption. For example, low culture scores call for safer experimentation and visible leadership support. Low direction scores call for clearer guidance on where AI should and should not be used. Low enablement scores call for role-based capability building, not generic training. Low integration scores call for workflow redesign, not more communications.

The point is not to launch more activity. It is to target the few actions most likely to shift behavior, increase perceived value and make AI part of how work gets done.

The winners in the age of AI won't necessarily be the organizations using AI the most. They'll be the ones that understand how work is changing, where value is being created and what it takes to scale it.

Because while AI may reshape work, it is people who determine whether that transformation delivers results.

While attempting to acquire a UK bank, Mr Taylor falsified, or arranged to be falsified, documents claiming to be the owner of a bond portfolio worth approximately €200m.

Ms Toni knowingly assisted Mr Taylor by making misleading statements to the bank and by helping falsify the documents. Mr Taylor knew, and Ms Toni understood that it was likely, that these statements and documents would be relied upon by the FCA and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) as part of their assessment for the proposed acquisition.

Ms Toni was interviewed as part of BHAM’s internal investigation into the events. During the investigation, she denied providing misleading statements and the creation of false documents.

On a separate occasion, Mr Taylor tried to acquire Reading Football Club. Mr Taylor made misleading statements, again falsely claiming to own the €200m bond portfolio to make the acquisition.

The FCA found that Mr Taylor and Ms Toni acted dishonestly over an extended period. Their actions were intended to mislead BHAM colleagues, counterparties and regulators.

Therese Chambers, joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: "Trust in financial services relies on those working in it to be honest. Mr Taylor and Ms Toni fell woefully short of even this minimum expectation. They lied and lied again, first for commercial gain and then to cover their backs. They have no place in our industry."

Royal London met with the trustee board earlier in the year. This evolved into a sole insurer framework which delivered a tailored solution for the trustees at an attractive pricing level. The Trustees were advised by XPS and Stephenson Harwood.

Beatrice Male, BPA Origination Lead at Royal London, said: "This buy-in with the Royal Horticultural Society 1974 Pension Scheme brings together two organisations with a strong sense of purpose and hundreds of years of history.

“That shared perspective was clear from our first engagement with the trustees and helped us deliver a bespoke solution to meet their objectives. We’re proud to have earned their trust and look forward to delivering the high-quality service and stewardship their members deserve for many years to come.”

Ash Williams, Partner at XPS, said: “We are pleased to have led the Trustees and the RHS through the transaction, which has resulted in improved security for the members of the Scheme at a competitive price. The Scheme had a number of complexities to consider but the collaborative work of the Trustees, the RHS and the advisory team has led to an excellent outcome with an insurer that puts customer service first, which was one of the key criteria for the Trustees.”

Ingrid Fernandes, Director of Finance for RHS and on behalf of the Trustee, said: “We are delighted to be partnering with Royal London on this important step for the Royal Horticultural Society 1974 Pension Scheme. Royal London’s expertise, professionalism and collaborative approach have been evident throughout the process, giving us confidence that our members’ benefits will continue to be supported by a strong and trusted insurer.

“This transaction represents an important milestone for both the Scheme and the RHS. By increasing certainty around the charity’s future pension obligations and strengthening the long-term financial sustainability, it supports our ability to focus on delivering our charitable mission. This includes continued investment in our world-renowned gardens, scientific research, educational programmes and our work to inspire more people to garden and connect with nature.

“We look forward to building on our relationship with Royal London as we secure an even stronger future for the Scheme and its members, while helping to ensure the RHS can continue delivering lasting public benefit for generations to come.”

“The cost-of-living crisis has just turned five, and shows signs of being every bit as tenacious and destructive as most five-year-olds. When inflation started to kick off back in August 2021, we couldn’t have known what was to come, with runaway price rises sparking interest rate hikes that had a dramatic impact on our finances. The immediate impact of the pandemic was supercharged by geopolitical turmoil that sent oil prices soaring, and has kept the pressure up ever since.

“Most of the time we measure how things change year to year, so it can be difficult to spot how much our finances have been altered over the past five. That’s why it’s worth taking stock and understanding the cumulative impact, and what it means for us. For some people there has been a silver lining, thanks to the impact on savings and annuities, but for others there have just been particularly gloomy dark clouds.

“In the public sector it was even tougher, because it took far longer for wages to start to pick up after prices soared. So, for example at the start of 2022, wages in the private sector were up 8.5% over the year and in the public sector they were up just 1.7%. It took until 2023 for public sector pay inflation to overtake the private sector and start making up the lost ground.

Source: ONS

“The state pension income has risen more. In August 2021 it paid £179.60 a week, whereas now it has risen to £241.30 a week – up just over 34%. This is because the past three rises were based on earnings growth, which was higher than CPI inflation at the time. The biggest bump was in April 2023, when it increased by 10.1% with prices.

“If the state pension, inflation-linked pensions, annuities or drawdown make up the bulk of your income, there’s a decent chance it kept up with inflation. Meanwhile, anyone whose retirement income is dominated by income from a level annuity will have faced a painful financial squeeze. For those with flexible income from a drawdown arrangement, the value of their pension investments will have fluctuated but strong market returns over the period ought to have offered good protection against rising prices.

“However, although the number of people buying annuities when they first access their pot has risen, it’s still only used by about 10% of people at this stage. Drawdown continues to be the most popular retirement income solution, partly because retirees value the flexibility and the fact you can leave a portion of the money invested, offering a chance to keep pace with inflation. It’s why so many people consider drawdown, or a combination of drawdown and annuities as they go through retirement.

“Savings rates followed suit. The average new fixed rate savings account, according to the Bank of England, was offering 0.25% in August 2021, 1.78% a year later and 5.1% in August 2023. It peaked at 5.23% in October 2023. Unsurprisingly, the mini-Budget of September 2022 sparked the steepest rise in average fixed rates, but the pace was rapid across the period. The average has fallen back to 4.27%, but remains strong thanks to competition in the market.

“Rates are expected to rise again in the coming months, but this isn’t likely to be a re-run of the savings glory years. Two rises are being pencilled in by the end of next spring, so savings rates could pick up. However, an awful lot depends on uncertain global politics, so savers shouldn’t hang on in the hopes of seeing rates surge again. If you need a fixed rate deal, there are plenty of strong rates around right now.

“Depending on whether they had a fixed or variable rate mortgage, when they fixed and how long they fixed for, this could have been a spectacularly painful period for borrowers. Someone with a £200,000 repayment mortgage over 25 years at 1.82% could expect to pay £831 a month. Meanwhile, someone with the same mortgage at 5.34% could expect to pay £1,209 – that’s almost 50% more.

“Rates have fallen since the peak, trending downwards from the end of 2023 to spring this year. They’ve climbed since, in the wake of the Iran war, to an average of 4.35%. If rates rise very slowly as expected into the spring next year, we’re likely to see mortgage rates remain higher for longer. It’ll take a calmer world with fewer inflation fears before falls are on the cards.

“It means anyone on a variable rate deal shouldn’t hold their breath for life to get cheaper, and anyone on a fixed rate mortgage who is coming up for a remortgage should hedge their bets. You can agree a rate up to six months before your deal expires, and if rates rise as expected you have locked in a bargain. If rates surprise on the downside, and better deals emerge, you can still shop around closer to the time.”

We also touch on how asset owners can take these risks into account, particularly when engaging with asset managers.

Human rights issues can arise across sectors, geographies and asset classes. The risks can be direct, such as workplace safety failures, or indirectly, through exposure to suppliers linked to forced labour, child labour, unsafe working conditions or community harm. Where companies fail to identify and manage human rights risks, the consequences can become financial. They may include litigation, regulatory penalties, operational disruption, remediation costs, loss of contracts, higher financing costs, weaker consumer trust and, in some cases, a lower company valuation.

Supply chains are often long, fragmented and data-poor, meaning investors may have exposure to labour rights risks that are not immediately apparent. MSCI research published in December 2025 found that only 3% of companies in the MSCI ACWI Index reported on modern slavery risks, while nearly 40% may have exposure to forced or child labour somewhere in their value chains.

For asset owners, this underlines the importance of asking managers how they identify, prioritise and act on social risks. A lack of perfect data should not mean inaction. It should prompt better questions about due diligence, escalation, engagement outcomes and how managers use the information that is available. The DWP's 2024 Taskforce on Social Factors guidance reinforces this by highlighting labour rights, health and safety, supply chain issues and modern slavery as social factors that may be financially material for pension schemes.

The longer-term significance for investors extends beyond the initial market reaction, with damaged trust in the company's governance and oversight processes, contributing to ongoing reputational challenges and heightened stakeholder scrutiny. In 2024, a group of institutional investors brought legal proceedings alleging that Boohoo had failed to adequately disclose information relating to working conditions within its Leicester supply chain. By July 2026, the reported value of claims had risen to £245m. Boohoo strongly contests the allegations and intends to defend the claim.

While the allegations are disputed, the cases highlight how human rights risks can translate into litigation costs, reputational damage, regulatory scrutiny and increased due diligence obligations.

For asset owners, the challenge is how to deal with these complex and underreported issues and consider what to do, given limited time and resources. Most asset owners rely on their managers to identify, monitor and engage on human rights risks across portfolios – so it’s incumbent on asset owners to hold their managers to account.

Practically, this means asking challenging questions of managers. How do they identify and prioritise human rights risks, engage with companies on issues such as labour rights, modern slavery and supply chain oversight? How do they demonstrate that these risks are being considered as part of investment decision-making and stewardship?

We are currently assessing how asset managers identify, manage and engage on modern slavery risks across listed equities and listed credit, with the findings designed to help asset owners ask better questions and strengthen oversight. Look out for the upcoming paper, where we’ll share our key findings and practical considerations for engaging with managers.

Reporting its update for July 2026, the Broadstone Sirius Index found that the ‘growth focused’ scheme performed best through the month, increasing its funding level by a full percentage point to 94.1%.

It continues to outperform the funding level of the ‘matching focused’ scheme so far in 2026. Despite some small movements through the month, the ‘matching focused’ scheme ended July on the same funding level that it ended June on – 89.9%

The ‘growth focused’ scheme has generally outperformed the ‘matching focused’ scheme since April, with its underhedged position benefiting in a rising yield environment and greater exposure to return-seeking assets which performed well over the period.

Chris Rice, Head of Trustee Services at Broadstone, commented: “July provided another positive month for our ‘growth focused’ scheme, which benefitted from its underhedged position and moved 4.1 percentage points above its starting funding level for the year.

“However, the contrasting performance of the two strategies should not be interpreted as evidence that taking greater investment risk will always deliver a better outcome. The recent gains achieved by the ‘growth focused’ scheme could be vulnerable to a market correction, while the ‘matching focused’ strategy is deliberately designed to provide greater stability and protection against changes in liability values.

“The appropriate balance between growth and matching assets will depend on each scheme’s funding position, covenant strength and liquidity requirements. Trustees should therefore avoid making decisions based on a few months of performance.

“For schemes that have benefited from recent market strength, now may be an appropriate time to review their long-term objectives. Clear triggers and a well-defined journey plan can help trustees reduce risk at the right time rather than relying on market conditions remaining favourable.”

However, UK motor insurance providers are being asked to price vehicles they have never insured, repaired or settled claims on, with limited visibility of how construction quality, safety systems and component availability will impact repair costs. Underprice and loss ratios may deteriorate as claims experience emerges. Overprice and insurance providers risk ceding a fast-growing segment to competitors willing to take a different view of the risk.

At the same time, ADAS (advanced driver assistance systems) specifications vary significantly across models and trim levels. Insights from the recent China Auto Show underline how rapidly Chinese manufacturers are introducing new models into global markets, with specifications that shift from one vehicle to the next and are frequently unverified at the point of quote.

This is against a backdrop of motor claims severity inflation at 7% in 2026[v] partly driven by the growing complexity of repairing vehicles with advanced electronics and EV powertrains. Of the 36.7m cars on the road, c.12% are now hybrid or fully electric where costs to repair are significantly higher.[vi] Chinese EVs compound the claims conundrum further as parts for repairs can be difficult to source meaning higher average claim costs and greater pricing uncertainty.

Thatcham Research is also working directly with Chinese OEMs to build a deeper, UK-specific evidence base around safety and repairability — most notably through its Vehicle Risk Rating (VRR) score. By making that intelligence accessible through LexisNexis Risk Solutions, a more powerful connected ecosystem is taking shape; one that combines OEM insight, independent validation and vehicle-level intelligence into a single, usable framework for insurers.

OEMs are increasingly aware of this dynamic, recognising that a competitive purchase price can be undermined by high running costs, and that insurance sits at the centre of that equation.

To help address these challenges, insurance providers need to understand not just what people drive but also how they drive.

Kia has now deployed this driving safety scoring capability across all European markets. The feature is optional for drivers, yet adoption has reached approximately 35% of users, equating to around 400,000 drivers engaging with their safety score.

That level of voluntary engagement points to strong consumer appetite for greater visibility into driving behaviour and, by extension, greater control over what they pay for cover.

This also addresses affordability: helping drivers reduce their risk, improve their behaviour and ultimately lower their premiums, while contributing to safer roads overall.

As the UK car parc with older vehicles being driven longer and newer Chinese EVs entering the market, integrating driver intelligence alongside robust vehicle-level data will be essential — both to give insurance providers the confidence to price these vehicles competitively and to give consumers a realistic route to bringing those costs down.

A full new state pension is currently £241.30 per week. While this will be sufficient for many people to cover their essentials, for the vast majority it will be nowhere near enough to live the lifestyle they enjoyed while they were working. In addition, the age at which you receive the state pension is currently on the rise and is expected to hit 67 in 2028. It’s then expected to start rising to age 68 between 2044-46, though the ongoing review into the state pension age could bring this forward. The reality is that if you want a retirement where you can afford more than just the essentials, or you want the flexibility to retire early, then you will need to make the most of your pension.

Analysis HL carried out with Oxford Economics showed 92% of people can meet their essential needs in retirement with a combination of the state pension and their pension savings. However, if you take the state pension out of the equation this falls dramatically to around 42% so the state pension continues to do most of the heavy lifting.

The good news is that auto-enrolment has boosted the number of people contributing to a workplace pension. This should mean that, over time, the number of people totally or largely reliant on the state pension will drop. However, if you want to fulfil all your plans for your retirement years, then it’s worth looking at how you can boost your pension.

Even relatively small changes can make a big difference. A 22-year-old earning £25,000 per year, contributing at auto-enrolment minimums throughout their career, could have a pension worth £477,500 by the age of 68. However, if they decided to increase their contribution to 10% per year at the age of 32, they would have closer to £550,000 in their pension at the age of 68. This either gives them a larger pension when they reach state pension age or the option to retire a bit earlier.”

Balz Grollimund, Head Catastrophe Perils at Swiss Re, said: "A less costly first half of the year does not mean the risk has gone away. One major hurricane, earthquake or wildfire can quickly change the picture. Europe's recent wildfires highlight how hotter and drier conditions are making large wildfires more likely and, with more homes, businesses and infrastructure built in risk-exposed areas, also more costly."

As the world's fastest-warming continent, Europe now experiences 64% more hot days, defined as days when the daily maximum temperature reaches 30°C or more, than in the 1950s. June's record heat in western Europe, together with persistent dry conditions, also created an environment more conducive to wildfires across western and southern Europe, where major fires affected France and Spain in July.

Wildfire risk has so far accounted for only a relatively small share of insured losses in Europe. Yet it is the fastest-growing weather peril globally. Insured wildfire losses in Europe have increased by an estimated 8–11% per year in real terms since 1970, Swiss Re Institute's research shows.

The early start to Europe's wildfire season illustrates how hazards are changing. Fire seasons are becoming longer, while conditions conducive to wildfires are becoming more frequent and affecting regions historically less exposed.

Insurance covered around 42% of first-half economic losses, above the 30-year average of 33%, reflecting the concentration of damage in highly insured markets and across widely covered perils. By contrast, the earthquake sequence in Venezuela caused an estimated USD 20 billion in economic losses. Although no reliable insured-loss estimate is yet available, low insurance penetration suggests that only a small share of the damage is expected to be insured.

Beyond seasonal outlooks, the long-term drivers of catastrophe losses remain unchanged, including growing exposure in hazard-prone areas and rising reconstruction costs. Strengthening resilience and reducing underlying risk will therefore be increasingly important in maintaining the affordability and availability of insurance.

Across all employees, the median male saver contributed £4,430 to their workplace pension in 2025, £310 more than the £4,120 saved by the median female employee.

Encouragingly, this contribution gap has halved in the last six years, from £680 in 2019, when the median male saver contributed £4,660 and the median female saver contributed £3,980. However, whilst the gap has narrowed, progress has begun to slow in recent years, with the gap standing at £360 in both 2023 and 2024 – just £50 more than the latest gap.

The impact of lower pension contributions can extend well beyond working years. A £310 annual difference in pension saving would amount to £12,400 in missed contributions over a 40-year career. Assuming annual investment growth of 5%, the effect of lost compound growth means this could leave someone with around £37,500 less in retirement savings.

Kelly Parsons, Head of DC Proposition at Broadstone, said: “While it is encouraging to see the gap between male and female pension contributions gradually narrowing, women are still saving significantly less into their workplace pensions, leaving many at greater risk of poorer retirement outcomes.

"This isn't just a question of engagement. Women are more likely to take career breaks to care for children or family members, work part time, or reduce their hours during different stages of their careers. These interruptions can have a lasting impact on pension contributions and limit the additional savings accrued by long-term investment return growth.”

The median private sector female employee contributed £2,800 to their workplace pension in 2025, almost a thousand pounds less - £920 - than the £3,530 contributed by the median private sector male employee. In the public sector, the savings gap was significantly larger at £3,060, with the average female employee contributing £8,370 in 2025, compared to the £11,430 saved by the average male employee.

Female employees remain less likely to opt out of workplace pension saving than men. In the latest quarter (Q3 2025/26), 10.3% of auto-enrolment (AE) eligible female employees opted out of their workplace pension scheme, compared with 13.3% of AE-eligible male employees. However, opt-out rates have risen for both groups over the past year, increasing from 8.6% to 10.3% for women and from 11.5% to 13.3% for men (Q3 2024/25).

Kelly Parsons added: "Employers are in a strong position to help close this gap. Clear, targeted communications around the value of pension saving, encouraging both private and public sector employees to review and increase contributions following pay rises or after returning from parental leave, and providing access to financial education can all make a meaningful difference.

"Creating a workplace culture where pensions are discussed more openly and employees are supported to make informed decisions won't eliminate the structural challenges overnight, but it can help more women stay on track for a better retirement.”

With over 26 million UK adults* lacking confidence when managing their savings for retirement, more are now turning to AI to better understand their pension savings.

Over two in five (42%) people are comfortable using AI to explain pension jargon, 37% would be open to calculating how much they need for retirement with AI and more than one in four (28%) to work out how much they need to save each month.

Almost a third (30%) of people currently trust AI tools to give them guidance about their pension. Of these, 80% say their most trusted source is either their pension provider, or firms that already provide financial guidance or advice. Meanwhile, one in five (20%) say they would trust technology firms that don’t specialise in money more than any other provider, highlighting the need for further education on how consumer protections differ.

For example, just one in 10 (10%) retirees would be comfortable with AI suggesting the best way to withdraw from their pension. Among those aged 50 and over, just 5% plan to rely on AI tools before taking money from their pot.

Almost half (48%) of people are worried that AI may give wrong or unsuitable pension advice, 43% worry about the safety of their data and two in five (38%) don’t think it would take their personal circumstances into account.

But AI has a valuable role to play in helping people take their first step towards financial advice, with nearly a third (31%) saying they would take AI-generated insights to a professional financial adviser and a quarter (24%) using AI information to have more informed conversations with their pension provider.

Maria Herrero-Bullich, Scottish Widows’ Chief Customer & Digital Officer, said: “AI has the power to simplify complicated financial topics, personalise guidance, and make everyday decisions around pensions, savings and investments much easier to manage. As it becomes a normal part of managing our money, trust is essential. It’s clear that for those bigger, more complex moments people still value speaking to a financial expert, so the human factor and AI can comfortably co-exist to provide people with the confidence to make more informed decisions about their future.

“One thing that’s important to understand is the difference between support from regulated firms and general-purpose AI tools, with the former carrying much greater protection for the consumer.

Highlights

Aaron Pang, PPF Acting Chief Actuary, said: "While equity markets performed positively during July, gilt yields matched global markets in rising through the month as a resumption of hostilities in the Middle East increased concerns about an inflation shock. Falling bond prices, which drove gilt yields higher, led to a reduction in both asset and liability values across the PPF eligible universe, reflecting DB schemes' significant allocation to bonds.

Overall, across the eligible universe, funding levels improved as the 3.1% fall in liability values was greater than the 1.7% drop in assets. This resulted in a stronger aggregate surplus of £271.3bn and a funding ratio of 133% - the highest recorded since July 2023."

View the August update and see the supporting data on the 7800 Index for 31 July 2026 here: The PPF 7800 index | Pension Protection Fund.

Swiss Re's Life & Health Re Business Unit also announces the appointment of Karen Tan as Chief Underwriting Officer for L&H Re, effective 1 October 2026. Karen will continue to be based in Singapore and will relocate to Zurich in due course.

Damien Bartlett joins Swiss Re from SCOR, where he held a number of senior leadership roles, having started his career there in 2001. Most recently, he served as SCOR's Global Head In-Force Management, Head Strategy and COO for Life & Health. Prior to this, he was Regional CEO for EMEA & Canada and previously led SCOR's UK, Ireland, South Africa, Canada and Australia markets.

Karen Tan is currently the Chief Risk Officer of L&H Re. Karen has served in several leadership roles at Swiss Re, including Head Life & Health Products Asia and Chief Risk Officer for Asia Pacific. She was previously Chief Actuary of Zurich Life Insurance Company in Switzerland, and led Zurich Insurance Group's Global Life Risk Analysis department. She is a Fellow of the UK Institute and Faculty of Actuaries.

Clearly, if there is a reduction in the growth of AI capex committed, or if supply shortages of memory and all the other components of AI infrastructure are resolved sooner than expected, then a downturn in the cycle can be expected.

As to demand reflected by capex, the hyperscalers continue to ramp up spending with Jensen Huang, predicting that capex on AI infrastructure will be 4-5tn USD by 2030. The issue will be whether this type of investment is sustainable as financing shifts from existing cash-flow to debt funding. The Oracle downgrade is a red flag.

On the supply side the current consensus is that shortages will remain until at least 2H27, however, despite being denied the most advanced NVIDIA GPUs the Chinese pursuit of AI dominance could change the dynamic. The release of Moonshot’s Kimi 3 agentic model last week may be another DeepSeek moment and casts doubt on whether paying top dollar for the most advanced chips is money well spent. Chinese chipmaking companies are also a major factor when considering the supply side. The IPOs for CXMT (+460% on its first day of trading) and YTMC are a reminder of this, however, one analyst revealed that Chinese capacity would have to quadruple in order to satisfy domestic demand alone. The impact of Chinese production must also be viewed against the dominance of Hynix and Samsung when it comes to the most sophisticated chips.

The conundrum remains whether the correction just experienced marks a floor after all the excitement of the last 2 years or whether there is more to come. We have trimmed our AI exposure but still retain a decent position as the US hyperscalers are more likely to increase capex in the coming quarter than reduce it (as shown by Alphabet’s results this week). However, having a strong list of alternative options is important at this stage.

India, with its lack of exposure to the AI trade, has suffered from significant outflows from foreign institutional investors (FII) with 27bn USD of outflows as of middle of July and the lowest level of net FII buying since 2016. Clearly a fluctuating oil price may yet temper FII enthusiasm, however, it is reasonable to expect the rotation from India into the AI trade to reverse should AI start to show signs of fatigue. The first signs of this trend reversing have been visible with 1.8bn USD of net buying in the first fortnight of the month. Despite the lacklustre performance of the stock market of late, India is economically strong; growing GDP over 7% in each of the last two quarters and the stocks are significantly cheaper now than at the market’s peak in Sep’24. As you know, as stock pickers, we buy companies not markets and to this end we have added modestly to our Indian exposure albeit from low levels. Early days but on watch.

This month's featured topics are related to Hungary's ability to deliver on its announced fiscal target, credit implications from growing opposition toward data center construction, and credit implications from the ongoing wildfires for Canadian property and casualty (P&C) insurance companies.

Yesenn El-Radhi, Senior Vice President, Global Sovereign Ratings, comments on Hungary's ability to achieve its recently announced fiscal target. "The new Hungarian government has set an ambitious fiscal target for 2030, but the announced consolidation measures are unlikely to be sufficient for reaching this goal. Durable fiscal consolidation will depend on politically challenging measures that broaden the tax base and restrain spending, with a primary balance improvement of 2.0% to 2.5% of GDP likely needed to stabilize public debt."

Jason LaPorte, Vice President, Corporate Ratings, Asset Finance, comments on the credit implications related to growing opposition to data center construction. "Impacts to data center credits have been limited so far, as rated debt in project finance has largely been late-stage construction or fully completed. However, if new construction were inhibited, this could increase the value of operating data centers and make debt refinancings easier."

Catch up on these topics and more thought leadership from across the Fundamental Credit Ratings teams and around the globe in this month's edition.

August 2026 edition of "Consider Credit—Fundamental Ratings Monthly Briefing."

So, we’ll start where the plan starts. With what - in my view - is its most important and simplest point. The one thing that must not change in the age of AI.

AI does not create a new category of decisions that somebody or something else answers for. Quite to the contrary, it enables new ways of reaching decisions that funds are already accountable for.

This is an important nuance because AI brings with it a subtle temptation. Anyone who’s used ChatGPT knows that AI can make it feel easier to hand decisions over to technology. If we are not careful, “the AI model recommended we do this” could start to become an increasingly used explanation for poor outcomes.

In fact, there have already been legal cases in other industries where organisations have been held accountable for errors made by their chatbots. As an example, Air Canada’s customer assistant famously hallucinated a non-existent discount fare.

So far, these claims have been relatively minor, but for pensions, where the financial stakes can be very large, the consequences could be significant.

The Regulator’s plan attempts to close that door before it can open. In doing so, turns what could be seen as a philosophical question, into a practical one with which to get started; “Do you know where AI is already working on your behalf?”

For many funds, that might be a more uncomfortable question than it first appears.

The likelihood is that many could already be using AI without a formal decision ever having been taken. AI has proliferated quickly over the last few years. As a result, it now may well sit inside an administration platform’s fraud screening, a member portal’s chat assistant or a supplier’s document processing. Much of that will have arrived not by way of an explicit board decision, but through IT procurement processes. These tend to focus more on concerns such as cybersecurity and infrastructure compatibility, than accuracy and fairness.

The question then becomes not just whether AI was approved at the point of adoption, but whether it remains fit for purpose over time.

LexisNexis Risk Solutions analysis shows 2025 was the most severe year on record for wildfire activity in the U.K., with satellite technology recording 4,659 wildfire detections. This exceeds the previous peak of 3,305 recorded in 2018 and is nearly five times the 951 detections recorded in 2024.

The data also reveals a clear seasonal pattern in wildfires. Contrary to the common belief that wildfire risk peaks in summer, the LexisNexis Risk Solutions analysis identifies spring as the primary risk window by detection volume. In 2025, 2,635 wildfire detections were recorded in spring compared to 1,606 in summer.

However, spring and winter wildfires tend to occur, on average, almost twice as far from towns and cities as those recorded in summer months. In summer, fires move closer to urban centres, increasing exposure to property and infrastructure and increasing the potential for higher insurance claims severity. The findings are particularly relevant as fire services across parts of the U.K. respond to a series of wildfires during the current heatwave, with authorities warning of extreme pressure and elevated wildfire risk.

Caroline Elliott-Grey, senior product manager, U.K. and Ireland insurance, LexisNexis Risk Solutions, says: “Understanding the risk of wildfires spreading to homes and commercial properties has become almost as important as understanding flood or subsidence risk for property insurance providers. As we move into the peak summer months, following record-breaking temperatures in June and a dry spring[v], it is vital that insurance providers incorporate wildfire risk assessment at an individual property level, at the point of quote, to help price insurance cover accurately and fairly.

“Historical wildfire data, combined with geospatial intelligence covering weather patterns, terrain and proximity to infrastructure such as fire stations, enables insurance providers to build a location-specific view of risk. Integrating this insight into property underwriting and pricing allows for more accurate risk assessment, clearer identification of accumulations across insurance provider portfolios, and more informed decisions as climate risks continue to evolve.”

LexisNexis Analysis on Top Urban Hotspots for Wildfires

Since the dashboards regulations were laid, we’ve had several dashboards-related ministerial statements, one ‘reset’ and six pensions ministers, and now the statutory deadline for connection of 31 October 2026 is finally in sight. Connection is a milestone moment for any scheme in scope for pensions dashboards, but of course it is just the beginning. With the public launch of the MoneyHelper dashboard possibly only a year away, how prepared is your administrator for the next phase?

While the onus is on users to contact schemes to resolve possible matches, administrators need to be ready should the majority choose to do so. How will your administrator handle potential match queries – are they planning a dedicated telephone line or an online form specifically for this purpose? And how automated is the process? How much does it rely on resource that may need to be taken from business as usual queries or other projects?

Administrators need to have a plan to deal with these members should they access dashboards and request this information – even if a large scheme is 95% automated, that may still leave several hundred members needing benefit data calculated on request. And with a statutory 10 working day deadline to provide defined benefit information (and only three for defined contribution), it’s going to require a slick and well managed process.

For now this information needs only to be recorded and made available to regulatory bodies on request, but routine reporting of these metrics is expected to be a requirement in future. As trustees, you are ultimately responsible for recording this information, so make sure your administrator has a plan for doing this on your behalf which is compliant and transparent. They should also have a way of letting you view and keep track of key dashboard metrics, be that via quarterly administration reports or a live dashboard that shows the information in real time.

While trustees’ focus has for so long been on connecting schemes to dashboards, they now need to look ahead to the initiative’s next phase. Ask your administrator what plans they are putting in place for each of the areas above. And ask them how you can help prepare for the launch of the MoneyHelper dashboard – consider putting an item in your next newsletter warming members up to dashboards so they know what they can expect to see and what they need to do should they have a query. Can you use your communications to explain to members why keeping their details up to date with all of their pension schemes will be beneficial? Taking the time now to work out what might be needed, and how these needs will be met, could make for a less painful experience when dashboards are launched to the public.

Ms Dunne advised about 92% of her clients to move out of defined benefit pension schemes between April 2015 and June 2017. This led to more than £126m being transferred, including when it was not in clients’ best interests.

The FCA had based both fines on the finding that all of Ms Dunne's advice breached regulatory requirements. The Tribunal ruled that the fines should reflect its finding that 18% of Ms Dunne's clients received unsuitable advice. It also ruled that only the income Mr Fenech earned from his relationship with Ms Dunne should count towards his fine.

Therese Chambers, the FCA's executive director of enforcement and market oversight, said: 'We welcome the Tribunal's ruling, which supports our decision that Mr Fenech and Ms Dunne are unfit to work in financial services. The Tribunal agreed that the FCA must be able to rely on those it regulates at all times, including in periods of stress and high pressure. These individuals failed that test and breached the trust placed in them. Dishonesty and negligence have no place in our industry, and we will continue to take action against those who fall short of our standards.'

The Tribunal agreed fines were appropriate but reduced these to £41,230 for Ms Dunne and £16,046 for Mr Fenech.

Well, they say a week is a long time in politics and true to the saying we now have a new Prime Minister in Andy Burnham and the Middle East peace talks, well, they now have the honour of the longest every peace talks in history with no end in sight. I was hoping to talk about a World Cup triumph but unfortunately, we were beaten by Argentina, the less said about their lack of sportsmanship in the final the better. Congratulation to worthy winners in Spain. We also had within a single week in July, France recording its most devastating wildfire outbreak in at least half a century and Spain recording the largest wildfire in its modern history.

Our usual authors give their insights including a new series from Bolton Associates interviewing actuaries within the Catastrophe Modelling space.

We look forward to welcoming you all back next month.

“We know from previous years just how much damage people can do to their finances if they feel forced into panicked decisions. Ahead of both the 2024 and 2025 Budgets, widespread speculation about possible reform to tax-free cash on pensions persuaded people to raid their pots. AJ Bell analysis of FCA data indicates that in 2024/25 an additional £10 billion may have been taken out of pensions for no reason other than panic.

“If this money is withdrawn without a plan, there’s a real risk it comes out of a tax-efficient environment, misses out on investment growth, and is eroded by tax, inflation and incidental spending. It’s why AJ Bell has written to Chancellor John Healey, calling for a ‘Pensions Tax Lock’, and urging him to commit to long-term pension tax stability.

“The fact that raiding your pensions may not be the best approach doesn’t mean you have to sit and wait to be knocked sideways by fiscal surprises, because there are still seven sure-fire steps you can take ahead of 28 October, which you’ll be grateful for whatever the Budget holds.”

“Recent governments have demonstrated enthusiasm for moving investment tax thresholds and rates, and there’s nothing to stop them doing it again. If you have investments outside an ISA, and the available allowance this year, you can move investments into a Stocks and Shares ISA using the Bed and ISA process to protect them from dividend and capital gains tax.”

The findings point to a clear rise in engagement since 2024, with more members checking their pensions, exploring what income it could provide and reviewing the choices available to them as they approach retirement. Overall, the proportion of members regularly reviewing their TPT pension increased from 38% in 2024 to 45% in 2026.

Over the same period, the proportion who said they never review their pension nearly halved, falling from 21% to 11%. Among active members, 68% said that they had checked their pension balance or current value over the past 12 months, up from 59%.

The findings also showed that members were paying more attention to the wider aspects of retirement planning. Just over half of active members, 51%, had looked at the income their pension might provide, up from 44%. The proportion who had changed their target retirement age increased from 11% to 16%, while 30% had reviewed their retirement options or ways of accessing their savings, up from 24%. TPT’s research also found that 24% of active members had looked into their investments or investment choices, up from 16%.

Only 22% of members aged 50+ either already pay for professional financial advice or plan to do so when making retirement decisions. This leaves a significant proportion who may benefit from more structured support.

Guided retirement products can provide a clearer pathway for turning pension savings into income, and this research suggests that support amongst savers is growing. TPT’s 2026 research found that support for guided retirement among this cohort substantially outweighed opposition among its members, at 35% compared with 4%. To address this, TPT offers a managed income-for-life product, which provides a streamlined path from pension saving to income withdrawal, enabling members to convert their pension pots into a sustainable, inflation-linked income for life.

Philip Smith, DC Director at TPT Retirement Solutions, said: “It is encouraging to see more members checking their pensions and exploring the options available to them. However, engagement is only the first step and does not, by itself, lead to better retirement outcomes. While members are paying greater attention to their pensions, many remain uncertain about how they will use their savings at retirement.

“The research underlines the need for the industry to make retirement pathways simpler, both enabling informed, confident decisions where members are able, and putting in place good value default solutions where they do not engage. There is a clear opportunity to turn growing awareness into better retirement outcomes through clearer information, more effective support and innovative solutions that guide members through the choices they face at retirement.”

Simon Martin, Head of UK Technical Services at Utmost, a leading global provider of insurance-based wealth solutions, commented: “The inexorable rise in the proportion of estates facing Inheritance Tax shows how a tax once associated primarily with only the very wealthy is now affecting a growing proportion of families as frozen thresholds continue to bite.

“This direction of travel looks set to accelerate as recent reforms to the Inheritance Tax regime begin to take effect. Measures such as the inclusion of pension benefits in estate calculations from April 2027, for example, will further increase the number of families facing a potential liability.

“Families should not wait until these changes take effect, as the range of options available to manage a potential liability may narrow over time. It underlines the importance of professional financial advice in helping families understand their individual situation and pass on their wealth to loved ones as efficiently as possible."

For most clients, wealth must do many things, sometimes more than one at the same time. It needs to preserve capital, support growth, provide income, maintain liquidity, fund lifestyle choices and help plan for succession and legacy. These objectives often overlap and evolve over time. No single product or structure can address them all. That complexity is what makes the institutionalisation of wealth management both important and less predictable than similar shifts elsewhere in the industry.

Wealth combines multiple goals, long time horizons and emotional considerations. Even so, the direction of travel is becoming clearer. A handful of forces are reshaping how wealth firms are built, how portfolios are governed and how outcomes are delivered.

Figure 1: Top business priorities (2-3 years) of wealth managers

Source: Thinking Ahead Institute, Global Wealth Study 2025

Whether you're new to pensions policy or looking for a reliable reference, the Primer provides a clear and accessible overview of how State and private pensions work, together with the latest policy and legislative developments. Fully updated to reflect the policy and legislative framework as at June 2026, it brings together everything you need to understand the UK's pensions landscape in one trusted resource.

The Primer is designed for policymakers, pension professionals, researchers, journalists, educators, students and anyone with an interest in retirement policy.

PPI Pensions Primer 2026

In the meantime, the AI theme continued to play out as has become the theme for this earnings season, whereby companies are increasingly being punished if the continued and committed levels of AI spending are not obviously translating into physical earnings. On the other hand, if there are signs of progress the rewards can be meaningful, as evidenced by Microsoft last week which was followed by a 15% spike in the Amazon share price on Friday. The company beat expectations for revenue in the second quarter, boosted by the strength of its cloud-computing business which provided some comfort that AI spending can be at least partially rewarded. In contrast, Apple shares dropped by more than 7% despite topping estimates, with a weaker revenue outlook which the company blamed on a supply crunch in the components space in the midst of high AI demand.

The initial reaction to the new Federal Reserve Chair’s tenure has not been positive. He has moved away from the forward guidance to which the market had become accustomed, while also admitting last week that there was no “magic wand” to hand in the battle against persistently high inflation. This translated into a loss of faith from investors which was most acutely reflected in the bond market, where the yield on the 10-year and 30-year Treasuries has risen to either side of 5%, which is becoming uncomfortable for the wider economy and borrowing levels in general.

Indeed, there will be further clues this week from both corporates and economic readings. On the company front, there will be updates which will shed light on the consumer (Walt Disney, McDonald’s), industry (Caterpillar) and inevitably tech (Advanced Micro Devices), with other highlights being Pfizer numbers and the first post-IPO report from SpaceX. At the end of the week, the non-farm payrolls release is pencilled in at 87500 jobs having been added in July, up from 57000 the previous month, with unemployment ticking marginally higher to 4.3% from 4.2% previously.

In the meantime, the main indices have ploughed on regardless of the volley of worries which they have faced and in the year to date there have been gains of 9.2% for both the Dow Jones and Nasdaq, with the benchmark S&P500 having added 9.4% and each of the indices close to recent record highs.

The technology turbulence in particular has been a catalyst as the FTSE100 comes back into global investment fashion. Although the index has flirted with record highs and passed the number intraday over recent trading sessions, it has been unable to maintain the momentum later in the day and has yet to eclipse the record closing high set at the end of February. Even so, the attraction of the solidity and stability typical of most of its constituents has lifted the index to a gain of 9.4% in the year so far, although any gains at the open were limited by a lurch downwards from a core heavyweight.

There was a sense of palpable alert in the pharmaceutical sector after weekend reports that US giant Bristol-Myers Squibb and the FTSE100’s second largest constituent, AstraZeneca were considering a major merger which could reach some $400 billion. The talks were not confirmed by either party, and it is questionable whether such a merger would be to the benefit of either party given some value destruction in such moves historically, even if there would be some obvious symmetry given their complementary expertise in oncology and cardiovascular. The opening reaction was a fall of around 7% in Astra shares, sending a clear signal that investors would potentially be strongly opposed to such a deal.”

David Little, Partner in Financial Planning at wealth management firm Evelyn Partners, comments: ‘These are quite striking increases of 22 per cent in the number of individuals reporting AA breaches and 33 per cent in the total value of contributions above the AA. The pensions annual allowance is the maximum amount of tax-free money you can contribute to your pensions each tax year, and the full AA is currently £60,000, as it was in both these tax years.

'What is slightly surprising about the figures is that the AA was raised from £40,000 to £60,000 by then Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in April 2023 following his Spring Budget. That, you might have expected, would lead to a fall in breaches in the subsequent years as people had more leeway to make large annual pension contributions than they had enjoyed for nearly 10 years.

'It's not easy to pin down the cause, but a very plausible one is that more high earners were being surprised by the tapered annual allowance. Plausible because this was a period of elevated inflation when high earners could easily have lost track of the impact on pension contributions of increasing salaries and bonuses. Also many AA breaches occur within defined benefit schemes where it is harder for employees to keep track of how their pension is tested against the AA, and generous public sector pay deals during this period could have contributed.

‘However, there may be other factors at play than just the tapered annual allowance. Both years being compared had the £60,000 standard allowance, and the increase could be due to earners exceeding the full AA by mistake as their earnings rose or as they sacrificed large bonuses into their pension. Increased employer contributions and unexpectedly high pension growth within defined-benefit schemes can also drive AA breaches.

'But the taper remains a particular trap because the headline £60,000 allowance can give higher earners a false sense of security. Where threshold income exceeds £200,000 and adjusted income exceeds £260,000, the allowance is reduced by £1 for every £2 of additional adjusted income, potentially falling to just £10,000.

'Adjusted income includes employer pension funding, so somebody may be caught even where their personal contributions appear relatively modest. Bonuses paid at the end of the tax year, variable earnings and contributions across several schemes make the final position difficult to predict until late in the tax year, by which time it’s very difficult to unwind pension contributions made during the tax year. Also HMRC doesn’t monitor these breaches in real time, it relies on self-reporting, which means some savers don’t realise for two or three years that they’ve been over-contributing, and then are faced with a big tax back-charge.

'The key is to plan before the tax year has ended rather than waiting for a pension statement or tax return to reveal the problem. Savers should obtain up-to-date pension input figures from every scheme, estimate their total income including bonuses and benefits, and check whether unused allowance can be carried forward from the previous three tax years. Defined-benefit members need particular care because the amount tested is the increase in the value of their promised pension, not simply what they have personally paid in.

'Where a charge on an AA breach is unavoidable, savers should establish whether Scheme Pays is available to allow the charge to be paid from their pension scheme, but they should not automatically stop pension saving simply to avoid a tax charge. Giving up valuable employer contributions, tax free growth inside the pension fund or defined-benefit accrual could leave them materially worse off in the long run. Sometimes paying the tax charge is the best option.

'What we are seeing here is evidence that pension taxation remains too complex for most people and even financially savvy earners can get caught out. It’s striking how many high earners are completely unaware that their pension allowances are tapered until it’s too late.'

More than half (51%) of advisers believe scale will become an increasingly important differentiator between workplace pension providers, versus just 8% who disagree. At the same time, only 11% believe smaller providers can continue to compete effectively with larger schemes, underlining the increasingly important role advisers expect scale to play as the market evolves.

However, advisers are looking beyond size alone when assessing DC providers. A quarter (25%) believe scale delivers important operational advantages but does not necessarily translate into better retirement outcomes, while only 9% believe increasing provider scale directly improves member outcomes.

People’s Pension also found that the majority (58%) of advisers say member outcomes and support matter more than cost alone, versus a small minority (12%) who disagree. The findings suggest advisers increasingly expect providers to demonstrate how scale translates into tangible benefits for members.

The research comes as the Pension Schemes Act accelerates the next phase of workplace pension reform, with greater emphasis on consolidation, value for money and improving member outcomes. Against that backdrop, advisers recognise the benefits that larger providers bring, but need more evidence they are using their scale to deliver consistently better member outcomes.

Stuart Reid, Distribution Director for People's Pension, said: "It's encouraging to see advisers recognising that scale is becoming increasingly important as schemes consolidate and employers look for providers with the governance, resilience and investment capability to deliver over the long term.

"What stands out from these findings is that whilst advisers clearly see the value of scale, they're not yet convinced that it automatically translates into better outcomes for members. That reinforces the importance of providers demonstrating the value scale can create in practice. We're committed to continuing to improve retirement outcomes for members, and I believe that as the market sees more examples of how scale is being put to work, advisers will become increasingly confident in the benefits it can deliver."

"Ultimately, scale should never be judged in isolation. Its real value lies in what it enables providers to deliver for employers and members, and that's where the market is increasingly focusing its attention."

CDC schemes pool members' contributions and investments, allowing risks and rewards to be shared collectively. They provide a target retirement income for life, rather than relying solely on individual pension pots. Benefits can be adjusted up or down depending on investment performance and the scheme's funding position.

The new framework gives employers and members an alternative between traditional defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) pension arrangements.

Any organisation wishing to establish a CDC scheme must be authorised by The Pensions Regulator (TPR) before operating. Authorisation provides important protections for members and helps ensure high standards of governance and administration. TPR has today published new and updated guidance to help prospective schemes understand the authorisation process, regulatory requirements and what will be expected of them as authorised schemes.

This includes new guidance on promotion and marketing and sectionalisation of schemes, and updates to existing systems and processes and fees guidance.

Organisations considering establishing a CDC scheme are encouraged to engage early with TPR through its supervision teams and Innovation Support Service to support a smooth authorisation process and avoid surprises as new provision is developed: Get support with pensions innovation.

Richard Knox, Executive Director of Strategy, Policy & Analysis at The Pensions Regulator, said: "We are delighted to open applications for multi-employer CDC schemes, marking an important milestone in the development of the UK's pensions system. At The Pensions Regulator, we want everyone to be able to achieve a sustainable income in retirement, and multi-employer CDC schemes could become an important part of the pensions landscape to support this goal. We also want a no-surprises approach as new innovations like CDC come to market. That is why we encourage anyone considering establishing a scheme to engage with us early so we can support the process.”

Laura joins MS Amlin from consultancy firm LCP, where she is a Partner advising insurance boards and executive teams on actuarial, risk and strategy.

She brings more than 20 years of industry experience and has previously held senior actuarial positions at Milliman, Hiscox and Brit Insurance. She began her career at Swiss Re.

Laura serves on the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries' General Insurance Board and is Deputy Chair of the London Market Actuaries' Group.

MS Amlin's current Chief Actuary, Paul Lucas, has been appointed to the newly created role of Underwriting Portfolio Director, reporting to Martin Burke, the Chief Underwriting Officer. In the role, Paul will bring together insight from across the business to help shape MS Amlin's underwriting appetite, portfolio strategy and capital allocation decisions.

Jessie Burrows, Chief Financial Officer at MS Amlin, said: "We’re delighted to welcome Laura to the team and to appoint Paul to the new role of Portfolio Underwriting Director. Laura brings a strong combination of actuarial expertise, commercial judgement and leadership experience. Having advised boards and executive teams across the insurance market, she understands how actuarial insight can support better business decisions and stronger performance. As market conditions continue to evolve, both Laura and Paul will play an important role in helping us balance growth with discipline, ensuring we continue to make informed decisions that support financial resilience and sustainable profitability.”

“There are six main reasons why the FTSE 100 has proved relatively resilient.

Windscreen repairs in particular saw a sharp quarterly increase, with the average repair cost rising 7% to £283.

Despite these ongoing claims pressures, motor insurance premiums remained relatively stable. The average premium paid rose by £6 (1%) during the quarter to £566. Adjusted for inflation, this remains £14 lower than the average premium in the same quarter of 2025.

Chris Bose, Director of General Insurance and International Policy at the ABI commented: "Motor insurers are working hard to keep premiums competitive and affordable for customers, despite ongoing high claims costs. The Motor Insurance Taskforce provides a real opportunity for the new government to work with insurers and the automotive sector on this, to help improve affordability for drivers further.

Alongside the positive steps the industry is taking to improve the claims handling process and to tackle vehicle-related crime and fraud, Government investment is also needed. By increasing repair sector skills and improving parts availability, policymakers can help the sector keep pace with vehicle innovation and support a more resilient market. We stand ready to work with government and industry to help deliver these reforms."

Inheritance tax receipts reached a record £7.03 billion in 2023-24 and the proportion of deaths resulting in an IHT charge climbed to 4.72%, highlighting the powerful effect of fiscal drag. IHT still affects a minority of estates, and the number of estates caught by the tax dropped in 2023-24 – down 3.6% on the previous year - though the decrease may only be temporary as this dataset predates the IHT changes introduced by former Chancellor Rachel Reeves at the Autumn 2024 Budget.

The nil-rate band has remained frozen at £325,000 since 2009, while the residence nil-rate band has been fixed at £175,000 since 2020-21. With both bands now set to remain unchanged until 2031, the real value of these thresholds will erode over time. It means more estates are likely to drift into taxable territory even where there has been little change in a family’s underlying wealth.

The threshold freeze is already cutting deep, but this could be just a taster of the IHT pain to come. Plans to bring unused defined contribution pension assets within the scope of inheritance tax from April 2027, alongside significant changes to business and agricultural property relief, will undoubtedly have an impact.

The IHT reforms to agricultural property relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) that took effect in April are already increasing the amount of wealth potentially exposed to tax. Meanwhile, imposing IHT on unused DC pension assets from next April brings a longstanding estate planning advantage for many families to an end.

The combination of policy change, asset growth, frozen thresholds and a widening tax base will accelerate the inheritance tax take considerably in the years to come and families that fail to plan ahead could find themselves facing an unexpectedly large tax bill. In many parts of the country, it doesn't take vast wealth to create a potential inheritance tax liability. A family home, combined with a modest investment portfolio, can easily push estate values beyond £1 million – the IHT-free threshold for a beneficiary inheriting from married parents - which helps explain why the more affluent areas of London and the South East continue to account for the highest proportion of inheritance tax-paying estates.

For now, inheritance tax is predominantly paid by those with significant accumulated wealth rather than the average family, but that will change in the future. Families must remember there are solutions to mitigate an inheritance tax liability. With the average effective tax rate paid by taxpaying estates in the 2023-24 tax year coming in at 13% - significantly lower than the headline marginal rate of 40%, the data demonstrates the importance of taking advantage of available exemptions and reliefs.

Being married, for example, remains a key tax advantage with the largest exemption applied to transfers between spouses and civil partners. After the spousal exemption, the next greatest protection against IHT was taken through business and agricultural property reliefs – with the combined value of relief claimed coming in at £5.96bn, up 13% on the £0.68bn in the previous tax year – though relief limits introduced since April are likely to propel that figure even higher in the coming years.

The planned inclusion of pensions within inheritance tax calculations from April 2027 has already radically shifted estate planning. In the past, many carefully preserved pension wealth both to support later-life spending needs and to provide a legacy for loved ones. The new rules have substantially altered those plans, with more retirees choosing to gift and spend their pensions rather than preserve their pension wealth until their final years. Research from Hargreaves Lansdown has found that nearly one in four people plan to gift their pension tax-free cash to loved ones to reduce their inheritance tax liability.

That said, the Government’s proposal to reform social care may alter the retirement landscape once again. While Britain urgently needs a sustainable solution for social care, how that will be funded and the potential impact on retirement saving over the long term, remains unclear at this stage.

For now, those approaching retirement, or already in later life, must first consider whether their beneficiaries could be in the frame for an inheritance tax bill, and then explore what steps they can do to reduce that burden.

The key message is that inheritance tax planning should not be left until it's too late. Families concerned about the potential impact of inheritance tax should review their circumstances early, consider whether gifting strategies are appropriate, ensure wills remain up to date and explore the role whole-of-life insurance or trust arrangements could play in meeting future liabilities.

However, estate planning is a balancing act. The greatest mistake can be giving away too much wealth too soon and jeopardising your own financial security in retirement. With people living longer, it's vital that any inheritance tax strategy ensures sufficient resources remain available to support your own needs first. Given the complexity of the rules and the significant sums involved, professional financial advice can be invaluable in helping families strike the right balance between protecting wealth and maintaining long-term financial security.”

The government has released the Annual Inheritance Tax liability statistics for 2023-24

HMRC Private Pension Statistics

Washington claims to have intercepted an attempted surprise attack on US bases in the region by Tehran, with Iranian missiles launched intercepted. Working with Saudi forces, the American military struck sites in Iraq, where Iranian backed militia are believed to have been operating from, with drones attacking Saudi’s oil facilities, East of the country. High hopes that Oman’s attempt to broker a deal over transit through the Strait of Hormuz have been dashed, with Tehran insisting it must keep control of key routes.

The conflict has opened up a hornets' nest of hostilities, and each retaliatory sting threatens to draw yet more regional players into an increasingly difficult conflict to control. There still remains some optimism that an agreement will be eventually brokered, but it looks set to be a long drawn-out process.

AI jitters are still causing volatility on indices as investors question lofty tech valuations, increased competition and future demand. Futures markets indicate a downbeat start for the Nasdaq while it’s been another turbulent ride for South Korea’s Kospi. The index is down 40% from recent highs as heavyweight chipmaker SK Hynix and tech giant Samsung Electronics have lost considerable heft after a spectacular runup. The advances made by Chinese companies keep causing jolts of worry about how long the dominance of the current chip-making incumbents can continue for.

Federal reserve policymakers are meeting against this complex backdrop of geopolitical tensions and tech volatility. They are still largely expected to keep interest rates on hold this month to get a better reading on where inflationary pressures will land, but there’s increased doubts coming into play, given sticky inflation and a surprise hike can’t be ruled out. With services inflation still too hot for comfort, wage growth elevated and higher energy prices feeding back into the mix, more of a hawkish tone is expected to emerge from this meeting. So even if rates are held all ears will be tuned into any hints from Fed chair Kevin Warsh about a possible hike in September.

Finally, Greggs, the baker, has put its batch of flaky sales behind it and baked up a strong set of results. New store openings, brisk grocery sales and careful cost control have helped lift profits by 20% in the first-half, showing there's still healthy appetite for affordable treats even while many consumers have turned super-cautious. Greggs has continued to take a bigger slice of the food-to-go market, proving its value proposition is resonating as households look for cheaper lunch and breakfast options. It's also proving nimble at keeping pace with the latest food trends, showing it can compete with far more premium cafés. The iced matcha latte has emerged as one of the hits of its latest menu revamp, demonstrating that the bakery chain can blend social media-inspired tastes with its trademark value offering.

There is a slight soggy bottom to the outlook, though. The company is warning that investment in expanding its supply chain will weigh on second-half profits unless consumer confidence improves. It's a reminder that while Greggs is continuing to grow its store footprint and invest for the future, it's doing so against a backdrop where shoppers are still feeling the pinch. Even so, with costs well controlled, expansion continuing and its loyal customer base returning for everything from sausage rolls to pizzas and iced drinks, the long-term recipe for growth still looks firmly in place.”

The analysis, ‘Do Pension Savings Pay? Assessing the Interaction Between Housing Benefit and Private Pension Savings for Older Renters’, sponsored by Independent Age, highlights that the means test of private pension savings used to calculate the amount of HB a pensioner (or pensioner household) receives could dissuade private pension saving.

The assessment highlights how current HB rules lack incentive for pension saving, due to the net impact of every £1 of private pension income reducing HB entitlement by 65p, leaving an only 35p improvement to a person’s disposable income. The analysis explains how this impact is created by modest private pension income currently immediately forming part of the income assessed by the HB means test, reducing the overall HB entitlement. The examination also shows how the form in which pension wealth is held can matter as much as the amount.

The research also reveals that HB spending may increase by £3.4bn by 2044 despite the assessed eligibility rules. This reflects the growing pensioner population, and a 14% fall in home ownership rates, which will see one in three pensioner households expected to be renting by 2044.

A total of 330k otherwise eligible pensioners with private pension income currently see their HB entitlement either reduced or removed entirely, at an average £50 weekly reduction, the investigation finds. This comes at a time when renters in retirement face growing cost of living overheads.

Addressing the highlighted risk of HB eligible retirees lacking incentive to save into their private pension, the study explores an alternative policy option, which would disregard part of private pension income in the HB calculation. It would disregard the first part of a person’s private pension income, so that it would not reduce their HB at the taper rate of 65%, which is applied to private pension income or on notional income arising from private pension savings where no, or low amounts of income are being drawn.

For example, for someone with a full State Pension and a private pension income of £100 a week, a £25 a week disregard would effectively increase disposable income by £16.25 per week due to the increase in HB eligibility. A £25 disregard on pension saving would lift approximately 20,000 people into HB eligibility, costing the government approximately £100m, according to the research.

John Adams, PPI Senior Policy Analyst and lead author of the research, commented: “The interaction between Housing Benefit rules and private pension income is working against eligible retirees, at a time when more pensioners facing spiralling retirement rental costs. With housing costs in retirement set to look markedly different to the last generation, policymakers will need consider how they reach the right balance to ensure Housing Benefit support works as intended.”

Independent Age Chief Executive Joanna Elson, CBE, said: “As this important research shows, the Housing Benefit system isn’t working for older renters on low incomes, especially those with small pensions. Reducing the already inadequate rental support they receive is a disproportionate response to the tiny amounts of income the pensions provide.

To prevent more older renters on low incomes being dragged deeper into financial hardship, we’re urging the Pensions Commission to recommend changing the eligibility criteria for Housing Benefit, so small amounts of private pension income are disregarded. It’s also vital the Government unfreezes Local Housing Allowance rates and ensure they keep pace with the rising costs of renting.

The growing number of older private renters, one third of whom are in poverty after housing costs, really do need these changes.”

The terms of reference of the Casey Commission point to the delivery of "a fair and affordable adult care system". Resolving how care is funded in a sustainable way must be a key part of any reforms.

The UK population is rapidly ageing. According to the Office for National Statistics, the population over age 85 is set to roughly double in the next 25 years from 2.5% to 4.9%.

With a rapidly ageing society, and an increasing proportion of the population comprising people in retirement, it is important that any system of funding takes this demographic change into account to ensure that the system remains sustainable, and fair from an inter-generational perspective.

The current social care system is complex and can be difficult to navigate for those needing care. The launch of the Big Conversation on Care consultation is a positive step forward in raising awareness of how the care funding system currently works and how it could be structured in future

It is encouraging to see the new Prime Minister taking a cross-party approach. To bring about effective policy change in the care system, it will need to endure over multiple electoral cycles."

Maike Currie, VP Personal Finance at PensionBee, comments: “The growth in centenarians marks a remarkable shift in British longevity. When King George V introduced the tradition of sending congratulatory telegrams to centenarians in 1917, he wrote to just 24 people. Today, reaching 100 has become sufficiently common that the tradition has evolved into a dedicated royal operation.

“Longer lives are something to celebrate, but they are also rewriting the rules of retirement. Britain has shifted away from defined benefit workplace pensions, where employers carried much of the investment and longevity risk, towards defined contribution pensions, where individuals are responsible for how much they save, where their pension is invested and ensuring it lasts throughout retirement. Living longer means our money has to work harder for longer too.”

Five ways to prepare your pension for a longer life

Maike Currie added: “Living to 100 was once exceptional. Increasingly, it’s becoming part of the retirement landscape that millions of people need to plan for. The biggest financial risk today isn’t simply market volatility, it’s underestimating how long retirement could last. The good news is that we have more control than ever before. Saving consistently, investing for the long term and making the most of the pension system can all help ensure our money lasts as long as we do.”

Ray Hughes, Director at HPW said: “Improved funding positions are a positive development for many DB schemes, and the ability to consider surplus release creates new opportunities for schemes and sponsoring employers. However, surplus should not simply be viewed as capital available for distribution. The key question is how surplus fits within a scheme's broader funding and risk management strategy, and whether retaining, sharing or releasing it best supports the long-term interests of both the scheme and its members.

“One of the biggest challenges will be balancing the interests of different stakeholders. While employers may have an interest in benefiting from surplus, trustees must continue to act in accordance with their fiduciary duties and consider whether members should also benefit from any surplus position.”

Hughes added: “Ultimately, the question is not simply whether surplus can be released, but how it fits within the wider strategy for the scheme. Different schemes will have different objectives, whether that is progressing towards buy-out, pursuing a run-on strategy or maintaining additional resilience against future uncertainty. Good governance and a clear decision-making framework will be essential to ensuring any surplus decisions are sustainable and aligned with the long-term interests of the scheme and its members.”

Key considerations for trustee boards on DB pension surplus decisions include:

• reviewing scheme rules and any existing powers relating to surplus;
• assessing the sustainability of the surplus position, including under different economic scenarios;
• considering the employer covenant and the impact of any surplus release on long-term scheme resilience;
• ensuring member interests are properly considered and decisions are supported by clear evidence;
• reviewing whether the investment strategy remains aligned with the scheme’s objectives; and
• engaging with actuarial, legal, covenant and investment advisers to support robust decision-making.

Standard insurance, often arranged online or through comparison sites, may not always reflect how you live with your assets, how you travel with them and what it could cost to repair or replace them if the unexpected happens. Some standard policies may also have limitations around flexibility, global cover, or discretion when dealing with high-value claims.

Below, we look at where you could face insurance gaps and what to ask to shape cover more closely around the specifics of your higher-value home, cars and belongings.

If your policy only covers the purchase price, that may be the amount your insurer pays out should you need to claim, subject to the policy terms and claims circumstances. More tailored cover, supported by updated valuations and extended replacement provisions where available, may improve the likelihood of replacing your luxury watch in line with current values.

The same review also identified an unmet fire protection requirement, which had left the client without fire cover for several years. We recommended a provider to install the required fire protection, helping the client address the identified gap and improve the suitability of cover for the collection.

In one case, a homeowner we supported believed £3 million of cover was sufficient for their property. But when we carried out an on-site appraisal of the property that considered the high-specification finishes, including the services and materials needed to put the property back into its original condition. This showed the rebuild cost was closer to £3.6 million, or £600,000 of underinsurance.

If £250,000 of your collection remains securely stored in your safe, your policy can be structured to reflect that usage, which could affect the way your premium is calculated, potentially reducing the premium.

Specialist policies can work differently. In some cases, if each car in your collection sits below a certain value, any driver can be covered automatically. Some policies can offer you cover to drive someone else’s car without prior notification, as long as they’re not residing at your home address. That flexibility is valuable if you’re part of a collector network and expect to use classic cars the way many enthusiasts do.

Rising and shifting values can sometimes leave gaps in your cover. Let’s say you have a £100,000 classic car that features in a film or sees a sudden surge in demand. Its value can jump to £130,000 almost overnight. That means if you haven’t adjusted your cover, you may not have enough cover should you need to claim. Some specialist policies may include agreed value or automatic uplift provisions, which can help address sudden market changes.

Specialist policies can also better reflect drops in value. Your £200,000 classic car may be repaired to a flawless standard after an accident, but once original parts are replaced, the car is no longer considered fully original, meaning its market value could fall.

In one case we worked on, a specialist team revalued a classic car after repair and supported a further claims discussion with the insurer. This type of protection is not always well understood, so it can be helpful to ask your broker whether it is relevant to your circumstances.

In one case we managed, a client needed to move collectibles valued at $2 million from the UK to the US. As their private client insurance broker, we helped arrange specialist transport, guards and a lock box, based on the client’s specific requirements.

In another case, a high-profile sports client lost a valuable watch. We supported the claims process discreetly and helped the client obtain a crime reference number, while being mindful of confidentiality considerations.

Markets in Asia were roiled by a sell-off, with South Korea’s Kospi plunging 10% and Japan’s Nikkei sliding more than 4%. Wavering sentiment towards semiconductor manufacturer stocks, which have hit eye-watering valuations and skewed the performance of indices, prompted the falls. SK Hynix and Samsung both were down more than 12% at one point, with trading halted on the Kospi amid the frenzied sell-off. The trigger appears to have been the blockbuster debut of ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) on the Shanghai STAR Market, causing frissons of worry about just how quickly the Chinese memory maker will aggressively expand production.

It’s the fourth-largest producer of DRAM and threatens to knock market leaders SK Hynix and Samsung off their perches. DRAM is the dynamic fast-working memory used in everyday items from smartphones and computers, but crucially also for AI accelerators, microprocessors designed to execute AI workloads at lightning speed. Investors had allocated significant chunks of portfolios to the South Korean chip makers and are rotating out to free up capital in expectation there will be more chip opportunities coming out of China and its ambitious AI strategy, with more expected to flow through the IPO pipeline. US-listed Micron shares also fell back, as investors assess the growing competition and adjust allocations.

It’s a reminder just how volatile AI investments are right now, given how quickly tech is advancing and how the market share of mighty incumbents threatens to be gobbled up. There are also big questions about demand once this ferocious build-out phase of AI infrastructure has waned, but for now the big focus is who will be the future winners of growing global demand.

The Footsie’s tech-light nature has insulated it from the turbulence hitting markets elsewhere. It’s set for a flat start to trading, with lower crude prices pulling down listed energy giants, as hopes rise for a positive outcome of talks over the Middle East crisis. Investors are also digesting key corporate results, with Unilever providing particular cheer.

Five things to check before Oxford Street goes car-free

But the annual picture tells a different story. Despite putting in less per transaction, high frequency savers accumulate an average of £7,760 over the course of a year. Medium frequency savers reach £5,394. Low frequency savers, despite their larger individual deposits, average just £1,763 annually. The data shows that contributing little and often can be far more effective than waiting for a single ‘right’ moment.

The pattern reflects the reality of being self-employed. Variable and unpredictable income makes regular commitments difficult, and for many, pension saving happens when cash flow allows: a strong month, a good quarter, or a conscious decision to set money aside before it is spent elsewhere. But waiting for the right moment tends to mean contributing less overall.

The spread is striking. High frequency savers end the year with more than four times the total contributions of low frequency savers, not because they earn more, but because they save regularly. Low frequency savers account for nearly 70% of total contribution value in aggregate, but that figure is concentrated among a small number of customers making very large deposits. For most in this group, contributions are modest and irregular.

For employees, Auto-Enrolment removes this problem by making saving the default. For the self-employed, no such mechanism exists. The result is a large population of savers who are willing to contribute, as the value of low frequency deposits demonstrates, but who either lack the regularity and predictability of income, or lack the consistent touchpoints that turn occasional saving into intentional retirement building.

The data also raises a question about the high frequency group. Contributing consistently over time can smooth out the impact of volatility rather than trying to time a lump sum. For people who find financial decisions stressful, that predictability has psychological value too. Consistency tends to be less anxiety-inducing than deciding when and how much to put in each time.

Lisa Picardo, Chief Business Officer UK at PensionBee, said: “What this data shows is that contributing little and often into a personal pension is often the best way to build a strong retirement pot. For most of the self-employed, this approach is the one most likely to soften the impact of volatility, whilst also likely being less stressful in comparison to making a handful of lump sum deposits.

“The good news is that a personal pension is already built to support this kind of saving, offering maximum flexibility - no minimum contribution, no fixed schedule, no employer required. You put in what you can, when you can, and every penny attracts tax relief from day one. For people managing variable income, that flexibility is not a compromise, it’s a must have. But by committing to making smaller contributions more frequently over the course of the year, pension saving becomes much more of an intentional part of wealth building for the future, rather than sporadic saving.

“What is particularly striking is the small group contributing every single month by choice, is their election to mirror the saving habits of their employed peers who are Auto-Enrolled. They are not being nudged or defaulted into it, yet they’ve decided to treat their pension like any other regular financial commitment. A personal pension makes that straightforward to do, as it’s easy to set up regular monthly contributions as a baseline for saving, and then top-up further if and when cash flow allows. If more self-employed savers understood how well it fits around the way they actually work and earn, we believe far more would engage the same way.”

The cross-border commuter trend is emerging through conversations with Rathbones clients and prospective clients who work in Scotland but are increasingly questioning where they should live as the gap between Scottish and rest-of-UK income tax rates continues to widen.

Rathbones’ analysis shows that someone earning £250,000 could pay around £8,900 less income tax in the first year alone if subject to the income tax rates that apply in England rather than Scotland. Assuming salary growth of 2% a year, the cumulative difference could exceed £46,000 over five years.

The findings reflect the Scotland’s devolved income tax system. Scotland currently operates six income tax rates above the Personal Allowance, ranging from 19% to 48%, while England, Northern Ireland and Wales have three main rates of 20%, 40% and 45%.

Rathbones recently warned that Scotland’s divergent income tax regime could hamper efforts to attract investment, entrepreneurs and skilled workers.

Gordon Lawrie, Head of Rathbones’ Edinburgh office, says: “For higher earners, the tax map of the UK is becoming harder to ignore. A worker can live on one side of the border, work on the other and, depending on their tax residence, face a materially different income-tax bill.

“High earners ask us a very simple question, namely can I save tax if I live in England and continue to work in Scotland? Someone earning £250,000, the difference could exceed £46,000 over five years, which is enough to make tax part of the conversation alongside housing, commuting and wider lifestyle considerations.”

For someone earning £150,000, the potential difference is around £5,900 in the first year and more than £30,500 over five years. The potential five-year income tax difference ranges from approximately £12,300 for someone earning £80,000 to more than £46,000 for someone earning £250,000.

The analysis also highlights the significant impact of the Personal Allowance taper. Between £100,000 and £125,140, taxpayers effectively face a marginal income tax rate of 60% in England. For Scottish taxpayers paying the 45% Advanced Rate, the equivalent effective marginal rate can rise to 67.5% while the Personal Allowance is being withdrawn.

Rathbones, which has offices in Glasgow and Edinburgh, argues that policymakers should place greater emphasis on Scotland’s long-term competitiveness through a simpler and more competitive tax system, in turn strengthening the country’s appeal as a place to live, work and do business.

Adam Drummond, Head of Rathbones’ Glasgow office, says: “There is also a broader economic question for Scotland. If tax policy starts driving higher earners elsewhere policymakers should consider what that means for Scotland’s long-term competitiveness, its ability to retain and attract investment and entrepreneurs to drive growth.”

The regulatory intervention report details how it took steps to exercise its anti-avoidance powers against Cliden Construction Limited (CCL) resulting in a settlement being reached with a former director of CCL and a related company.

Many DB schemes are better funded than at any point in recent memory, with around 90% of schemes fully funded (on the ‘technical provisions’ basis). However, a small proportion are in deficit.

The multi-employer plumbing industry scheme, which has a deficit of around £258 million, is an industry-wide defined benefit (DB) multi-employer scheme with over 30,000 members. The scheme is sponsored by more than 300 employers.

Participating employers leaving the scheme are required to pay a debt to meet their share of a pension deficit. If an employer fails to pay its debt, the liability is distributed across the remaining employers.

Gaucho Rasmussen, TPR’s Executive Director, Enforcement and Legal Group, said: “Members rely on pensions to provide them with a sustainable income in retirement and employers cannot simply walk away from their responsibilities. While we aim to prevent harms through constructive engagement, we will not hesitate to use our enforcement powers where necessary to secure positive outcomes and as a deterrent against this type of behaviour."

“We will continue to work together with the trustees of the plumbers’ scheme to ensure that employers understand the importance of paying their debts to the scheme and the potential consequences of not doing so.”

CCL triggered a debt under section 75 of the Pensions Act 1995 in early 2019 when it ceased to employ active members of the scheme.

TPR’s investigation found that CCL, alongside connected parties, had taken a series of steps to avoid its section 75 debt. These included issuing dividends effectively removing funds that could have gone into the pension scheme. CCL later entered liquidation in June 2023 with the debt still unpaid.

In response, TPR launched an anti-avoidance investigation culminating in a Warning Notice seeking Contribution Notices against CCL and connected parties.

TPR used a range of its legal powers in the case including compelling witnesses to attend interviews on three occasions to provide information, and fining CCL’s accountants for failing to comply with statutory information requests.

Following the Warning Notice, a settlement was reached with the relevant parties, and funds have now been paid into the scheme.

The consultation follows a review of bulk annuity market pricing, which found pricing had become more competitive since the PPF’s last detailed review. The main proposed changes cover discount rates and longevity assumptions. The proposed updates are intended to keep the assumptions aligned with current buy-out pricing and would generally reduce estimated scheme liabilities under the valuation bases.

The PPF regularly reviews market developments to ensure its assumptions remain appropriate. The current standard assumptions were set after a 2023 review, with guidance updated in 2024 to allow bespoke adjustments to the section 143 discount rate in limited circumstances.

Aaron Pang, Acting Chief Actuary at the Pension Protection Fund, said:"We regularly review our valuation assumptions to ensure they remain appropriately aligned with the bulk annuity market and continue to meet the objectives set out in legislation.

Our latest review suggests that market pricing has moved since the assumptions were last comprehensively updated. The proposals in this consultation are intended to reflect those developments while continuing to provide a practical and proportionate framework for valuations. We encourage trustees, actuaries, advisers, insurers and other stakeholders to review the proposals and share their views."

The consultation document is available in the PPF's valuation guidance section on the website: Consultation documents | Pension Protection Fund

The consultation closes at 5pm on 16 September 2026. Subject to the outcome of the consultation, the PPF intends to publish its final decision in October 2026. The proposals currently envisage the revised assumptions applying to valuations with an effective date on or after 31 May 2026.

Responses can be submitted by email to: AssumptionsConsultation@ppf.co.uk.

Once again, the LGPS didn’t get a mention. However, virtually all funds can now start preparing for the future.

A key message, which is repeated across the various decision letters, is around housing and economic growth. The government has consistently approved the expansion of city boundaries across England with direct reference to increasing the available housing stock, something that will no doubt keenly interest funds and investment pools.

Another point of interest is that while the number of senior officers actively participating in funds will decrease, eg less 151 officers will be required, there will be service areas that may need to take on staff. In regions such as Warwickshire, the decision letter specifically points to disaggregation of services that are currently provided on a county wide basis and the loss of benefits of scale. This means funds in areas which see services disaggregated can expect to see a spike in the employment of more junior officers to fulfil these roles.

On the subject of administration tasks, we’ve been talking for some time about the administrative challenges that LGR will bring. There will need to be bulk transfers, changes to contracts and, sadly, redundancies. Where boundary changes take place, these challenges will be all the greater and only increase the scale and complexity of the work that needs to be carried out.

There are some key questions which need to be addressed, and funds will no doubt want to be part of the conversations:

Chris Bose, Director of General Insurance Policy at the ABI, said: “We recognise how stressful and worrying the wildfires will be for people currently in the affected areas, as well as those due to travel there in the coming days. Safety must be the priority, so it’s important to follow the advice of local authorities and emergency services.

 “Insurers are ready to support their affected customers. If your travel plans are disrupted by a wildfire and your policy includes trip disruption cover then travel insurance may cover some of the resulting costs. It can also help if you become ill or are injured.

“Where flights or accommodation are cancelled, you should seek refunds from their airline, tour operator or accommodation provider in the first instance.

 “Cover can vary between providers, so if you’re not sure what’s included in your policy, speak to your insurer who will be able to advise on what support is available.”

The big confidence booster for investors at the start of the week remains signs of progress in the Middle East. Early speculation that negotiations could resume has been reinforced by a second consecutive night without US strikes and by Tehran’s decision not to respond with further retaliatory action. While on the face of it the US administration is pushing the line that pressure is being maintained, markets remain cautious given the twists and turns during this conflict and the uncertainty over whether talks will actually come to fruition. Brent crude has fallen back sharply to trade around $90 a barrel, down by 10% since Friday, as fears of a prolonged energy crunch begin to ease. However, there is still significant uncertainty baked into these prices and a reticence about whether negotiations will lead to a lasting breakthrough. The weekend attacks by Houthi rebels continued at the Red Sea ports of Yanbu and Jizan, a reminder of how many more factions have been pulled into the war. Oil prices are still around a third higher over the month as tensions ratcheted up again. Nevertheless, with fresh negotiations looking increasingly likely, it appears to be a sign of progress, and there is an expectation that President Trump will want some kind of resolution given that the mid-term elections are looming and this war remains unpopular among voters.

With fears of a chronic energy crunch easing a little, it has helped take the pedal off borrowing costs, which accelerated higher last week. UK gilt yields have dipped back, easing the pressure slightly on the Burnham administration. This will be welcome given focus has switched firmly to the spending challenges facing the new government, with warnings from the Prime Minister that social care needs desperate reform to help save the NHS while also accepting that the benefits bill needs to be brought down. There is still a distinct lack of detail on how he and his ministers will go about tackling the huge costs of welfare, and so investors in government debt look set to stay wary while there’s so much talk but so little action on lowering government spending costs.

While some heat is being taken out of energy prices, there’s no change in temperature for emergency services fighting the ferocious fires raging, particularly in France and Spain. The devastating wildfires are set to leave a deep economic as well as environmental scar. As firefighters battle to contain the blazes, businesses are also counting the cost, as immediate harm is being felt across tourism, agriculture and local economies. But the financial toll is set to mount rapidly through soaring insurance claims, disrupted transport links and supply chains, and a hit to consumer spending in some of Europe’s most popular holiday destinations.

The timing couldn’t be much worse given it’s at the height of the summer getaway season, and prolonged disruption and poor air quality threaten to take a big bite out of tourism, a cornerstone of both the French and Spanish economies. Hotels, restaurants and attractions in affected regions face cancellations and lost trade during what would normally be their busiest weeks of the year. Tourists are being urged to stay away from the Gironde in particular right now, as key routes to the beaches remain closed while the fight to contain the dramatic blazes continues.

The flames are also threatening some of Europe’s most productive agricultural land. Vineyards in particular are at risk in Gironde, home to the famous Médoc wine route. While for now the flames are concentrated to the western side of the peninsula, even if vineyards escape the flames, they can still suffer from smoke taint, which can affect the quality and value of grapes. France’s public finances will also come under fresh strain, given the government faces the prospect of another hefty bill for emergency services, rebuilding infrastructure and supporting devastated communities at a time when it is already under pressure to rein in its budget deficit. Spain faces a similar challenge, with the major fires around Madrid adding another unexpected burden to public finances, forcing more spending on emergency response, reconstruction and longer-term climate resilience.

As extreme weather events become more frequent and more destructive, governments and businesses will have to dig deep, diverting money from investment and growth towards recovery and rebuilding. However, for infrastructure companies and renewable energy developers, the intensifying focus on climate risks could create a powerful tailwind. It’s forcing governments to rethink how resilient their economies are, accelerating spending on everything from fire and flood defences and upgraded power networks to more efficient water systems and climate-proof infrastructure.

The powerful fast-fashion giant Shein has stumbled, facing a big hurdle from the removal of US import duty exemptions amid the wider tariff war. Shein, which was founded in China, lost $99m in the first three months of the year, compared with net income of $395m a year earlier. It’s another sign that the huge wave of ultra-cheap fashion flooding Western markets may start to lose power. The removal of the US de minimis exemption has taken away a huge competitive advantage, forcing the retailer to put up prices and absorb higher costs at the same time. That’s a difficult combination for a business built on razor-thin margins and impulse purchases.

However, although the US and the EU have already acted to clamp down on low-value imports from fast-fashion giants, the UK is still playing catch-up. The government has brought forward plans to scrap customs duty relief on parcels worth less than £135, but the changes won’t come into force until October 2028. That’s left many major high street retailers frustrated that Britain continues to lag behind its biggest trading partners, allowing Shein and Temu to benefit from an advantage that has already been stripped away elsewhere.

For years, high street chains have complained they are fighting with one hand tied behind their back, competing against overseas rivals able to ship low-value parcels into major markets without facing the same import costs. As governments chip away at those tax advantages, the playing field is beginning to look a little more level, even if the UK is in the slow lane in this journey.”

However, as more schemes move beyond transaction day, attention is increasingly turning to the practical steps required after a transaction. These can include resolving historic data issues, addressing benefit complexities and coordinating the wider activities needed to support a scheme’s chosen end-game strategy.

Rob Chandler, Consultant at Cartwright Pension Trusts, said: “Completing a buy-in is a major achievement and one that trustees and sponsors should rightly recognise. However, transaction day should be viewed as a milestone rather than a finish line. The work required afterwards is critical to delivering the scheme’s long-term objective.

“As the market continues to mature, the focus needs to move beyond securing transactions and towards ensuring schemes are well positioned for the next phase of their journey. Trustees, insurers, administrators and advisers are all managing significant volumes of activity, making early planning, clear ownership and strong oversight increasingly important.

“Data is one of the key factors that can influence progress after a transaction. Insurer reviews can uncover historic inconsistencies, missing information or benefit complexities that require careful investigation. The important question for trustees is not whether issues will emerge, but whether they have the right processes and expertise in place to address them effectively.”

Chandler continued: “Trustees can help maintain momentum by reviewing their post-transaction plans early, ensuring outstanding actions have clear ownership, maintaining regular communication with advisers and service providers, and addressing data or benefit issues as soon as they are identified.

“Ultimately, completing a transaction is only one part of the end-game process. Whether a scheme is moving towards buyout or pursuing another long-term strategy, success depends on the preparation, governance and collaboration that follows.”

Before the change was announced, many people planned to spend down their other assets first and leave their pension for as long as they could, so it could be passed on to loved ones, free of inheritance tax. The change in the rules has since prompted people to think again and assess what can be done to reduce the value of the estate to save their family a tax bill.

The research shows that gifting is viewed as a key option. Around one in four people said they would access their tax-free cash and make use of their allowances to gift to loved ones while they are still alive, rather than leaving it in a will. One in four (22%) said they would draw an income from their pension and make gifts alongside that. The same proportion of people said they would still gift but would use assets outside of their pension to do it.

It’s understandable why people would consider gifting to loved ones as a means of reducing the value of their estate. Gifting to loved ones while you are still alive not only potentially saves them a tax bill but can also help them to meet their financial goals that bit earlier. It could be a one-off amount towards a house deposit or wedding, for instance, or regular contributions into a Junior ISA to help someone afford university later down the line. Contributing to a Junior SIPP can give a young loved one a real leg up the retirement planning ladder, that puts them well ahead of their peers. It can also act as an early lesson on the power of investing, which can go on to form a lifelong habit.

However, it’s important not to give away too much, too quickly. This risks potentially running short of money further down the line, which can cause serious challenges. Take a longer-term approach and assess the affordability of these gifts as you go. One in five (21%) said they would spend their assets to reduce the value of their estate. This may point to someone prioritising taking their income rather than gifting - again it’s crucial not to spend your assets down too quickly as you don’t know how long you are going to live.

The upcoming changes are going to have an enormous impact on retirement planning, and it’s important to understand the ramifications before acting. For instance, there are several different gifting allowances that can be used to reduce a potential inheritance tax bill, but they can be complex. You will also need to make detailed notes as to who you have given money to and when, so your family can evidence your gift giving if needed.

These are major decisions and it is a good idea to take financial advice. The data show that 27% said they would access financial advice before deciding, and this may grow over time. Advisers can play a vital role in making sure that you not only gift sustainably but also that your gifting does not fall foul of any rules that could leave your family with a large bill.”

HMRC launches investigations into the estates of deceased individuals where underpayment of inheritance tax is suspected.

The amount of inheritance tax recovered following investigations was £247m in 2024/25, down from £285m in the previous year, and comes at a time when the total amount of IHT collected reached a new annual high of £8.5bn in 2025/26.

According to Sean McCann, Chartered Financial Planner at NFU Mutual: ‘’ Where there is a suspicion that inheritance tax has been underpaid through error, omission or undervaluing assets, HMRC has substantial investigative powers and will check a range of sources to build a picture of the deceased individual’s financial affairs.

‘’Bank statements can be a rich vein for an HMRC investigator as they can reveal income from undisclosed assets such as overseas property or investments, as well as outgoings such as life insurance premiums, which if not written in trust will be included in the taxable estate’’.

’HMRC will often review the deceased’s insurance records as part of their investigations, to ensure jewellery, wine collections and other high value items have been included in the IHT return’’

‘’Insurance records can also highlight items that have been gifted more than seven years ago but the deceased continued to enjoy a benefit from, such as a valuable painting remaining in their home. This ‘reservation of benefit’ can mean that the item is included in their Inheritance tax calculation.

He explains: “In addition, the interest rate you pay on overdue inheritance tax stands at 7.75%, which can add a significant amount to the bill. This can compound what for many is already a challenging and distressing situation.

“With the £325,000 nil-rate band and the £175,000 residence nil-rate band frozen until 2031, and pensions set to be included in the inheritance tax calculation from April next year, more families will be caught in the net with ever increasing bills for those affected.”

Although the figures reveal that the sums collected from IHT investigations have fallen, according to Sean McCann, this doesn’t mean a change in tack from the authorities:

“Investigations can take months and occasionally years to complete, and therefore the £247m recovered in 2024/25 may be from inquiries opened in earlier years.

“The revenue recovered through these investigations is significant and the rising value of assets and the potential sums at stake would appear to justify HMRC spending more time looking at individual cases.

“Inheritance tax remains one of the most feared and least understood taxes,” he added.

One item that has crossed my desk is vertically integrated business models, which we’re publishing information for firms on today.

When a consumer buys insurance, they need to trust that the firm they're dealing with is genuinely working toward the best outcome for them – and that they’re not losing out due to conflicts of interest.

This can happen when a single group of companies span multiple parts of the insurance chain: underwriting the policy, distributing it to customers, arranging premium finance, and providing other related services.

It can also happen when firms are connected through ownership or financing relationships that may be publicly disclosed or private in nature. These arrangements can make good and efficient business sense. But they can also create conflicts of interest – particularly if they influence consumer journeys or potentially alter commercial incentives. This has the potential to shape decisions in ways that don't serve the customer.

This isn't just a theoretical concern. We've taken enforcement action before against firms where conflicts of interest weren't properly managed, and where ownership or remuneration arrangements influenced customer outcomes.

You must actively identify, manage and evidence those conflicts. That means effective governance, clear senior management accountability and controls that actually work in practice, not just on paper.

Crucially, disclosure alone is not enough. Simply telling customers about a conflict doesn't remove your obligation to manage it properly.

You should look at how you design products and panels, how you communicate with customers, how you structure remuneration, and whether your customer-facing information is genuinely transparent about commercial relationships that could affect a customer's decision.

Wherever a firm happens to be in the chain it needs to assess and be able to evidence the value added in each link.

If you're considering new ownership, investment or financing structures that could add complexity or create new conflicts, you should factor our expectations into that assessment from the start.

But we're also making our expectations clear to the whole market – because this isn't an issue isolated to a handful of instances.

We are monitoring developments in this area, so you may receive ad hoc data requests. You should be able to show us how your arrangements deliver good outcomes for customers. Where business models are overly complex or difficult to supervise, we expect you to think seriously about simplifying them.

Any material changes to your business model that affect conflicts of interest should be notified to us promptly.

Our position is clear: Where we see firms acting in ways that could harm consumers, obscure accountability or undermine trust, we will act, starting with supervisory engagement, and with enforcement if needed.

Getting this right will help give customers that extra peace of mind that insurance products are working for them.

The acquisition, which has been unanimously approved by the boards of directors of both companies is expected to close in Q1 2027, and will create the second largest writer of Private Passenger Auto in New England as well as the largest Homeowners and Commercial auto insurer in the region, further enhancing service and offerings to clients and agents in the region

Antonio Huertas, Group Executive Chairman of Mapfre, said: This acquisition is in line with Mapfre’s strategic objectives to strengthen our position in the markets where we already operate—specifically, in this case, in Massachusetts and a number of states throughout the Northeast. I believe that the combination of our strengths will allow us to serve our clients in the U.S. even better. It will enable us to strengthen our franchise in both scale and profitability, creating strategic and financial value for our shareholders, while putting us on track for enhanced growth in the highly attractive and developed states of the Northeast.

Mapfre has temporarily entered into a bridge loan agreement with Citibank and Deutsche Bank, making the acquisition not subject to any financing condition. This bridge loan is intended to be replaced by a combination of ~€700 million in Tier 2 capital instruments, €500 million in senior debt, and the remainder via bank debt. The Solvency II impact is expected to be around 10 p.p. and pre-tax synergies have been estimated at more than $30 million p.a., with full run-rate benefits anticipated within three years. The acquisition is forecast to be accretive with an over 5% uplift to net income.

This transaction is designed to deliver meaningful, tangible value for Mapfre and its shareholders. The acquisition is consistent with Mapfre’s focus on financial discipline and long-term value creation. It brings significant upside to profitability while maintaining Mapfre’s Solvency II ratio comfortably within the company’s target range. The funding structure is also consistent with Mapfre’s prudent financial framework.

The combination of Mapfre USA and Safety is expected to strengthen Mapfre’s overall profitability, stability, and growth in the US It will reinforce its ability to attract and retain top talent, foster deeper connections with agents and clients, and enhance product innovation and service quality. Safety will operate within Mapfre and maintain the unique strengths of both organizations.

Jaime Tamayo, CEO of Mapfre North America, stated: This is an exciting milestone that brings together two leaders in Massachusetts with a shared commitment to excellence. Safety has an exceptional team, a strong brand, and a deep understanding of the local market, making it an ideal partner. As a larger organization, we have the ability to unlock greater value, broader capabilities, and new opportunities for growth—while remaining deeply focused on the people who define our success. I look forward to incorporating Safety’s high-quality franchise into Mapfre USA’s operations. Safety’s solid underwriting track record, servicing capabilities and agent network will enhance our product offerings and improve the customer experience of our clients and agents throughout the Northeast. This combination will definitely reinforce our commitment to agents and clients throughout the Northeast while providing enhanced opportunities for our employees.

Looking at two key features that distinguish Dutch ‘solidarity’ DC schemes from traditional UK occupational DC schemes:

In Dutch schemes, DC pots are automatically converted at retirement into a ‘collective variable annuity’. This is a collective pool of all retirees, where all risks are shared, including longevity risks and financial risks, which allows for post-retirement investment in return-seeking assets.

The collective variable annuity is offered within the same fund as the accumulation phase. Hence no assets must be liquidated at the conversion date, which facilitates the use of private and illiquid assets.

The risk exposure of the collective variable annuities is typically an allocation of 30% to 55% towards a diversified return portfolio. The risk level is determined at cohort-level by participants, via a ‘risk preference survey’.

Meanwhile, PwC's Buyout Index, which tracks the estimated cost for UK defined benefit pension schemes to fully insure their liabilities through an insurance buyout, showed an estimated surplus of £155 billion, with schemes totalling an aggregate position of 116% funded.

PwC's Superfund Index also remained robust, with an estimated surplus of £220 billion and a funding level of 125%, highlighting the continued strength of alternative endgame solutions.

This strength has been consistent throughout 2026, with low dependency and buyout measure consistently exceeding 120% and 110% respectively, alongside a general upwards trend.

Saye Mkangama, Pensions Partner at PwC UK, said: "With funding levels remaining strong, the government's surplus release consultation marks an important step towards making surplus release a practical option for well-funded schemes. That greater clarity is already influencing market sentiment, with around two-thirds of trustees, sponsors and industry professionals responding to PwC polling saying the consultation and The Pensions Regulator's (TPR) statement have increased their confidence in running on schemes and releasing surplus.

"The focus now turns to translating that confidence into action. Government and TPR have an opportunity to create a practical framework that gives trustees and sponsors the certainty to make informed decisions while maintaining appropriate member protections. If achieved, the new flexibilities could allow well-funded schemes to put surplus capital to more productive use without compromising members' security."

The PwC Low Dependency Index, Buyout Index and Superfund Index figures are as follows:

Iran appears to have pulled the Houthis back into the toxic geopolitical mix, with the Iran-backed group claiming it attacked two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea with drones and missiles. The strikes, if confirmed, would mark the first since the Houthis announced a maritime embargo against Saudi Arabia, opening another potential front in the conflict. It comes as the US carried out its 12th consecutive night of strikes on Iranian targets, while President Trump warned Washington would target Iranian infrastructure if ships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz.

With both the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea now under increasing pressure, markets are bracing for the possibility that the conflict could disrupt key energy routes, keep oil prices elevated, and the prospect of interest rate hikes in focus.

easyJet has flown through some fierce turbulence with profits taking a nosedive, but shares are cruising higher today as investors spy resilience, amid the ongoing takeover story. Third-quarter profits plunged 70% to £85 million as the Middle East conflict sent fuel costs soaring and knocked travellers' confidence, but demand didn't disappear, it simply arrived later, with holidaymakers waiting until closer to departure to book, lured by attractive fares.

Investors also seem to be encouraged by the continued momentum in easyJet Holidays, which is proving to be much more than a useful sidekick to the airline. Customer numbers grew 8%, and profits rose 7% on a constant currency basis. It's increasingly becoming the group's profit engine, delivering higher-margin revenues at a time when the core flying business is battling volatile fuel costs and geopolitical disruption. As more travellers opt for package holidays, easyJet is earning a bigger slice of customers' travel budgets, helping smooth some of the bumps that have traditionally made airline earnings so unpredictable. And the company has big ambitions for this part of the business, targeting £590 million in pre-tax profit by 2030.

Above all of this looms the bid for the airline by private equity giant Apollo, and investors may be buying into the possibility that there could be another chapter to the takeover story. Apollo's interest has highlighted the airline's strategic value, and although tougher EU scrutiny over foreign ownership clouds the path to a deal, investors don't appear to be ruling out another twist, and potentially another approach from rival bidder Castlelake. Until there's greater clarity on whether Apollo can navigate the regulatory turbulence, or whether another bidder could emerge, takeover speculation and the prospect of further corporate interest still appear to be providing investors with a fresh tailwind.

Shares in pub operators haven't benefited from a Burnham bounce, despite the Prime Minister's announcement of a 20% cut to business rates for night-time hospitality businesses. Wetherspoon's shares continued their descent, with investors still reeling from yesterday's downbeat update. Fresh clouds have also scuttled over the sector after Mitchells & Butlers, the owner of brands including Harvester, Toby Carvery, All Bar One and Miller & Carter, warned that the recent heatwave dented food sales. The hot weather has been a bittersweet brew, filling beer gardens but emptying dining tables, with customers choosing another round rather than another course. While that kept drinks sales flowing, it was a less profitable sales mix as food serves up the fatter margins.

Given operators had been calling for much steeper relief, such as a cut in VAT from 20% to 9%, bringing the UK more into line with European peers, today's measures look more like a small top-up than a game-changing pint of support. Investors are also mindful that hospitality businesses continue to grapple with higher wage bills, elevated National Insurance contributions and stubborn input costs, all of which continue to squeeze margins. Another headache is brewing with crude oil prices climbing again, raising the prospect of higher transport, logistics and energy costs filtering through supply chains in the months ahead. That threatens to pile further pressure on margins at a time when operators are already finding it difficult to pass higher costs on to increasingly value-conscious consumers. So, while the business rates cut is a welcome gesture, it's not enough to dispel concerns about the sector's longer-term profitability. Far from providing bubbles of cheer, today's announcement has had a flat response.

Wall Street is set to open lower, as tense geopolitics and inflation worries collide with concerns that the AI spending boom could be running way ahead of returns. Alphabet’s results highlighted the vast infrastructure race under way, with the Google owner lifting its 2026 capital expenditure plans to as much as $205bn as it pours money into data centres and AI capacity.

The company’s results highlighted that AI remains a huge growth opportunity but also increasingly a source of investor anxiety. Google Cloud revenue surged 82% year-on-year, but investors baulked at the sheer scale of the spending required to stay ahead in the AI arms race, with shares slipping in after-hours trading. There are growing concerns that the returns from these vast investments won’t arrive quickly enough, or be large enough, to justify the eye-watering costs.”

The research also finds that nearly two in five (38%) of 60-65-year-olds are working for longer to cover day-to-day expenses, showing that financial pressures are a major factor behind the increase in later-life working, alongside those who continue working by choice.

And these figures may increase if reported plans to raise the State Pension Age to 68 more quickly are implemented. Currently it is due to gradually rise to 68 between April 2044 and April 2046, affecting those born between April 1977 and April 1978.

However, the possibility of an acceleration of in SPA rises was highlighted after reports that Treasury officials have told the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government’s fiscal forecaster, that the “current policy” is to bring the increase in the retirement age forward by at least seven years, to 2037.

This comes against a backdrop of widespread under-saving in the UK, with over 15 million people not saving enough for retirement.

Catherine Foot, Director of the Standard Life Centre for the Future of Retirement, comments: “Working later in life can offer real financial and social benefits, particularly when it reflects personal choice. Yet for many people, this isn’t a lifestyle decision but a financial necessity. Millions across the UK are unable to retire when they want, underlining the challenge of retirement adequacy and the need for longer working lives just to bridge the gap.”

Following the State Pension age starting to rise to 67 in April, over a third (37%) of 60-65-year-olds who are still working say they are delaying retirement until they can receive the State Pension, with the State Pension comprising a significant proportion of most people’s retirement incomes. Previous Standard Life research also found that one in six (16%) retirees have either gone back to work (8%) or are thinking of doing so (8%)3, as the inadequacy of their retirement finances becomes clear.

These findings underline the growing pressure on retirement plans. While the Pensions Commission’s interim report highlights the need for longer working lives, it also makes it clear that the system must adapt to modern, more flexible ways of working if this is to be fair and achievable.

Catherine Foot continues: “To make working in later life as accessible as possible, we need expanded, age-tailored careers support, alongside better flexible work arrangements and improved access to in-work health support. However, many will not be able to continue working, even with better support. This is particularly true for those with long-term health conditions and unpaid carers, who are financially disproportionately affected by the rise in State Pension age. Alongside improving wider pensions adequacy, the government must set out a clear plan to ensure the most vulnerable are supported before and during retirement, mitigating the negative impact of further changes to the State Pension age on their financial security.”

The volume and sophistication of fraudulent claims is making it harder for teams to distinguish them from genuine customer issues, particularly where retail, leisure and hospitality organisations feature busy sites, lean customer service or claims teams or high staff turnover.

Your people need to know that polished wording and professional-looking images don’t prove the facts. Frontline staff are your first line of your claims defensibility. They need clear prompts they can be ready to deploy during busy shifts or backed-up complaints queues: what happened, who saw it, what records are there?

Junior or transient staff may not see how a missed photo or incomplete log or can drive investigation costs, your business’ reputation and your ability to defend a claim. They may also need explicit permission to pause, check the incident log, ask for missing information or escalate to someone with claims experience.

Processes that are hard to access or take too long to carry out are likely to fail on a busy shop floor or hotel reception, during restaurant service or if you operate a call centre where your people are handling high volumes of complaints. Think about easy-to-use processes, clear ownership of roles and responsibilities when someone makes a claim — both on-site and online – and a route to preserving evidence and escalating cases.

If your claims teams have a way of comparing the trends it’s seeing with wider market experience, they’ll be in a better position to separate isolated service issues from AI-supported.

Can you trace a claim from first contact to settlement, challenge or escalation. Where did it start? Who handled it first? What evidence did they capture?

If a location, product line or channel shows higher volumes, you may want to investigate whether poor recording, weak escalation, an operational issue or AI-supported claims activity caused the increase.

If you’re facing high volumes of claims, your teams may benefit from a clear framework for triaging cases that look doubtful but lack enough evidence to justify a harder stance. This framework should help teams weigh cost, available evidence, customer experience and reputational risk consistently, ultimately saving time and resources.

Test your written procedures against recently closed incident records and claims files. Review the records, speak to the teams who created them and check whether your escalation routes are clear to the people using them. The findings from these exercises can identify practical improvements in training, forms and reporting, or give you assurance you’re getting the basics right.

Get the industry specialist support you need to protect your business against AI-enabled claims. Get in touch with our retail, leisure and hospitality specialists.

The findings have been published in the first Insight Report from the TPT Retirement Solutions: DB Trustee Pulse 2026, a new series based on an independent survey of 100 UK DB pension trustees representing schemes with assets ranging in size from £100m to over £10bn+.

Pensions dashboard readiness topped the trustee agenda, cited by 38% of respondents. Evaluating endgame options ranked second and was the fast-rising priority, with 31% of trustees citing it as a major challenge, compared with 16% in 2024. Other priorities followed closely including liquidity, collateral and cashflow management (30%), staying on top of member communications and expectations (28%), and navigating market volatility / investment performance (26%), all of which ranked similarly high (see Figure One).

Taken together, the findings point to a broader capacity issue. Trustees are no longer contending with a single overriding challenge. Rather, they are having to deal with an increasingly crowded agenda that requires them to progress long-term strategic decisions while simultaneously meeting an ever-expanding range of operational and governance demands.

Compared with TPT’s 2024 DB Trustee Pulse Survey, some previously prominent challenges have eased. Notably, concerns around accessing different asset classes fell from 29% to 24%, while concerns over data quality declined from 21% to 16%, suggesting progress has been made in areas that previously required greater trustee attention.

However, for medium-to-large sized schemes with £1bn or more in assets under management, pensions dashboard readiness is the most prominent challenge, selected by 39% of trustees in this category, followed by liquidity, collateral or cashflow management needs at 33%. Scheme administration, keeping pace with regulation and asset allocation all rank close behind, each cited by 26% of trustees in this group.

Nicholas Clapp, Commercial Director, TPT Retirement Solutions, said: “For a number of years, the industry conversation was dominated by funding, de-risking and endgame planning. Those priorities have not gone away, but there is now greater recognition of the growing practical realities trustees face in overseeing a pension scheme. Dashboards, governance, data, administration and implementation projects all compete for the same time and resource.”

Katherine Lynas, Head of Consultant Relations, TPT Retirement Solutions, said: “What we are seeing is that operational complexity is becoming a strategic issue. Trustees are evaluating endgame options while also thinking about how much governance, resource and ongoing management each route requires. That's why consolidation options that provide scale and simplicity are becoming increasingly important considerations.”

Core CPI, which strips out volatile food and fuel prices and is monitored closely by the Bank of England, also came in at 2.6%. Price rises for goods have slowed quite markedly, but services inflation is proving stickier, falling only a little to 2.6%, above expectations. The pound initially rose before losing ground as investors assessed the conflicting signals for interest rate policy. While the fall in the headline rate is welcome news, stubbornly high core inflation, a sluggish economy and the Middle East crisis are set to keep Bank of England policymakers on alert. However, it still looks likely they'll adopt another wait-and-see stance at the meeting later this month, with an interest rate hike not fully priced in until close to the end of the year.

Policymakers will be monitoring closely how the war with Iran filters through to everyday prices. Risks to supplies are mounting again, with the effective blockage of the Strait of Hormuz remaining a chokehold as tankers are stranded in and around the waterway, while risks to other crude routes are also intensifying. Both the Red and Black Seas are fast becoming the latest flashpoints. President Trump has dashed hopes for imminent talks, threatening to ramp up attacks on Iran if Houthi rebels are drawn into the conflict and begin disrupting the Red Sea route for oil shipments. As the conflict in Ukraine rages, with drone attacks on tankers serving Russia's Caspian Pipeline Consortium on the Black Sea coast, Kazakhstan has been forced to halt crude exports through the port. Both conflicts, which look increasingly intractable given the lack of momentum behind diplomatic solutions, are threatening to choke vital energy supply routes and keep a firm floor under oil prices, raising the risk that inflationary pressures flare up once again. If they drag on, this could prove to be the low point for inflation before price pressures start building again through the second half of the year.

The new Burnham administration is trying to build a buffer against a fresh cost-of-living squeeze amid the threat of higher prices. Following yesterday's VAT cut on household electricity bills, today's £2 bus fare cap is another attempt to put money back into consumers' pockets before higher energy costs start filtering through the economy. For many households, particularly those reliant on buses to get to work, the savings will offer an immediate salve to what have become painful everyday costs. But in many ways policymakers are in a race against forces beyond their control. If conflict in the Middle East keeps oil prices simmering near recent highs, the relief offered by cheaper electricity and transport could quickly be eroded by rising fuel, freight and wider consumer costs. The cost-of-living battle may be getting a helping hand from government, but it is still likely to be fought on the global stage.''

For low earners who spend a particularly large portion of their working life as low earners, the study states the Lower Earnings Limit (LEL) reduces their contributions to such a degree that increased minimum contribution rates are unlikely to compensate for it. For example, at age 22, low earners are projected to have a further 16 years of low earning across their working life if they are a woman, or 8 if they are a man. Other risk factors, such as low educational qualification levels or motherhood, may increase these figures further, increasing the impact of any change to the LEL. However, for other low earners who may be at risk of poverty, any contribution may be too much, and the removal of the LEL could increase their contribution significantly.

The research also shows how the impact of fiscal drag on AE thresholds has made its current aims unclear. Eroded by inflation since the last uprating in 2014, PPI analysis shows the Earnings Trigger is now £4,300 (43%) lower in real terms, pushing employees and employers to make a greater contribution to a workplace pension. As low earners and employers face a range of cost of living and global economic pressures, the LEL is also 28% lower in real-terms, meaning a further £1,750 of employees’ earnings are now subject to a workplace pension contribution since the last 2020 uprating.(3)(4)

The analysis notes that the real-terms decrease of AE thresholds reflects an implicit assumption that low earners will opt out if it is in their best interests to do so, in order to address immediate cost of living pressures, or other factors. This is despite the AE policy mechanisms of the Earnings Trigger and the LEL being originally designed to protect against low earners failing to opt-out of saving when potentially needed, the report states. Future AE reforms that explicitly outline assumptions about the capacity of low earners to opt-out when necessary, the assessment elaborates, would help clarify the wider policy direction.

The report comes as the Second Pensions Commission considers how AE might be reformed to increase pensions adequacy, with low earners highlighted as facing particularly high adequacy risks.

Further key findings of the research series summarised in the report include:

Saving may present immediate risks to low earners who are at risk of poverty, in debt, or in precarious or unstable employment. Even relatively small contributions under current AE policy may exacerbate hardships, and some AE reforms may increase these contributions.

Many individuals will spend a significant portion of their career as low earners, so any periods of higher earnings are unlikely to provide sufficient savings for their retirement. For example, in the case of an 18 year old low earning woman who does not achieve qualifications higher than a GCSE, she is projected to spend 22 years as a low earner across her working life.(5)(6)

Some potential new policies may benefit persistent low earners, such as non-contingent employer contributions, or sidecar savings. Non-contingent employer contributions would see an employee enrolled in a pension scheme, receiving employer contributions, without having to reduce their own take home pay. Sidecar savings create a mechanism by which pension contributions would be paid in to a separate, accessible savings account first, and only when this account reached a certain size, would they be paid into a conventional, harder-to-access pension pot.

John Upton, PPI Policy Analyst and lead author of the research series, commented: “Automatic enrolment started with the assumption that low earners may not opt out by themselves and needed a degree of protection, but this assumption appears to be shifting: they are excluded from Automatic Enrolment to a degree, but as thresholds reduce with inflation, more people are gradually brought into scope. As the Second Pensions Commission seeks to improve pensions adequacy, highlighting low earners as a high risk group, it will need to find the delicate balance between working life living standards and retirement living standards for low earners. As no single policy reform may fully counter all risks, it may be necessary to make the assumptions around the capacity for saving and opting out more explicit, so that extra protections for at-risk groups may follow.”

The findings show that mutual and cooperative insurers continue to strengthen their position within the global insurance industry, achieving the highest premium volume ever recorded while maintaining more than one-quarter of the worldwide insurance market.

Key findings from the Global Mutual Market Share 2026 report include:

The report highlights the continued strength of mutual insurers in many of the world's largest insurance markets. Mutual insurers hold market shares of 40% or more in countries including the United States, France and Germany, while accounting for more than one-quarter of the insurance market in 19 countries globally.

Commenting on the findings, Liz Green, CEO of ICMIF, said: "At a time when trust is increasingly hard won, these findings demonstrate why mutual and cooperative insurers continue to be trusted to deliver for their members, customers and communities.

“The record premium income achieved in 2024 is not simply a measure of financial performance. It reflects the enduring strength of a business model built on member ownership, long-term stewardship and service rather than short-term shareholder returns. Mutual insurers continue to demonstrate that commercial success and social purpose go hand in hand.

“In an environment shaped by economic uncertainty, technological disruption and changing customer expectations, the mutual sector continues to adapt, innovate and grow while remaining focused on creating long-term value for the people and communities it serves."

While the report highlights the sector's continued strength in established insurance markets, it also points to significant opportunities for mutual and cooperative insurers to expand their presence in emerging markets, where mutual insurance currently represents just 3.0% of total insurance premiums.

The Global Mutual Market Share report is published annually by ICMIF and is recognised as the leading source of comparative data on the size, performance and contribution of the global mutual and cooperative insurance sector. Alongside market share analysis, the report examines premium income, assets, employment, membership and policyholder data across life and non-life insurance markets worldwide.

Susannah Streeter, Chief Investment Strategist, Wealth Club: “The Footsie has been on the back foot in early trade as investors keep an eye on Middle East tensions, a stronger pound puts pressure on some listed multinationals, and investors assess the Burnham administration’s policies. A slightly more resilient snapshot of the UK labour market has lifted sterling, just as the Prime Minister unveiled the first significant cost-of-living intervention of his premiership. The abolition of VAT on household electricity bills from October should provide some welcome relief for households, although it will only make a modest dent in overall energy costs, amounting to around £45 per year for a typical bill payer. Investors will now be looking beyond the immediate announcement to how further support measures can be funded while keeping the public finances on a sustainable footing.

The latest snapshot of the UK labour market highlights the difficult inheritance facing the new government. While unemployment has edged slightly lower compared with the previous quarter, suggesting employers are hanging on to staff, the rise in the claimant count underlines that many families continue to feel the squeeze. Employment has largely stalled and economic inactivity remains stubbornly elevated, pointing to an economy that's proving a little more resilient than expected but still sluggish. Sterling has nudged higher, an indication that investors are increasingly pricing in two further interest rate hikes from the Bank of England after figures showed the jobs market is holding up better than forecast.

That resilience, however, comes with a sting in the tail for the Burnham administration. If borrowing costs stay higher for longer, it will make the task of repairing the public finances while delivering further cost-of-living support even more difficult. Cutting VAT on electricity bills is a relatively inexpensive intervention compared with lifting the threshold for the first rate of income tax, but if the government wants to go further it will have to find room within already tight fiscal constraints and raise money elsewhere. Burnham's government will also need to find ways to lift productivity and coax more people back into the workforce if it wants to generate the stronger economic growth needed to relieve pressure on households and the Treasury alike.

A little more hope appears to be creeping in about the potential for negotiations to resume in the Middle East and act as a circuit breaker to escalating violence. Amid rumours that talks could restart this week, Brent crude has shifted a little lower to around $88 a barrel, and some optimism has returned to financial markets. Stocks in Asia largely lifted, with Japan's Nikkei clawing back some of its losses. But as investors assess the shifting expectations about where the conflict could go next, European indices look set for a flat start to trading.

Fractious trade policy is once again front and centre, with the US slapping 50% tariffs on some Canadian goods, underlining how brinkmanship remains a key feature of the presidency. The higher duties are set to be imposed within 30 days, in retaliation for what Trump claims is unequal treatment of US cars, dairy and alcohol. Futures markets indicate that Toronto's main exchange will open in the red, as investors react to this fresh deterioration in bilateral relations. But Prime Minister Mark Carney appears sanguine, deflecting the threats with a vow to intensify negotiations. There will be expectations that the US will roll back after some concessions are made, but it's a reminder of the Trump administration's bullish treatment of both former friends and long-time foes.

There's been a cautious welcome on markets to John Healey's appointment as Chancellor, taking control of the UK's fragile finances. Former Defence Secretary John Healey was a Treasury minister in Gordon Brown's government, and there's an expectation he'll very much be playing second fiddle to Andy Burnham when it comes to leading economic policy, singing from the same song sheet on decentralisation and backing regional industrial bases. But the immediate focus will be on the military implications of his appointment. Having resigned from government over the lack of a roadmap to meet NATO commitments of defence spending reaching 3% of GDP by 2030, attention will now turn to how quickly he might be able to find more funding to bolster the defence investment plan. Shares in military contractors BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, QinetiQ and Melrose were all higher in early trade, indicating investors expect the chancellor will be a bigger backer of defence than his predecessor. There will be cautious optimism to his appointment across the armed services. Having spent months making the case for higher military spending, Healey has a detailed understanding of the capability gaps facing the armed forces and the demands of a far more dangerous geopolitical environment. It comes at a highly timely moment, given reports of live-firing weapons exercises by a Russian warship off the Plymouth coast. The service chiefs are likely to believe they now have a Chancellor who understands their concerns more fully and may be more willing than his predecessor to set out a credible pathway towards spending 3% of GDP on defence.

However, he's also inherited responsibility for balancing the nation's books, and the question will be whether he can reconcile his long-standing support for higher military spending with the government's fiscal rules, which require debt to be falling as a share of the economy by the end of the Parliament. Finding room for defence while also funding infrastructure, social care, employment programmes and measures to boost growth could prove one of the defining challenges of his time at the Treasury.

It also puts the question of tax rises back front and centre to fund these demanding requirements, especially with the VAT cut to energy bills, with speculation about increases in capital gains tax and further changes to the top rate of income tax likely to intensify. However, investors should resist the urge to drastically alter portfolios in an attempt to get ahead of potential tax changes. History shows us that rashly switching and ditching assets based on speculation can lead to unnecessary transaction costs, trigger premature tax liabilities and, crucially, miss out on the power of long-term compounding. Timing the market is hugely difficult, and time in the market is what counts most. Nevertheless, it may be worth trimming positions which have performed spectacularly well to lock in gains. For those looking to shelter their portfolios, it is well worth exploring government-backed, tax-efficient life rafts like Venture Capital Trusts (VCTs), the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS), and the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS).”

PSIG supports the aim of reducing unnecessary delays and friction where transfers are low risk. However, the group has identified several areas where further clarity and refinement are needed, including the proposed employment link warning sign, the approach to identifying lower-risk receiving schemes, oversight of SSAS arrangements, and ensuring the regulations remain effective as scam methods continue to evolve.

PSIG Chair Margaret Snowdon OBE said: “The key challenge will be getting the balance right - removing unnecessary delays for legitimate transfers while maintaining the protections needed to prevent fraud and protect savers. Members should not face unnecessary delays when making genuine transfers, but trustees and administrators must retain the ability to identify risks and act when something does not look right.

“The proposed employment link warning sign is an important area where we believe changes are needed. As currently drafted, it may not always work as intended. A genuine employee could trigger a warning sign because they do not meet certain salary or contribution thresholds, while someone without a genuine employment link may avoid the same scrutiny by providing only partial evidence. We recommend that a red flag should apply wherever the employment link remains unproven, whether all, some or none of the required evidence has been provided.

“We also support giving trustees greater discretion where they believe a transfer is low risk, but there needs to be greater clarity around the proposed concept of a ‘reputable scheme’. Trustees should be able to carry out further due diligence where they consider it necessary, without first having to make a potentially subjective judgement about a scheme’s reputation.”

Snowdon continued: “The risks facing pension savers continue to evolve. We are seeing increasing use of impersonation fraud, clone firms, artificial intelligence-generated evidence, social media investment scams, crypto-linked pension liberation and newly established occupational schemes with little or no genuine employment activity. The regulatory framework needs to keep pace with these developments. The employment link alone will not address the wider vulnerabilities in the SSAS market. We support proportionate additional oversight of these arrangements, including consideration of a requirement for professional trustee involvement.

“We also need to ensure that any approach to lower-risk scheme lists is properly governed, regularly reviewed and supported by clear accountability, while recognising the practical challenges and responsibilities involved in maintaining them. The proposed exemption from repeat MoneyHelper guidance also needs careful consideration. While it may be appropriate where a member’s circumstances have not changed and the guidance remains relevant, a subsequent transfer could involve a different receiving scheme, different warning signs or a materially different level of risk. The regulations should ensure that members receive appropriate guidance and safeguards where the circumstances and risks warrant it.”

Snowdon concluded: “Ultimately, these reforms could help deliver a faster and more effective transfer process. But the test of success is not simply whether transfers happen more quickly, it is whether they can happen safely. Legitimate members should not face unnecessary barriers, but fraudsters should not be given new opportunities to exploit the system -make it easier for good transfers to proceed and harder for bad actors to succeed.”

That’s according to Gallagher’s CDC Report, which examines industry confidence levels, the barriers to implementation and the path to scale for CDC pension schemes in the UK.

The research, which surveyed 250 employers, trustees and pensions professionals, arrives at a time when multi-employer CDC schemes are nearing regulatory approval in the UK.

Interest in the CDC model is growing, with around half of respondents (52%) saying they would be comfortable being an early adopter.

The findings indicate that larger employers may be better placed to assess CDC at this stage. Beyond the natural barrier of cost, they are more likely to have specialist pensions support and strong internal governance structures. Smaller companies may face greater barriers around governance capacity and internal resource.

Notably, many organisations are hesitant to move first when it comes to adopting CDC. When asked what would increase their confidence, respondents cited clearer regulatory guidance (39%), proven results from early adopters (38%) and positive feedback from unions or employee representatives (37%).

Andre Clarke, Senior Vice President, Investment Consulting at Gallagher, said: “In a very short period, the conversation around CDC has moved forward at blinding speed. The Royal Mail scheme gave the UK market its first live example. It is no longer possible to think of CDC as a niche actuarial idea; it is stepping into the spotlight, demanding close attention.”

“However, our research paints a more nuanced picture. There’s a clear difference between exploring CDC as an option and taking the steps to introduce it into an existing benefits package. Employers and trustees want to see more test cases, and they want greater clarity on regulation and delivery. Then they want to understand what it really means for their specific workforce. It is here where an experienced consultant can help firms assess their options in the CDC market and decide which arrangements could suit their workforce best.”

Sector-wide arrangements also saw significant interest, with 86% saying they would find a sector-wide CDC scheme appealing. The findings point to a preference for scalable CDC models that can be put into action across a broader range of organisations.

The largest group (36%) see both models as equally appealing, suggesting many organisations are open-minded about how CDC could be delivered in practice and recognise that their roles are not mutually exclusive.

David Piltz, CEO of Gallagher's Benefits & HR Consulting Division, says: “For decades, employers and pension professionals have struggled with one question: how can we offer good retirement outcomes for employees without putting too much risk on the balance sheet? A Collective Defined Contribution scheme offers a potential alternative. It is an aspirational model, and one that could offer more predictable outcomes than a traditional Defined Contribution scheme and without the high-risk guarantees of a Defined Benefit plan.

“The challenge is converting that interest into adoption. If a firm is unsure about CDC, it’s likely due to a mix of factors: a low number of test cases, competing business priorities, and a hesitance to step out first. The science, regulations, and guidance are in place, but the industry needs to communicate CDC in a way that everyone can understand. That is the only way that the sector will translate the growing interest into this emerging area into real and tangible action.”

“Burnham has inherited a difficult economic backdrop: subdued growth, stubbornly high borrowing, a sizeable national debt and rising debt-servicing costs, alongside unresolved questions over how to fund higher defence spending. The arithmetic leaves limited room for manoeuvre. Higher taxes, spending cuts, more borrowing - or some combination of the three - could all be on the table.

“That matters because the UK already has a highly progressive income tax system, with a relatively small group of higher earners shouldering a disproportionate share of the burden. Our analysis shows that someone earning £150,000 earns 3.8 times the median full-time salary yet pays more than 10 times as much in income tax."

“Frozen tax thresholds have also steadily pushed more people into higher tax bands without a corresponding improvement in their standard of living. This is particularly relevant for HENRYs - high earners, not rich yet - who may look affluent on paper but are often juggling hefty mortgages, childcare costs, pension contributions and other financial commitments.

“So, while the government may want to pursue a different economic strategy, the question is how much more pressure can be placed on the same relatively narrow group of taxpayers. The key issue is not simply whether taxes will rise, but who will ultimately be expected to pay for Burnham’s economic agenda - and whether those already carrying a disproportionate share of the burden have much more capacity left.”

Hannah English, Head of DC Corporate, Hymans Robertson (member of the consortium), says:“From an employer perspective, the how matters as much as the how much. A clear roadmap will be vital. Long lead times and gradual escalation will be essential. Reform must also be simple to operate as complexity creates cost, compliance risk and confusion. Employers are more likely to engage positively if the direction of travel is clear and the system is hard to get wrong. Most importantly, adequacy is not just a pensions issue. It is a workforce issue. Better pensions can support financial resilience, workforce planning and productivity. They help people make better decisions about when and how they retire. Higher contributions are likely to be part of the solution, but they are not the whole answer. Every pound saved needs to work harder through strong value for money, effective investment and better retirement support. There’s no cost-free route to higher retirement incomes. This report from the IFS makes it clear that the question for the Second Pensions Commission is how to improve outcomes while balancing affordability for workers, employers and the Exchequer. If pension reform gets those things right, it can become a success not just for savers, but for employers and the wider economy too.”

Catherine Foot, Director of the Standard Life Centre for the Future of Retirement said: "The Pensions Commission's interim report rightly highlighted the scale of the retirement savings challenge facing millions of workers. Automatic enrolment has transformed pension participation, but current minimum contribution levels are unlikely to deliver adequate retirement incomes for many people, making further reform essential. Today's report reinforces the case for action. It shows that higher pension contributions and broader pension coverage could help significantly more people achieve adequate retirement incomes, particularly younger generations who have longer to benefit from reforms. In particular it correctly highlights the earnings thresholds limit the amount people save and potentially give them a false sense they are saving more than they are. We believe the long-term ambition should be to remove these limits and increase minimum contributions from 8% to 12%, delivered through a clear, phased and affordable roadmap. At the same time, reforms must recognise that people's financial circumstances change throughout their working lives. Any package should balance better retirement outcomes with the financial pressures households face today. Policymakers should therefore explore greater flexibility within the system, including temporary opt-down or pause mechanisms, allowing people facing short-term financial pressures to remain engaged with pension saving rather than opting out altogether. By combining higher contributions, broader coverage and greater flexibility, we can build on the success of automatic enrolment and create a system that improves retirement outcomes while remaining realistic about the challenges many households and employers face today."

IFS Retirement Savings Consortium Report

“Inheritance Tax continues to generate historically high tax revenues for the Treasury as frozen thresholds and rising asset values bring more families within scope of the tax. The Autumn Budget 2025 extended the threshold freeze until 2031, while the scope of IHT continues to expand following reforms to Business Property Relief that came into effect on 6 April 2026 and with unused pension pots set to fall within the scope of Inheritance Tax from April 2027. While these measures are increasing tax receipts, it is making the UK a less competitive destination for entrepreneurs, investors and internationally mobile wealthy individuals, who make an outsized contribution to the tax take.”

While higher earners would need to save broadly the same cash amount, the impact on affordability is very different. Someone earning £80,000 would still need to save around £74 a month, but because of their higher income and greater tax relief, this equates to around 1.1% of salary, compared with 2.3% for someone on median earnings.

Once pension tax relief is taken into account, the impact on take-home pay falls to around £53 a month (1.7% of salary) for the median earner using salary sacrifice, compared with £43 a month (0.6% of salary) for an £80,000 earner.

Martin Willis, Partner at Barnett Waddingham, part of Howden, said: "People have understandably focused on the £12,500 they'd need to replace if they still wanted to retire at 67. But for many households, the more immediate question is what it means for their monthly finances. Our modelling suggests a typical 55-year-old on average earnings would need to find around an extra £74 every month - and if that's difficult for someone on average earnings, it'll be even harder for those on lower incomes.

"Everyone loses broadly the same year's State Pension, but replacing it isn't equally affordable. The cash amount may be similar, but it takes a much bigger bite out of the budget for someone on average earnings than it does for a higher earner. That's why giving people plenty of notice of any changes is so important."

"This also assumes people will continue working and contributing to their pension until they retire, although for some that might not be realistic. Whether because of ill health, caring responsibilities or physical demands of their job and anyone hoping to retire earlier or reduce their hours will have even less time to plug the gap. Even relatively small increases to pension contributions can make a meaningful difference if they're made early enough, whereas leaving it until the final years before retirement makes catching up far more difficult."

“The prize is significant. Based on LCP analysis, we estimate that FTSE 100 companies with UK DB schemes currently each have an average surplus of around £500 million. That represents a substantial pool of capital that could be put to productive use while maintaining strong member security. The next step must be meaningful engagement with industry, so that reforms are workable in practice and deliver good overall outcomes. ”

Laura Amin, LCP Partner and Head of DB Consolidation, commented: “Although it was disappointing to see earlier this week the delay in the timeframe for delivering draft superfund regulations to Q1 next year, we expect the government will want to drive forward delivering the new rules. Their focus should be on creating a viable superfund market which works effectively for providers, their investors, trustees and sponsors and which can deliver attractive solutions for members with suitable long-term protections in place.

“With at least three new superfunds seeking assessment this year, we expect more superfunds to be operating from next year. This will mean greater competition with increased choice for trustees and sponsors as they consider the best long-term solution for their schemes.”

Charlie Finch, Partner in LCP’s Pension Risk Transfer team, commented: “The Pension Schemes Act has laid the foundations for greater innovation through surplus-sharing and a permanent superfund regime. The priority now must be implementing these reforms in a practical way to give trustees and sponsors a range of viable endgame options.

“It’s also pleasing to see wider industry innovation such as the “sponsor swap” solution where Stagecoach transferred their £1.2bn scheme to Aberdeen – the recent Ministerial statement rightly supported such innovation and we would encourage any regulatory intervention to be considered carefully to ensure an appropriate balance between facilitating innovation and maintaining suitable guardrails to protect members.

“At the same time, policymakers need to recognise the enormous success of the UK buy-in market, with the insurance regime providing robust long-term security at highly competitive pricing for schemes of all sizes. This will continue to be the endgame solution of choice for many schemes. The policy objective should not be to favour one approach over another, but to create a stable framework where insurance, superfunds, run-on and other innovative strategies can all flourish, giving trustees the confidence to choose the option that best meets their members' needs.

“Getting that balance right will be critical if the UK is to unlock the full potential of the £1 trillion plus of DB pension assets and create one of the world's most innovative and competitive pension endgame markets.”

Jon Forsyth, LCP Partner and Head of Pensions Developments commented: “There is a huge amount on Trustees’ and sponsors’ agendas, and some very important strategic decisions for them to make and changes to implement. On the DB side alone, we have major developments on surplus and endgame, more to come from DWP and TPR on Trusteeship, a way forward on the Virgin Media issue, PPF regulations to come, and changes to inheritance tax with additional administrative requirements. And that’s before we add the ongoing Pensions Commission and the big challenges with pensions adequacy, plus of course the myriad developments in DC and CDC.

“There are great opportunities to improve things for schemes, members, and sponsors, and we very much support the government pushing ahead with the current reforms. But it is equally important to take a long-term view when it comes to pensions policy, and to consult meaningfully with industry on any future changes. Working towards a more stable, long-term policy framework for pensions should be the name of the game.”