Therefore a coordinated, joined-up approach is required with the implementation of a “prescribed permitted investment list” that should then be implemented across Sipps, Ssas and Qrops.
The article quotes how we would like to protect against vulnerable people such as nurses transferring out of government-backed public sector schemes into exotic, esoteric investments and that it’s an issue the industry needs to protect against.
L&C is calling for a united approach and an industry consultation on what that “prescribed permitted investment list” should look like. From L&C’s point of view we think the list could include, for example, UK residential buy-to-let properties. However the point of the list is to protect Sipp investors against exotic, esoteric investments and therefore I was surprised to see the following sentence.
“Mr Wrench said the list, which could include esoteric overseas property investment such as Latin American teak forests, should be made available to the public on the HMRC’s website, and possibly on the websites of the FCA and The Pensions Regulator.”
However if we simply amended the words “esoteric overseas property investment such as Latin American teak forests,” and replaced them with “residential property” then I would be very happy with the article/copy as a whole.
I hope you appreciate that this sentence, as it stands, contradicts what was said earlier in the article in relation to the nurse and the overall message we were trying to convey.
Adam J Wrench
Head of product & business development
London & Colonial
Haywards Heath, West Sussex
