Equitable Life (Payments) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury
Wednesday 10th November 2010

(13 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mark Hoban Portrait Mr Hoban
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point, which gives me the opportunity to clarify the make-up of the £1.5 billion. The figure includes the full cost of the losses to with-profits annuitants—approximately £620 million—which will be made through regular payments. However, taking into account the pressures on the public purse, the Treasury could allocate only £1 billion over the first three years of the spending review. That will cover two things: the first three years of payments to with-profits annuitants, and lump-sum payments to all other policyholders and to the estates of deceased with-profits annuitants.

It is important to start to pay off with-profits annuitants’ losses quickly, alongside the lump-sum payments to other policyholders. About £225 million of the £1 billion is for with-profits annuitants and their estates, leaving approximately £775 million for lump-sum payments to non-with-profits annuitants. The Towers Watson estimate of £620 million for with-profits annuity losses leaves approximately £395 million for the rest of the WPA losses from 2014-15 onwards. Those who are quicker at mental arithmetic than me will have worked out that the total comes to about £1.4 billion. The balance is a contingency, because the payments to with-profits annuitants are based on their longevity. We hope that they live long and healthy lives, and that buffer is set aside to cover this need. That is how the maths works out.

John Redwood Portrait Mr John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Could my hon. Friend provide further clarification on the tax status of those receiving such payments?

Mark Hoban Portrait Mr Hoban
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend pre-empts a point that I was going to refer to in the clause stand part debate. He gives me an opportunity to say now that the payments will be free of tax.

--- Later in debate ---
Mark Hoban Portrait Mr Hoban
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. It is difficult to calculate that because, as he will recognise, the tax status of Equitable Life policyholders varies. Some pay no tax, some pay tax at the 20p rate, some pay tax at the 40p rate, and some may even pay tax at the 50p rate. The value will depend on their tax status, and we do not have sufficient access to taxpayers’ records to be able to match Equitable Life policyholders with their tax records, so we cannot calculate the benefit. However, he will appreciate that it could provide a significant benefit to some policyholders, and I hope that they will recognise that when they receive their payments. We have sought to be as generous as possible in the tax and benefits treatment for that purpose.

John Redwood Portrait Mr Redwood
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for an important improvement to the scheme, which I am sure is welcomed.

Mark Hoban Portrait Mr Hoban
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my right hon. Friend. When designing the scheme, we considered seriously how to ensure that policyholders would benefit as much as possible from the payments. If we had been less generous, we would have been accused of clawing back money through the back door, and that is an impression that we want to dispel.