Pensions Insight: December 2025

This month’s insight covers the Autumn Budget pension measures, TPR’s regulatory intervention report on the longstanding Box Clever saga and its market oversight report on member data, the latest on SPA increase compensation for women born in the 1950s, confirmation that there will be a zero conventional PPF levy in 2026/27 and a quick round-up of other key pensions news including a raft of PASA materials.

The Pensions Regulator

Regulatory intervention report following settlement of case and transfer of members to ITV Pension Scheme

On 6 November 2025, the Pensions Regulator (TPR) published its regulatory intervention report, the ‘last chapter’ in the long-standing Box Clever saga. This case dates back to the 2003 administration of the Box Clever failed joint venture between Granada and Thorn (TV rental companies) and the financial support direction (FSD) that TPR’s Determination Panel issued in 2011 against five ITV companies, following the ITV group’s acquisition of the Granada group. There followed various court proceedings relating to TPR’s use of an FSD culminating in an Upper Tribunal decision in 2018 that TPR was reasonable to order ITV to provide financial support for the Box Clever scheme. The targets appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal on the grounds of whether the association and connection test was met, retrospectivity and the Upper Tribunal’s approach to reasonableness. In 2019, the Court of Appeal dismissed the case. Subsequently, in 2020 TPR issued FSDs to ITV and associated entities which failing agreement were followed by imposition of a contribution notice for the scheme’s full buy-out deficit (estimated as £77m). 

TPR can issue an FSD to an employer of an occupational pension scheme or a ‘connected or associated person’ if it considers that: 

• at the ‘relevant time’ (as determined by TPR within a 24-month lookback period from when a warning notice is issued); 
• the employer in relation to a scheme was either a service company or insufficiently resourced; and 
• TPR concludes, having regard to certain specified matters, that it is reasonable to impose the FSD.

TPR confirmed back in July 2024 that it had reached a proposed settlement with ITV in respect of Box Clever pension scheme members and, following finalisation of the agreement, a bulk transfer of all 2,800 members to the ITV Pension Scheme was completed on 1 October 2025. Those members who have received Pension Protection Fund (PPF) levels of benefits since 2014 will be provided with full scheme benefits (including relevant back payments scheduled to be made in 2026). Both the PPF and the Box Clever scheme trustees supported the agreement. TPR’s regulatory action has now ended.

TPR ‘encourages’ a reading of the report to see how TPR uses its FSD powers; this being the first significant matter considered by both the Upper Tribunal and the Court of Appeal and the first instance of a contribution notice being issued under section 47 of the Pensions Act 2004 for failure to comply with an FSD. The case provides some useful general takeaways on FSDs and TPR’s enforcement powers.

General takeaways

The report emphasises that TPR is willing to engage in complicated litigation over many years and settle cases in appropriate circumstances.

Retrospectivity (Court of Appeal, 2019): TPR can take into account matters relating to before the Pensions Act 2004 when assessing the reasonableness of an FSD.

Discrimination (Upper Tribunal, 2018): There being other potential targets who are not acted against does not prevent an FSD from being reasonable. 

Reasonableness factors (Court of Appeal, 2019): Every reasonableness factor does not have to be present, nor is the legislative list exhaustive. However, all relevant factors must be considered and given appropriate weight. It is not necessary for a target to have received a benefit.

Scope of TPR’s case (Court of Appeal, 2015: Upper Tribunal, 2016): The Upper Tribunal can decide whether a new case can be heard by it that was not previously presented to the Determinations Panel (the independent committee of TPR that decides whether to exercise certain TPR powers including in relation to FSDs and contribution notices – appeals are made to the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery) Chamber).

Member data: press release, market oversight report and updated guidance

TPR’s 18 November 2025 press release ‘urges’ trustees to make sure their scheme’s member data is dashboards-ready and emphasises the general importance of scheme data, this being schemes’ “most important ‘strategic asset’”. This latest warning comes off the back of TPR’s market oversight report, produced following TPR’s 2024-25 dashboards data engagement with hundreds of schemes, mostly those with 1,000+ members. TPR has also produced updated member data guidance. 

Conclusions from regulatory initiative applicable to all schemes

• Data items: Although schemes were following TPR standard data items for common data (unique identifiers such as name and date of birth), there were inconsistencies with use of standard items for conditional data (scheme-specific information needed to calculate benefits and process events).
• Data score assessments: There were inconsistent data score assessments and calculations and, although some reports were of high-quality others were patchy in detail.
• Improvement plans: TPR has identified a tendency for improvement plans to be ‘informal or fragmented’ with ‘vague timescales’.
• Value data: There have been improvements on matching data but gaps on benefit calculation data – TPR will engage on this area next. 
• Trustee involvement: There are some good governance practices amongst trustees, for example, use of sub-committees and quarterly consideration. However, others are relying too heavily on administrators and not taking as active a role as they should.

Guidance

The updated member data guidance pulls together all of TPR’s data-related guidance and includes ‘clearer expectations’ and best practice examples. In summary:

• Trustees are responsible for member data and retain responsibility even if their duties are delegated to a third party. They should satisfy themselves that administrators have adequate controls and processes, receive regular data reports (at least once a year), consider data regularly, include it where need be on the risk register, and provide accurate scores on the scheme return. 
• The need for a data review exercise should be assessed annually – the guidance refers to most schemes needing to “carry out a review at least once a year”.
• Trustees should also have a data management strategy, adequate improvement plans where required and “challenge service providers where standards are not met”.

Next steps

TPR will expand its data quality initiative to other schemes within scope of dashboards in 2026. Schemes should ensure they are adequately assessing and maintaining data and that improvement plans are sufficiently robust. Trustees should be prepared to demonstrate compliance with legal and regulatory requirements as part of TPR’s 2026 work – those that cannot risk potential regulatory intervention.

Additional DB and hybrid scheme return questions for 2026

There will be two new questions on the 2026 scheme return - additional details required on unquoted and private equity assets for tier 3 schemes (those with assets of £1.5bn or more) and new questions for LDI schemes on pre-agreed asset sale plans for collateral calls made in response to significant market events. 

Blog confirms TPR has updated its Pledge to Combat Pension Scams on fifth anniversary

TPR’s 27 November 2025 blog confirms that its Pledge to Combat Pension Scams has been updated including self-certification stage wording clarification and simplification of the reporting process details. TPR has also seconded a TPR intelligence expert to the City of London Police to analyse Action Fraud reports. The blog also notes that Action Fraud report analysis highlights that pension savers over 55 are at a higher risk of being scammed. 

Cases

Government to retake its December 2024 decision not to provide financial redress to women born in the 1950s

The Government will ‘retake’ its December 2024 decision not to set up a financial compensation scheme for those women born in the 1950s whom the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (the PHSO) concluded should be financially compensated because the Government failed to provide accurate, adequate and timely details of state pension age (SPA) increases. The Women Against State Pension Equality campaign group applied for a judicial review of this decision and, as part of these proceedings, produced a 2007 DWP evaluation of the effectiveness of Automatic Pension Forecast letters which the Government has decided it should consider. The written statement emphasises, however, that “retaking this decision should not be taken as an indication that Government will necessarily decide that it should award financial redress”. 

The Pension Protection Fund (the PPF)

PPF consultation on 2026/27 PPF levy

The PPF’s 17 November 2025 press release confirms that it plans to keep a zero conventional PPF levy in 2026/27, provided that the levy flexibility provisions in the Pension Schemes Bill get passed into law. It will, if necessary, leave the maximum time before confirming the position. If it is not certain that the levy provisions will become law by this time; the PPF will use last year’s levy estimate and rules which include the flexibility for the PPF to recalculate the 2026/27 levy back down to zero.

The PPF also plans to keep an Alternative Covenant Scheme levy with improvements and a medium-term wider review of methodology.

The consultation which closes on 5 January 2026 can be accessed here. 

Other news

PASA guidance on AI and digital transformation and industry paper on data protection

On 28 October 2025, the Pensions Administration Standards Association (PASA) published ten pages of guidance on the risks and opportunities of AI use in administration. It: reiterates the importance of high quality data; and sets out examples of the use of AI in administration (chatbots, member engagement analytics, fraud detection, risk management, automation, data extraction, investment management, member feedback analysis and know-how management), and how risks might be mitigated (understand the capabilities and limitations, ensure data privacy and security, mitigate data bias and discrimination, transparent decision-making, human review and oversight, and consider scheme-specific applications).

PASA has also published November 2025 guidance on Delivering Digital Transformation. It is the first in a three part series – this one is on Setting Strong Foundations. Helps schemes “assess their current technological maturity, identify opportunities and plan their next steps”. Part two will be published in January 2026 and will look at actionable strategies and planning frameworks. 

On 1 December 2025, PASA published an industry paper on six key areas of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 and associated Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) materials relevant to pension schemes: 

• Automated decision making – the shift from a prohibition-based model to a risk-based framework which removes some of the previous restrictions whilst maintaining specific protections such as transparency, human intervention and contest rights;
• The new Digital Verification Services and Attributes Trust Framework which can be used by schemes to carry out identity checks;
• Recognised legitimate interests, the new lawful basis for processing personal data. This includes safeguarding vulnerable individuals which might be relevant for pension schemes;
• Confirmation that subject access requests only have to be reasonable and proportionate and the introduction of a stop the clock process for timescales where clarification of a request is needed;
• The new right for data subjects to complain to data controllers if they believe that there has been an infringement of their rights under the UK General Data Protection Regulation or the Data Protection Act 2018. Complaints must be acknowledged within 30 days, investigated and responded to without undue delay and with a right for complainants to escalate their complaint to the ICO (rather than the Pensions Ombudsman);
• Looking ahead.

Updated PCST Code of Practice

The Association of Professional Pension Trustees has published the final version of its Code of Practice for professional corporate sole trustees. The PSCT Code sets out best practice for professional trustee firms that act as a sole trustee and will be effective from 1 January 2026.