There are a couple of significant benefits to the member of recycling:
Whilst income payments from pension plans are treated as taxable income, this can be effectively offset by the tax relief given when the payment is re-invested into the pension plan.
It is worth noting however that the HMRC do not classify income from pension plans as relevant UK earnings, and therefore the member would need to have relevant UK earnings from another source so that they are eligible for tax relief on the re-invested payments.
Our article on Member contributions - tax relief and annual allowance explains all about tax relief on member contributions.
Unfortunately, to an extent it is. HMRC introduced recycling rules in 2006 as it was concerned that recycling could abuse the generous tax relief system. Anyone who falls foul of these rules could face unauthorised payment tax charges.
HMRC outline specific conditions to determine whether a recycling event has taken place.
Basically, if the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following conditions then bad things can happen. If the answer is 'no' to any of the questions below, then recycling of the tax-free cash hasn't happened.
OK, so let's take each of the above conditions in turn and look at them a little closer.
Click on a heading below to learn more:
All payments of tax-free lump sums in a 12-month period need to be counted. This may include payments from more than one pension plan.
Is the total of all tax-free lump sum payments over the 12-month period more than 1% of the lifetime allowance*? If it's not, then recycling hasn't happened.
*Please note that from 6 April 2015, this will be replaced with a fixed amount of £7,500.
Because of the payment of the tax-free lump sums, have the contributions increased by more than 30% of what might have been expected?
At first hand this appears to be quite a vague condition. However, it's actually very specific. HMRC can look at the contributions paid in the remainder of the tax year after the point at which the tax-free cash is taken plus up to two subsequent tax years. This would then be compared with the contributions paid in the similar period before the tax-free cash was taken. That's potentially five tax years in total. This applies to member, employer and third party contributions.
Recycling may not apply if a member's contributions increased because they are linked to salary, bonus, overtime or commission as long as the basis on which the pension contribution is based hasn't changed.
The increase in additional contributions is only significant if the total amount is more than 30% of the tax-free lump sums. If contributions are paid to more than one pension scheme, it's the total of all contributions that need to be looked at.
If the member borrows money to pay the contributions or pays the contributions out of savings then uses the tax-free lump sum to pay off the loan or top up the savings, recycling will still be deemed to have occurred. This of course, assumes that all other conditions have been met.
If the answer to all the above conditions is 'yes', then it's going to all come down to the last condition. This is perhaps the hardest condition to interpret but let's have a stab at it.
In its simplest sense, pre-planning means that there was an intention right from the very beginning to use the tax-free cash as a way of significantly increasing pension contributions. To satisfy this condition, such pre-planning must take place at the 'relevant time'.
If a decision is made to use the tax-free lump sum to significantly increase contributions, this is pre-planning. The 'relevant time' is when the tax-free lump sum is taken. Even if the contributions increase before the tax-free lump sum is taken this can be pre-planning. In this case the 'relevant time' is when the contributions are increased.
If a member is caught by the recycling rules, the amount of the tax-free lump sum is regarded as an unauthorised payment and any of the following charges may be applied:
However not all of the charges are automatic.
The surcharge is levied if the total unauthorised payments to a pension scheme member in a 12-month period exceed 25% of their pension rights. This brings the total charge payable by the pension scheme member up to 55% of the tax-free lump sum.
The scheme sanction charge (payable by the scheme administrator) can be reduced by the lower of:
A scheme could also be de-registered if the total amount of unauthorised payments made exceeds 40% of the scheme's assets. If contributions are increased around retirement age, it is important that a member makes sure that HMRC can't claim that recycling has taken place.
It's worth looking at a couple of examples of where recycling does and doesn't apply.
Where recycling doesn't apply
Jim takes a tax-free lump sum of £9,000 on 1 May 2014 with the intention of using it to pay significantly greater contributions to a registered pension scheme.
The amount of the tax-free lump sum doesn't exceed 1% of the lifetime allowance and no other lump sums have been paid to Jim in the last 12 months. The recycling rule isn't triggered as the amount of the tax-free lump sums is less than 1% of the lifetime allowance.
Where recycling does apply
On 1 June 2014 Jim takes another tax-free lump sum of £10,000 in order to further significantly increase contributions. The increased contributions amount to £10,000 and are more than 30% of the contributions paid in the period starting two tax years before the tax-free cash is taken.
As Jim has received another tax-free lump sum within the previous 12 months (the lump sum of £9,000 taken on 1 May 2014), the £10,000 has to be added to the previous lump sum. The total amount exceeds 1% of the lifetime allowance so the recycling rule is triggered. Here's why:
The recycling rule applies to the second lump sum, resulting in a deemed unauthorised payment of £10,000.
All references to taxation are based on our understanding of current taxation law and practice and may be affected by future changes in legislation and the individual circumstances of the investor.
In addition, the information provided is also based on our current understanding of the relevant Finance acts.
Published 23 January 2007
Updated 21 March 2014