The firm said the events of the last few years, including the collapse of banks, a global recession and the offshore review, had ensured these two issues continue to be key priorities for advisers when selecting a QROPS provider and jurisdiction for their clients.
Investors protection was ranked third on the list of important criteria to consider, said Skandia, which suggested advisers should consider the protection available not only from the jurisdiction of the QROPS provider but from the jurisdiction of the underlying investment.
The availability of low or no inheritance tax ranked fourth, while the potential to receive a 30% tax-free cash sum allowance came in fifth. The requirement that the QROPS jurisdiction be English speaking and the perceived privacy of the jurisdiction ranked low on the list of essential criteria.
Skandia also found 73% of advisers preferred to use Isle of Man or Guernsey as the jurisdiction for a QROPS while Hong Kong came in as the third most popular.
“Pensions and therefore a QROPS are a long term investment and it is for this reason that it is so important to look at the jurisdiction that the investment is held in,” said Rachael Griffin, head of product law and financial planning at Skandia International.
“When making a decision on jurisdiction, a number of factors need to be considered such as financial security and of course the jurisdiction tax rules. For example it may be that the QROPS provider insists on a member being a local resident, or the particular pension rules of a jurisdiction insist on certain restrictions on investments."
