Skip to content

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

By Level Chan and Dante Manna

Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings options for moderate income employees of small or medium sized employers in Canada. Several provinces have since followed suit with their own versions of the legislation, using the Federal model as a guide. Nova Scotia was the first and so far the only Atlantic Canadian province to join the ‘pool party’ when it passed Bill No. 38, Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) in October 2014. While not yet in force, we recap the major features of the PRPP Act and profile new portability options that were added in December 2015 under Nova Scotia Bill No. 126.

Purpose of PRPPs

The purpose of PRPPs is to provide a low-cost, regulated pension option that is available to workers who are not currently under a pension plan or are self-employed. This legislation was developed by the Federal government in 2012 to provide another source of retirement income for Canadians (in addition to OAS/GIS, CPP/QPP, and RPPs/RRSPs). Pooling is intended to make pensions available to smaller employers while keeping the costs of administration low.

Nova Scotia PRPP Harmonization

The PRPP Act largely incorporates the Federal Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (Canada), with minor modifications for the province. This is similar to what the legislatures in British Columbia, Ontario, and Saskatchewan have done.1 The main differences between the Nova Scotia and Federal Acts are procedural matters regarding withdrawal and transfer of funds and division of assets upon breakdown of a spousal relationship. Hence the Nova Scotia PRPPs will match the major facets of those other jurisdictions’ regimes.

Key Features of PRPPs 

The PRPP Act adopts the following key PRPP features of the Federal Act:

  • Employer participation is voluntary. Employers are not required to set up a PRPP.
  • PRPPs are defined contribution plans.
  • Administrative duties are carried out by licensed third party administrators rather than employers.
  • Licensed administrators must provide the pension for “low cost”.
  • An employer joins or sets up a plan by entering into a contract with an administrator that sets the amounts and frequency of employer and employee contributions.
  • Employer contributions are voluntary and may be set at zero.
  • Employees may also set their contribution rate to zero, or they can opt out entirely by notifying the employer within 60 days of receiving notice of their membership in the plan.

The Nova Scotia PRPP Act is similar to Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Ontario’s Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act. Like those acts, the Nova Scotia PRPP Act will apply to provincial employees, federal employees in the province who are not covered by a federally-governed PRPP, and the self-employed.

Multilateral Agreement

On July 15, 2015, Finance Canada published its proposal for the Multilateral Agreement Respecting Pooled Registered Pension Plans, an agreement designed to streamline administration and supervision of PRPPs, particularly those which operate in multiple jurisdictions. Any province that has passed PRPP legislation, including Nova Scotia, may become a signatory.

Under the terms of the proposed agreement, all signatory provinces would agree as follows:

  • Federally licensed administrators are exempt from having to be licensed in the province or provinces in which they operate.
  • Licensed administrators of VRSPs (the Quebec version of PRPPs) would not be required to obtain federal administration licenses.
  • The Federal Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) is the regulatory authority for federally licensed administrators and all federally regulated PRPPs.
  • The Federal PRPP Act applies to federally registered PRPPs that operate in the province, subject to minor exceptions in matters such as definition of spouse and death benefits.

The proposed agreement contains no provisions for federal or interprovincial recognition of provincially licensed PRPP administrators.

The release date of the Multilateral Agreement signaled the start of a 45-day public comment period. It has yet to be released in final form.

Transfers from PRPPs

In mid-November of 2015, amendments to the Nova Scotia PRPP Act were introduced (Bill 126). This Bill received Royal Assent on December 18, 2015 (S.N.S. 2015, c. 48). The amendments introduced two new transfer options to the PRPP Act:

  • Funds in PRPPs can be transferred to retirement savings arrangements that are prescribed under the Pension Benefits Act. This makes it possible for funds to be transferred from a PRPP to a locked-in vehicle, such as a locked-in retirement account.
  • A process was established for transferring funds as a result of division of assets (for example as the result of a relationship breakdown) from the PRPP to the plan of the member’s spouse upon division of asset funds in the member’s account. They may be transferred to a PRPP account of that person’s spouse, to the spouse’s pension plan, to a prescribed retirement savings arrangement for the spouse, or to purchase a life annuity for the spouse.

In addition, Bill 126 features ancillary amendments to allow for the process of transferring funds from one account to another.

The PRPP Act is sparsely drafted, leaving many aspects of PRPPs in Nova Scotia to be prescribed by regulations. Draft PRPP Act regulations were published for an open comment period between September 9 and October 15, 2015, but have yet to be finalized. Like the PRPP Act, the draft regulation is closely harmonized to its federal counterpart. For more details, see our previous update. The finalization of those regulations will open the door to Nova Scotia employers to offer PRPPs to employees. The bottom line – Nova Scotia is getting closer but is not (quite) there.


1 The provinces of Alberta and Quebec, by contrast, have introduced stand-alone legislation. In Quebec, enrollment in VRSPs (that province’s PRPPs) is mandatory for certain employers. Alberta generally follows the Federal scheme but with its own legislation.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top