Skip to content

Pension update – CAPSA releases consultation draft of CAP Guideline No. 3 for comment

Level Chan and Annelise Harnanan

Background

On May 13, 2022 the Canadian Association of Pension Supervisory Authorities (CAPSA) released and invited feedback on a Consultation Draft of revisions to CAPSA Guideline No. 3 – Guidelines for Capital Accumulation Plans (“CAPs”). The guidelines proposed in the Consultation Draft (the “Proposed Guidelines”) update the 2004 Guidelines for Capital Accumulations Plans (the “Original Guidelines”) issued by the Joint Forum of Financial Market Regulators. Below we discuss some of the significant changes proposed.

Updates to the definition of CAP

The Proposed Guidelines have been updated to incorporate new (and some existing) plan types that were not directly addressed in the Original Guidelines. According to the Original Guidelines, CAPs can be established by employers, trade unions, and associations. The Proposed Guidelines clarify that CAPs can also be established by boards of trustees and licensed administrators of Pooled Registered Pension Plans or Voluntary Retirement Savings Plans.

In addition, the Proposed Guidelines include the following workplace plans or arrangements as examples of CAPs:

  • Locked-in retirement accounts (LIRAs)
  • Registered retirement income funds (RRIFs)
  • Life income funds (LIFs)
  • Pooled Registered Pension Plans (PRPPs)
  • Voluntary Retirement Savings Plans (VRSPs)
  • Tax Free Savings Accounts (TFSAs)

Clarification of definition of CAP sponsor

The Proposed Guidelines provide the following breakdown of sponsors by common plan types:

  • Defined benefit contribution plans (DCPPs), Registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs), TFSAs and registered education savings plans (RESPs): the CAP sponsor may be the employer, former employer, trade union or other association.
  • RRIFs, LIFs and other retirement income drawdown options: the CAP sponsor may be the former employer, trade union or other association or a licensed administrator.
  • Deferred Profit Sharing Plans (DPSPs): the CAP sponsor is the employer.
  • PRPPs/VRSPs: the CAP sponsor is the licensed administrator.

Added factors that may affect CAP sponsor’s fiduciary duties

The Proposed Guidelines specify that all CAP sponsors have a common law fiduciary responsibility towards CAP members. The following are some of the factors that may affect the CAP sponsor’s fiduciary duties:

  • whether members contribute;
  • the discretionary authority of the sponsor to make decisions on behalf of CAP members;
  • the imbalance between the sponsor and members in their ability to negotiate terms with and access information from service providers; and
  • the varying levels of financial literacy among members.

Added recommendations

The Proposed Guidelines set out new recommendations for CAP sponsors.

Of note, they recommend that CAP sponsors establish and document a governance framework for the administration of the plan. The governance framework can include a description of the roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities of all participants in the plan, a communication process, a code of conduct for managing conflicts of interest, and a risk management framework. The Consultation Draft also recommends the establishment of a process for the regular review of the CAP’s governance process.  While becoming a more common requirement for administrators of more regulated plans like registered pension plans, this would expand the practices for sponsors who do not have such plans.

In addition, the Proposed Guidelines recommend that CAP sponsors establish automatic features as part of the CAP. These automatic features have the potential to increase participation in plans, encourage earlier and greater contributions, and encourage appropriate investment selection (which could lead to greater positive member outcomes).

Some proposed automatic features are:

  • automatic enrolment;
  • automatic escalation of CAP member contributions; and
  • default investment options.

The Proposed Guidelines also suggest that CAP sponsors consider entering into an agreement with (or referring members to) service providers who are qualified to provide investment planning. CAP sponsors that enter into such agreements should clearly communicate to CAP members the nature of the advice from the service provider, how the advisor is compensated, and who is paying for their services. The new guidelines also recommend that CAP sponsors develop criteria for selecting service providers. Factors to consider when establishing criteria include:

  • any conflict of interest of the service provider relative to other service providers, the CAP sponsor and its members that may impact the investment advice provided;
  • the quality of any asset allocation or financial planning model employed; and
  • knowledge of CAPs and related tax and regulatory requirements.

Other Changes

The Proposed Guidelines provide further detail regarding many of the recommendations in the Original Guidelines. For instance, the new guidelines suggest that CAP sponsors provide CAP members with additional information regarding the nature and features of the CAP, including:

  • enrolment information;
  • automatic features, if any;
  • how to terminate membership;
  • the decumulation options (as applicable) and their benefits and risks; and
  • how to withdraw or transfer money to available decumulation options and/or generate periodic retirement income.

The Proposed Guidelines also highlight that many of the decision-making tools that assist members in making investment decisions within the plan, such as asset allocation tools and retirement planning tools, require the use of assumptions. Consequently, the Proposed Guidelines suggest that plan sponsors periodically review these assumptions for reasonability. These assumptions should also be described and disclosed to plan members.

Finally, the Proposed Guidelines state that member statements (provided by CAP sponsors) should contain additional information, including:

  • notice of any upcoming requirement or ability for a CAP member to commence retirement income;
  • a reminder of any plan features that the member is not currently taking advantage of; and
  • information regarding the total level of fees and expenses payable by the member with respect to each investment option elected by the member.

Submitting feedback

CAPSA is seeking feedback on the Proposed Guidelines.  It requests that comments be as specific as possible and that they be provided by August 15, 2022. Please contact a member of our Pensions and Benefits team for assistance in making a submission.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions and Benefits group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

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

April 22, 2016

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…

Read More

Client Update: Perrin v Blake reaffirms the law on contributory negligence and recovery of damages

April 14, 2016

In a case where there is a contributorily negligent plaintiff and two or more negligent defendants, can the plaintiff recover 100% of her damages from any of the defendants? The answer in Nova Scotia is…

Read More

Client Update: Interest arbitration changes for New Brunswick postponed for further study

April 11, 2016

On Friday, the Province of New Brunswick announced that it would not proceed at this time with the recently proposed changes to binding interest arbitration. The Province announced that a joint labour management committee will be struck to examine…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top