Of course, markets are volatile when they are trying to price in the outcomes of new elections in Greece, parliamentary polls in France and the Irish referendum, against a backdrop of European summits. Political bargaining, opinion polls and votes will be the currency to analyse – often on a daily basis.

It is impossible to forecast the outcome of so many inter-linked events. For some time, Europe has faced a three pronged choice: muddle through, crisis or collapse. Collapse refers to the break up of EMU as we know it. Crisis refers to some form of Greek exit from EMU, possibly disorderly and possibly relatively contained by massive central bank support. The most likely scenario remains the first one – buying time and muddling through, which has been the case since the Euro-zone crisis erupted two years ago.

The pressure on governments to buy more time is considerable – not only because the risks of a major collapse are abundantly clear but also because, underneath the doom and gloom, two positive trends are appearing – small flames which need to be fanned into life.

The first is that the conditions are falling into place for growth in Germany, the engine room of EMU. It is beginning to experience wage pressures and a stronger property market as the recovery widens from exports and manufacturing. The second positive trend is the improvement in competitiveness in the rest of Europe. Some of this improvement is being forced on economies by government austerity packages, say in Ireland or Greece, while some is being voluntarily adopted, and say by workers agreeing to wage restraint and productivity improvements at companies across Europe. The adjustment process will last many more years, but a start has been made.

European policymakers face vital decisions at their summits in May and June. Compromise on all sides can buy time for the necessary economic adjustment needed across Europe to develop even further. Failing to do so would lead to even more disorderly markets than those seen in recent days.

Commentary provided by Standard Life Investments

In January, an Aviva report on the small and medium sized business (SME) sector, indicated that a significant proportion of small and medium-sized business owners were losing their enthusiasm and entrepreneurial drive, with 25% thinking of returning to work and 50% saying it is too tough to be a business owner in the current climate.

Aviva reported that a reduction in the money taken out of their own businesses for personal use may be a contributing factor, with half of those (50%) surveyed having reduced the money they draw over the past two years. Restaurant owners appeared to have suffered the biggest fall. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of those with businesses in the catering sector have seen a marked decline in the amount they withdraw from their business, with almost a third (29%) reporting a drop of between 20-25% and 10% reporting a drop of up to 50%. Half of those surveyed had not asked for funds from the bank.

The survey recorded that SMEs had experienced a tough end to 2011. Nearly half (43%) said 2011 was tougher than expected, an increase since June 2011 when over one third (37%) expressed this opinion. 50% of independent retailers and shop keepers questioned, said that 2011 was tougher than expected – the highest of any business sector surveyed. In January, than one in three (35%) believed that there was an increasing risk of an economic “double dip” recession, compared with 28% when Aviva asked the same question in June 2011.

A quarter of businesses (26%) expected the first half of the year to be difficult as people curbed their spending, with 24% of those surveyed expecting a decline in sales. Less than one in ten (7%) expected good sales in the first six months of 2012.

So now that we have had the 2012 Spring Budget and a variety of legislative reforms and measures coming through, the Finance Bill etc, is the SME sector feeling any better? Is an entrepreneurial spirit returning with late spring and early summer? Where are the green shoots? Do things look better now and will small businesses be lifted and entrepreneurs heartened and re-energised by the Queen’s Jubilee and the London Olympics? We can only wait and watch…

‘Interest rates keep annuities low.’

‘Pension companies still overcharging.’

‘Stock market falls wipe billions off pensions.’

There’s no doubt at all that if you’re in a final salary pension scheme – or you’re in a private scheme where the employer is matching your contributions – a pension is the best way of saving for your retirement.

The same comment applies if you’re a high earner who can take advantage of the very attractive tax breaks available on pensions – particularly if you can channel money into a Self Invested Personal Pension.

But what if you’re not? What if you’re an average self-employed person who needs to fund his or her own pension, or you’re in a company scheme where your employer doesn’t contribute? After reading headlines like the ones above, you’d be forgiven for thinking that a pension wasn’t worth it. And there’s no doubt that a significant proportion of the population would agree with you. A recent poll in the Guardian showed that despite successive Governments’ encouragement, 43.7% of people thought that pensions were no longer worthwhile.

As with many aspects of financial planning, there isn’t a definitive right and wrong answer: the answer is what suits you best, given your own individual circumstances. But to help you gain a more informed opinion, here are three arguments in favour of pensions, balanced by three arguments against them.

1. First of all, pensions enjoy generous tax breaks. Every £1 you contribute has another 25p of tax relief added to it. The pension fund grows largely tax free and when you come to take your benefits, up to 25% of the total fund can be taken as tax free cash.

2. Recent reforms have meant that there’s now much more flexibility when it comes to taking the benefits from your pension. It’s no longer the case that you have to buy an annuity and that’s it. For example, you can now ‘drawdown’ an income from your pension, meaning that some of your accumulated pension pot could even be passed on to your children.

3. Finally, the fact that money in a pension is “locked away” until you retire is a real advantage. However much you might want to, savings in a pension can’t be accessed for a new car or kitchen extension, something which isn’t the case with other forms of saving. If you’re the type of person who isn’t very good with money, this could help to protect your retirement savings.

But what about the other side of the coin? Here are three arguments which suggest that alternative forms of saving might be better than a pension.

1. Pensions are inflexible: they simply don’t fit in with the fact that many people have lots of different jobs during their working life. Far too many people end up with several different pensions which are hard to keep track of and even harder to value – meaning that accurate retirement planning becomes almost impossible.

2. Despite the tax breaks pensions enjoy, the charges levied by the providers, the fund managers and the salesmen significantly erode growth. And in many cases the default funds suggested by the product providers give poor returns.

3. Yes, the recent changes to pensions legislation give more flexibility at retirement – but the vast majority of people will still end up taking an annuity. At the moment low interest rates mean that annuities are very poor value for money – and that situation is likely to apply for some time to come.

There you have it – two completely contrasting points of view. Pensions will be an essential part of some people’s financial planning, but completely wrong for others. Two things though are undeniable: we’re all living longer – and some form of saving for your retirement is essential. It might be a pension: it might other routes such as an ISA or National Savings.

That’s why taking independent financial advice is so important. An IFA will be able to advise you on your existing pension scheme, look at pensions you might have from previous jobs and advise you on the method of saving that is right for you. Above all, he’ll be able to tell you how much you need to save and he’ll stress the one key point about saving for your retirement – doing nothing is not an option.

The loss for the financial year, up to the end of March, has long been expected and the forfeit Nintendo has had to pay for the 3DS’s post-launch price cut. For the full year they previously predicted losses equivalent to $800 million, but in the end they ‘only’ lost $532 million.

Things aren’t as simple as that sounds though and as usual Nintendo’s profits were primarily affected by the strength of the yen and the company’s many and various foreign assets. This time the markets bent in their favour and the smaller loss is largely due to favourable exchange rates, not better sales.

In fact the 3DS still managed to underperform slightly, and sold 13.53 million units worldwide rather than the 14 million predicted. And that’s after predictions were revised downwards from 16 million last April.

Nintendo’s net sales also fell just short of forecasts, at $647,652 instead of $660,000. That meant that sales were down 36 per cent overall, although much of that was due to the ailing Wii.

The markets seem to have taken to the news fairly well though, with Nintendo’s stock value rising slightly following the results.

The remaining problem for the 3DS seems to be America, which although it’s seen a great increase in 3DS sales since the price cut has still not taken to the new portable with the same enthusiasm as the DS. During the last financial year 4.67 million 3DS were sold in the US compared to 4.79 million in Japan and 4.06 million in the rest of the world (including Europe)

Next year Nintendo is predicting 3DS sales of 18.5 million, slightly more than this year, and combined Wii and Wii U sales of 10.5 million. The Wii sold 9.84 million this financial year, but with sales rapidly declining it’s hard to say how much of this new total Nintendo expects to be taken up by their new console.

Read more: http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/games/897326-nintendo-losses-less-than-expected-but-3ds-still-underperforms#ixzz1t8dJ9WMm

Each month’s announcement of a new measure was accompanied by a statement from David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury. Not a well known politician in the public domain, David Gauke clearly has a lead Treasury role in the field of policing the tax system.

In January 2012, the Government announced the introduction of new legislation to block a tax avoidance scheme involving post-cessation trade relief, which allowed a person to claim a deduction in their income tax calculation for certain payments and bad debts arising after a trade, profession or vocation had ceased.

In February, the Government announced steps to close two aggressive tax avoidance schemes recently disclosed to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) by a bank. The schemes, both of which are highly abusive, were designed to work around legislation that had been introduced in the past to block similar attempts at tax avoidance.

David Gauke said: “The Government wants to ensure that the tax system is fair for all and we will not allow those who seek to benefit from this aggressive avoidance to get an unfair advantage.

“We do not take today’s action lightly, but the potential tax loss from this scheme and the history of previous abuse in this area mean that this is a circumstance where the decision to change the law with full retrospective effect is justified. The Government is committed to creating a competitive tax system and we have brought in a range of corporate tax reforms, but we are absolutely clear that business must pay the tax they owe when they owe it.”

In March the Government acted to shut down a contrived and aggressive income tax avoidance scheme involving property business loss relief, and David Gauke said: “At a time when our top economic priority is reducing the deficit, it is unacceptable for anyone to try to avoid paying a fair share. Today’s action will not affect legitimate agricultural businesses, but by acting swiftly, the Government has prevented this scheme being used by people who want to escape paying the tax they owe. We won’t hesitate to close other avoidance schemes down as we become aware of them.”

At the end of March, when the Government published the Finance Bill, enacting tax measures previously announced, David Gauke had this to say: “This year’s Finance Bill shows just how committed the coalition Government is to rewarding work, simplifying the tax system and tackling the nation’s debts. The measures in this Bill will create a tax system which supports a strong economy and promotes a fair society. In other words, a tax system that works for Britain”.

Can we now expect further monthly announcements throughout the remainder of 2012, from David Gauke MP, accompanying yet more measures to close tax avoidance loopholes or to scupper tax avoidance schemes? The monthly message seems consistent, but can the Treasury provide the ammunition to support the political rhetoric?

This is nearly 100,000 more than the total number of babies forecast to be born in England and Wales in 2012. The increase in number of 65 year olds in Britain include those born in the latter half of 1946 and the first half of 1947, corresponding with the post-war spike in births – the ‘baby boomers’.

Now 65 year olds can expect to live another 23 years – until their late 80s – as they are living healthier, longer lives.

According to the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), in 1946 and the first half of 1947, 65 year olds could expect to live for only a further 13 years. Now the DWP tells us that there are more people aged over 60 than under 16; that ‘baby boomers’ have added an extra £2 billion to the bill for basic state pension; and that within the 10 local authority areas with the greatest number of older people, for every two people of working age, there is one person in retirement. By 2030, this could increase to four people working for every three retired in these council areas.

It has been commented that the ‘baby boomers’ are part of a golden generation, many of whom have been fortunate enough to reap benefits that younger generations will not – enjoying record house price inflation, company pension schemes and free education for themselves and their families, and with the prospect of living for nearly twice as long in retirement as the 65 year olds who were celebrating VE Day at the end of the war.

Despite this potential wealth, some 65 year olds are facing many years in poverty. Research conducted by think tank Oxford Economics and the ONS reveals that 23% of pensioners, around 2.5 million people, now officially live out an impoverished retirement.

The longer post retirement lifespan presents many challenges across the generations. With more people aged over 60 than there are under 16, there will be fewer young people to meet the costs of the elderly through direct taxation.

The Government is working hard to find solutions for this significant shift in demographics by introducing legislation to end the default age for retirement and extending the pensionable age for men and women.

Baby boomers now retiring are at risk of having their dreams for retirement shattered because of pension shortfalls, low returns on their investments and savings and ongoing responsibilities for children and parents. Having been ‘baby boomers’, and in order to gain a life that will still ‘boom and bloom’ in retirement, most 65 year olds now need to plan carefully how they will occupy their time, whilst maximising and maintaining their income to provide for all that they hoped for in their golden years!

He drew attention to a clear and present danger to our stability in the environment of economic uncertainty, with ongoing instability in the Eurozone and the UK’s large deficit remaining a crucial economic vulnerability. He said that carrying on as we were meant accepting that we spend even more on debt interest as a share of public spending, and that fiscal discipline is at the core of good Government and necessary also to deliver fairness.

He felt that the significance of the creation of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) was often underestimated in the UK debate. Historically in the UK, politicians had been tempted to adjust their economic forecasts to suit their policies. So when in autumn 2011 the OBR chose to substantially change its assessment of the damage done by the crisis, and of the spare capacity in our economy, the government could not sweep this uncomfortable judgement under the carpet.

The changes he announced focussed on the ability of Government departments to cushion the impact of external instability on our economy, and to address issues as they arise by being better prepared and from within their own budget capacity. He singled out two aspects that had to change. Firstly, that delegated departmental responsibility for spending could no longer be an excuse to hide information, close the books, or weaken financial management.

Secondly, from now on, all departments must monitor and share spending information, via consistent data, with the Treasury on a monthly basis – for too long financial management in Government has been stifled by poor information sharing and poor incentives. Under the new rules all departments should identify around 5% of their resource budget that could be re-prioritised if new pressures emerge or new policies have to be funded, so there was a shared understanding of how they could be paid for.

He affirmed that the new measures were not just a tweak to the Whitehall machine, rather a structural shift that would shape Government for decades to come. Never again would politicians be able to fiddle their forecasts in the face of the uncomfortable truth. He emphasised that the rules had been drawn up with finance directors from across Whitehall, and are designed to fundamentally change and improve financial management across all organisations spending public money.

It’s understandable that many people involved in a divorce want to minimise the number of meetings they attend and simply let the solicitors get on with sorting it out.

Unfortunately, trying to cut down on meetings could be a serious mistake. Divorces are not just about broken relationships, dividing up the family home and arranging custody of the children. Sadly, they’re about financial planning as well – and meetings with your independent financial adviser may turn out to be even more important than meetings with your solicitor.

Even if a couple have only been married for a relatively short time their financial affairs are likely to be inextricably linked. The mortgage will almost certainly be in joint names; they could well have shared protection policies and pension benefits may need taking into account when assets are divided.

Couples who have been together for longer – and an increasing number of people are now getting divorced in later life – will find the financial situation even more complex. Pensions will certainly be an area that requires specialist financial advice as some people, particularly high-earners in final salary pension schemes, will have built up pension funds which could well be worth more than the family home.

The new rules on pensions sharing in divorce have introduced a variety of options when it comes to dividing accumulated pension funds: they have also introduced the need for some seriously complicated (and potentially contentious) calculations, making expert advice absolutely essential.

All these areas mean independent financial advice can be crucial to making sure that any financial ‘damage’ you suffer as a result of a divorce is kept to a minimum, and that you emerge with a clear idea of the financial planning steps you need to take in the aftermath of the divorce.

Virtually no-one relishes going through divorce proceedings, but if you find yourself in that position, seeking out independent financial advice will be one of the wisest decisions you make. A good IFA will help make sure that you receive the best possible financial ‘result’ from the divorce and will work with your solicitor to see that everything runs as smoothly and painlessly as possible. Whether it’s helping to sort out the mortgage, reaching an equitable settlement of pension assets or any of the other complications that a divorce can throw up, an IFA will be on your side, constantly giving advice with your best interests at heart.

If you are – or fear that you might become – involved in divorce proceedings then please don’t hesitate to contact us. We’ll provide you with expert and wholly confidential advice – and do our best to make sure that the financial pain of your divorce is kept to an absolute minimum.

Many people will have to leave work early due to “either ill health or the inability for elderly workers to retain their jobs”, says Partnership’s Head of Corporate Affairs, Jim Boyd. “People involved in manual work will be at most risk as the rigours of hard manual work and shift work take their toll and the possibility that employers may not be able to offer them suitable alternative employment.”

While a proportion of people will drop out of the workforce, we will also see an increasing number of people working beyond age 65. Some will continue to work because they want to, but others will do it because they have to. What more can be done to sweeten the bitter pill of a longer working life?

The International Longevity Centre UK (ILCUK) recommends government could consider graduating the state pension (starting it at a lower level and gradually increasing it) or promote existing opportunities more widely, such as deferring the state pension. Research carried out by the ILCUK with Aviva found half of those (55%) polled would support a system where individuals could access part of their state pension early, in return for a lower pension when they retire in full.

But monetary inducements from the government are not enough to support the massive shift towards increased working lives. If people are working longer then employers will need to ensure roles are appropriate for an ageing workforce to combat the issues Boyd mentioned earlier. Chief executive at ILCUK, Baroness Greengross, says innovative working holds the key: “A target based work pattern is one way of incentivising older people, so they have certain tasks they’re asked to do and it’s more flexible as to how they do them.”

In addition, she expects older workers to have a greater say in the design of their jobs. But she adds: “You can’t necessarily do the same tasks. You can’t necessarily go up scaffolding in your 70s, for example. There are management and mentoring jobs. What we’ve tended to do is put people in a job and when they’ve reached 50, they stop being trained for another job. Employers need to go on retraining people so they can go on working in appropriate ways.”

Half the UK’s SME owners surveyed report that they have changed their retirement and succession plans as a result of the economic downturn. 42% of owners are expecting to carry on running their businesses for longer, delaying their retirement, while 7% expect to close or sell their business sooner.

More than half (59%) of those which expect to close early report that their turnover was down over the past year. Despite the financial crisis, almost half (47%) of owners are still confident they will be able to retire by the age of 65, but 18% expect to retire between the ages of 66 and 70 and 11% believe they will be running their business beyond their 70th birthday.

Pensions have been highlighted as a concern, with 28% of SME owners expecting to struggle in retirement. This proportion increases to 35% for the smallest businesses and drops to 20% for medium-sized firms.

When asked what their plans would be should they be unable to work due to illness or injury, 16% of respondents said that a lack of continuity arrangements would mean they would have to close their business. This increased to 48% among business owners who work alone. Three quarters (44%) of owners felt they could rely on fellow owners or staff in such circumstances. More than half (53%) admitted they had no insurance protection against illness or injury that would make them unable to work.

Professor Rebecca Taylor, Dean of The Open University Business School, said: “The economic downturn has created a number of serious challenges for Britain’s SME owners. Our latest survey findings suggest that many owners, particularly those with smaller businesses, are having to make significant changes as they plan for retirement and succession. While some owners may never have intended to give up the business, many now expect to work for much longer than they had envisaged.”

Sources: www.open.ac.uk/quarterly-survey