Foxholer
Blackballed
Sorry, hadn't meant to be obtuse, I just did not think many people would be interested.
However, to answer your point; yes the reason for the ACT changes having much more effect upon Defined Benefit Schemes is largely due to different investment strategies.
The objective of such schemes is to be able to provide their members with a promised (not guaranteed) benefit at vesting. As this benefit will primarily be in the form of an income (pension) the Scheme's investment strategy will always have a high dependence upon those sectors that a have a relatively high yield such as gilts and "income" rather than "growth" equities.
Therefore, Mr Brown's changes had a dramatic effect since they reduced the yield on those equities and at a time when gilt yields were also falling.
Ah. That's more along the lines that I thought it was! Even so, the tax take is reportedly twice as initially forecast, so obviously hasn't deter investors, a sizable number of whom will actually be Pension related Funds!
From what I remember (it was 15-20 years ago) 'performance' of Fund Managers was measured against (long term?) Gilt rates, though one of the Fund Managers where I worked (in IT) apparently measured 'performance' differently - with Cocaine, Oranges and Autoerotic Asphyxiation according to the Red-Tops!