"At a time when families across the country face rising bills, higher costs and frozen wages, this gilded giveaway is the wrong priority."
Labour has announced that it would reverse the government's decision to abolish the pensions lifetime allowance if it got into power.
Announced in yesterday's Budget, Jeremy Hunt's changes to the pension allowance schemes are expected to cost the government £4bn over the next five years.
Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves told Sky News the decision was "the wrong priority, at the wrong time, for the wrong people".
She added: "The budget was a chance for the government to unlock Britain's promise and potential. But the only surprise was a £1bn pensions bung for the one per cent, a move that will widen the cost of living chasm.
"At a time when families across the country face rising bills, higher costs and frozen wages, this gilded giveaway is the wrong priority.
"That's why a Labour government will reverse this move. We urge the chancellor and the Conservative government to think again too."
Financial Reporter asked pension experts and financial advisers their thoughts on the decision to abolish the lifetime allowance and the differing opinions between the political parties.
Andrew Tully, technical director at Canada Life, commented: "You simply can’t play political ping pong with the pensions system. People plan for the long term and that relies on confidence the goal posts won’t constantly shift. We need cross party consensus on issues like this to deliver the stability required or else we seriously risk wrecking savers retirement plans.
“There are already restrictions in the system limiting pension savings and tax breaks - just let the annual allowance do the job its designed to do.”
Luke Thompson, director at PAB Wealth Management, said: "In recent years I have seen increasing numbers of middle earners who are either close to or have exceeded their lifetime allowance. The lifetime allowance has been frozen for several years and it effectively has acted as a stealth tax in the same way that stamp duty has done for many years.
"The change to the allowance should be seen as a positive in my opinion. It should take middle earners away from the potential of getting caught by the allowance as they near retirement the people we are talking about here are teachers, doctors and police officers. It's not the super rich who this change is going to affect.
"What the industry needs is clear guidance in this area. Not one party threatening to reverse a change if they are to gain power in eighteen months' time."
David Robinson, co-founder at Wildcat Law, added: "Removing the lifetime allowance only benefits the more wealthy and a very limited band of higher-earning blue light workers. It will do nothing to encourage people to work longer except perhaps a limited group of execs.
"It provides a great way to pass money to family IHT free, again something that disproportionately benefits the wealthiest. This is clearly a policy aimed at Tory heartland voters and Labour will just as clearly attempt to appeal to their core vote by declaring they will abolish it. In the meantime ordinary people will continue to struggle to save for a retirement that seems to be getting further and further away."
