On 8 September 2026, The Pensions Regulator (TPR) published its new enforcement approach, which sets out how it will decide when to investigate and how to use its regulatory, civil and criminal powers. The publication follows TPR’s consultation in late 2025, which we discussed in a previous update. It confirms a more focused, agile and outcomes-driven model, with emphasis on early engagement, data-led supervision and proportionate but decisive intervention where member outcomes are at risk.
A more proactive regulator
TPR’s updated approach emphasises acting “early, decisively and proportionately”. Trustees should therefore expect TPR to engage quickly where it identifies issues that could develop into member harm, rather than waiting until harm has occurred. This reflects TPR’s wider shift towards market oversight and a more prudential style of regulation, with enforcement considered as part of a broader toolkit alongside supervision, guidance and engagement.
The Regulator has identified five strategic objectives for enforcement:
- Targeted enforcement that tackles the key risks and harms to members with the greatest impact;
- Impactful enforcement through assertiveness, agility and collaboration;
- Decisive action addressing non-compliance, regulatory breaches and economic crime;
- Enhanced transparency to influence behaviour, raise standards, build trust and support a safer pensions system; and
- Using data and technology to support enforcement.
These objectives are intended to help TPR focus its resources on cases where intervention is likely to have the greatest impact.
Impact, scale and complexity
When deciding whether to take enforcement action, TPR will assess cases by reference to three factors: impact, scale and complexity. High impact cases are those involving significant actual or potential harm, such as financial loss to members, damage to confidence in the pensions system or an opportunity to drive wider behavioural change. High scale cases may affect large numbers of members, schemes or employers, or point to a systemic risk. High complexity cases may involve difficult legal, technical or operational issues, multiple parties or specialist investigative work.
This framework will be particularly relevant for trustee boards dealing with issues such as poor administration, delayed contributions, weak governance, trustee misconduct, suspected scams or transactions that could adversely affect scheme security. TPR has indicated that high impact or high scale cases will generally be prioritised even where the underlying issue is relatively straightforward. Lower impact matters may still attract regulatory attention if they form part of a wider pattern or risk escalation.
What this means for trustees
For trustees, the updated approach reinforces the importance of identifying and addressing risks at an early stage. Good governance records, clear decision-making processes and timely escalation of issues will be important evidence that trustees have acted prudently and in members’ interests. Trustee boards should also be prepared to explain not only what action they took, but why that action was appropriate in the circumstances and how it supported good member outcomes.
Comment
TPR’s new enforcement approach does not fundamentally change trustees’ legal duties, but it does sharpen the context in which those duties will be assessed. The practical takeaway is that trustees should be able to demonstrate that they understand their scheme’s key risks, have appropriate controls in place, and are taking timely action where member outcomes could be affected. That will be important not only in avoiding enforcement, but in supporting better governance and member confidence more generally.
If you would like to discuss any of the issues raised in this blog, please contact a member of the pensions team or your usual Brodies contact.
Contributors
Partner
Senior Solicitor
