• Important notes & reminders
• In this newsletter...
• Tilman Friedrich's industry forum
• Compliment
• Benchmark: a note from Günter Pfeifer

• News from RFS
• Legal snippets
• Snippets for the pension fund industry
• Snippets of general interest
• And finally...

• Funds with January 2025 year-ends must submit their 2nd levy returns and payments by 25 February 2026;
• Funds with July 2025 year-ends must submit their 1st levy returns and payments by 25 February 2026; and
• Funds with January 2025 year-ends must submit their final levy returns and payments by 30 January 2025.

• Annemarie Nel CFP® (061-446 073)
• Christina Linge (061-446 075)
• Dennis Fabianus (061-446 098)

• Pension funds and the Access to Information Act
• Update on the Electronic Transactions Act
• Trusts in Namibia after the Trust Administration Act, 2023 – What practitioners should note

• What is your performance benchmark?
• Five surprises every retiree faces in their first year

• Helping your spouse preparing for life without you
• Things you should never include in your will

• The Standard outlines the required considerations in the investment process and the contents of an investment policy statement.

• Investment Policy Statement: Investing Institutions must maintain a detailed written investment policy covering investment objectives, asset allocation, decision-making roles, mandates, fees, and risk management.

• Board Accountability: The board is ultimately responsible for investment decisions and must act with care, skill, and in compliance with all laws and the Investing Institution’s investment policy statement.

• Decision-Making: Investment decisions must be made by qualified and authorised individuals, with expert advice sought when necessary.

• Investment Strategy: Strategic asset allocation must align with liabilities and risk tolerance, considering all major asset classes, including unlisted investments.

• Expertise: Boards must ensure they or their advisors have sufficient expertise, and contracts for experts must be competitive and market-related.

• Written Mandates: Boards must enter into formal written investment mandates with investment managers, which must be in accordance with Standard No. GEN.S.10.12 – Content of Investment Mandate.

• Shareholder Activism: Investing Institutions must have an explicit policy on whether it allows member activism and proxy voting, ensuring actions support long-term economic interests and avoid conflicts of interest.

• Performance & Benchmarks: Boards must set appropriate benchmarks, assess investment performance annually, and evaluate whether active management justifies the risks taken.

• Investment Oversight: Boards must maintain control over assets, ensure proper custodial arrangements, prevent unauthorised encumbrance, and keep assets separate and properly recorded.

• Reporting: Investing Institutions must publish their investment policy statement and the results of monitoring advisors, investment managers and other experts annually and explain any deviations from the investment policy statement to stakeholders, including NAMFISA.

What to do:

• Investing Institutions should review and update their investment policy statement to ensure it includes all required elements.

• Investing Institutions should formalise written investment mandates with managers, in line with Standard No GEN.S.10.12.

• Trustees should obtain training on fiduciary duties and legal compliance under the FIM Act.

GEN.S.10.12 The content of investment mandates

This Standard applies to every Investing Institution and every investment manager registered under the FIM Act that is a party to an investment mandate.

Summary:

• An investment mandate, and all amendments thereto and renewals thereof, must be in writing and must be signed by the Investing Institution and the investment manager before the mandate commences.

• The Investing Institution must assess the appropriateness and adequacy of the provisions of an investment mandate, considering key factors such as investment objectives, expected returns, and risk tolerance.

• The investment mandate must define the investment manager's duties, set out the asset classes in which investments may be made as well as limits thereto, and define benchmarks and valuation methods.

• The investment mandate must address responsibilities and obligations of investment managers and custodians, ensure asset separation, and performance of duties by investment managers in compliance with legal requirements.

• The investment mandate must stipulate the provision of monthly statements and quarterly portfolio reports to the Investing Institution, both reports complying with the minimum requirements set out in the standard.

• Investment mandates must outline fee structures and the responsibility for transaction-related costs.

• Risk management provisions in the investment mandate must include the possibility of loss by the Investing Institution, the policy of the investment manager on risk management and internal controls, the requirement of investment managers to acquire fidelity guarantee insurance, and procedures to be followed in the event of a breach of any of the terms of the investment mandate by either party.

What to do:

• Investing Institutions should draft or update existing written investment mandates in compliance with this Standard.

• Investing Institutions should assess service provider readiness in compliance with this Standard.

So, after a long wait, FIMA has finally become a reality. After more than two decades of drafts and revisions, starting with a total overhaul of the old Pensions Funds Act by local experts, all of which was discarded, and then adopting a new approach of calling in foreign experts, it is worth pausing to reflect on what this development means for our retirement industry.

FIMA remains a clear example of how first-world regulatory standards, however well-intentioned, can become misaligned with the realities of a small developing economy. Namibia’s retirement system is built almost entirely on voluntary employer-sponsored funds, not on compulsory state social security as seen elsewhere. When complex regulatory structures are introduced without adaptation to this context, the unintended costs are ultimately borne by ordinary pension fund members, whose interests the FIMA intends to protect. While the intention was to move from a compliance to a risk-based supervisory system, the industry is now facing over 600 compliance requirements, many of which have been sanctioned with multi-million-dollar penalties!

A longstanding concern has been the nature of consultation. NAMFISA considers its process thorough, yet many stakeholders found the engagement instructional rather than collaborative. Employers, whose voluntary participation has for decades provided the only meaningful social safety net for thousands of workers, were not meaningfully brought along. Under FIMA, they face heightened risks and professional liabilities, which are likely to discourage their continued involvement.

On preservation, the dramatic halt of regulation RF.R.5.10 remains fresh in public memory. One politically influential person single-handedly stopped the regulation in its tracks! In principle, some form of compulsory preservation is unavoidable and globally supported. But it must be proportionate, accommodate Namibia’s socioeconomic realities, and include sensible exceptions. A model similar to South Africa’s two-pot system is far more likely than the rigid version originally proposed by our foreign experts.

Internationally, there is no universal requirement for compulsory preservation in voluntary arrangements. Institutions such as the ILO, OECD, and World Bank endorse preservation as good practice, but they do not prescribe strict rules. Hard preservation regimes are rare, and several were temporarily relaxed during COVID-19.

NAMFISA’s mandate is important and necessary. But as FIMA continues its journey, the regulatory process would benefit greatly from deeper collaboration with those who build, fund, and operate the system every day. Namibia needs a framework that balances prudential oversight with practical, local realities; one that strengthens retirement provision rather than unintentionally weakening its foundations.

These are my personal views only; I hold no official position.

• 202504 – Principal Officer’s year-end message 

• Vincent Shimutwikeni on his election to the RFIN board of directors.
• Annemarie Nel on her appointment to the RFS Financial Advisers board of directors.
• Denise Kukero on her marriage to Stanley Kandji
• Richardene Samuels on her engagement to Elgeno Gamatham

• Your Retirement Fund made simple - Part 1: What it is, how it works and how your money grows;
• Real Member Journey: How a Retirement Fund Helped Ndapewa Build Her Future;
• Why Updating Your Beneficiaries Can Spare Your Family Unnecessary Hardship.

• RFS 2025.11-10 RFS Completing the Migration Journey – A New Era for Your Fund’s Administration.

• The record contains personal information of a third party.
• Disclosure would constitute an unreasonable invasion of privacy; and
• The information is medical, health-related, or biologically sensitive.

• Compile a financial “roadmap” listing all accounts, investments (local and offshore), insurance policies, and key documents.
• Store login details securely using a digital vault or password manager.
• Record contact details for advisors, administrators, and attorneys.

• Attend financial review meetings together.
• Ensure each partner understands how income is generated and will continue.
• Encourage questions and create financial familiarity.

• Reduce the number of bank accounts and policies.
• Consolidate investments on a single platform for visibility.
• Close unnecessary or duplicate products.

• Ensure income can continue smoothly through annuities, investments, or trusts.
• Structure withdrawals and products in a taxefficient manner.
• Confirm medical aid and insurance will remain funded.

• Keep accessible cash for immediate expenses.
• Plan explicitly for estate costs and taxes.
• Consider structures that provide quick payouts when needed.

• Write a personal “letter of wishes” outlining intentions and values.
• Explain why decisions were made to avoid uncertainty or conflict.

• Work with a financial planner who understands the family and can guide the surviving spouse over time.

• Funeral instructions – Wills are often read after the funeral; communicate these separately.
• Assets held in a trust – These are managed by trustees and cannot be bequeathed.
• Life policy proceeds with nominated beneficiaries – These pay directly to beneficiaries, bypassing the estate.
• Retirement fund benefits – Trustees allocate these under Section 37C of the Pension Funds Act.
• Jointly held assets in community of property – You can only bequeath your share.
• Unlawful or unreasonable conditions – Courts will disregard impractical or restrictive clauses.
• Digital assets governed by service agreements – Use separate instructions or digital legacy tools.
• Illegal or unenforceable bequests – These will not be honoured and may complicate administration.
• Pet care instructions without funding – Always provide financial support for pet care.
• Personal grievances or disputes – Keep your will objective to avoid family conflict.