Life expectancy UK 81, US 79, France 83 and Japan 85. Until we see the numbers, it is difficult but for the tax issue to know how good this is. I do not see how a retiree aged 75 could benefit from this if the age of 79 is the limit. The question I have is this: Assuming someone takes the cash out option and choose to receive 10 installments over 10 years. After having received the first payment, would the remaining sum grow over the next 9 years and at what interest rate? As far as transferring the cash out payment to another type of pension fund, I have allready asked the question to tax authorities in France.

I would like to add some considerations, but first things first – and yes, many of you are fully aware, but seemingly insufficiently enough the pension plan administration: the spirit and good faith of the plan is to manage it well, to administer the plan well and to protect the integrity and rights(and duties) in the standard slb spirit and ethics compliance, we are all so proud of and was defines the slb spirit. Everyone is fully aware of the Clause XI. Review of Annual Benefits in the Pension Plan rules and guidelines. While no guarantees are stipulated, the clause in itself has an intention and meaning of good spirit and purpose. By not applying this clause now by almost 2 decades, everyone including the plan administrators should very well aware, that ignoring the clause ends in a catastrophic outcome for most pensioners. Is this the intention of the current slb management?

The spirit of the cash-out proposal has been put together with months long work by slb employees, and with the guidance, governance and thrust of WTW, at high costs and profit for WTW. No wonder slb is now very keen to push this out and make it happen. We are suggested to give up a defined benefit plan to adopt a self-managed defined contribution plan of a particular construct. While each country has detailed and reference mortality statistics published, up to the finest details, slb is proposing US mortality statistics, knowing that such numbers are among the lowest in the 1rst world – this obviously is very profitable for slb and very bad for non-US citizens. You might lose millions your money. Previously was no risk, except slb not providing COLA, but certainly no investment risks. Now all investment risk is with yourself. The applied discount rate is not published, but obviously can be calculated within seconds upon the cash-out value is given on 15th June. Such discount rate must be “regained” at double rates to reflect common tax rates in non-tax haven countries. Is this an easy task? Even 8-11% yearly won’t match this challenge easily, but at full CCC rated risk, junk bonds as such. slb is A+ rated, but proposed this to exchange to CCC rating by electing such high yielding investments, which are required to balance the financial outcome of this deal.

I need again to go back to basics to our agreed and dearly supported Pension Plan, and bear in mind, our contribution were already paid from our taxed incomes – why is it so hyper-attracted for slb to push this deal? Someone has to pay in an imbalanced proposal, and this won’t be slb. The financial benefit for slb is huge, mega huge. only to be paid and funded by us.

The proposal makes however a lot of sense when following considerations are valid:
– early passing long before US statistical mortality rate of pensioner and also wife
– need of cash
– acceptance of loss of loan buying power against your life-long pension
– you are a true and outstanding master in investing, and you are achieving high yields every year until your last day of living, and your wife needs to be equally successful
– you live in a tax haven forever
– you are a very prudent and disciplined investor
– and sure this list can be extended with some other personal situation based condition

We shall know all on 15th June 2026. Yet, I am sad that this came up, as I do not see the true slb spirit in it.

Good luck to all of us!

Well said Norbert. There is nothing to add and you probably are not the only sad retiree.

Some comments on life expectancy and annuity rates from the above discussions:
Life expectancy figures for a pension should be based on the age of converting the pension fund to an annuity, not on life expectance at birth (deaths before reaching pension age). So for UK 2024 figures for Life expectancy at birth was 83.0 years for females and 79.1 years for males, but Life expectancy at age 65 years was 21.2 years (age 86.2) for females and 18.7 years (age 83.7) for males.
ISPP is a DC (Defined Contribution) and not a DB (Defined Benefit – typically based on final salary). My understanding is that upon taking the pension the individual value of your pension pot is used to ‘purchase’ an annuity which guarentees a pension payment for life. The annual amount paid will depend on the life expectancy rates used, spouse benefits (full or reduced), whether index linked etc. Hence using a country reference with a lower life epectancy, eg. USA, will lead to a slightly higher initial pension payment; so will lack of inflation indexing.
When a computation of the cash-out value of our pension pot is made, assuming the same USA reference is used, these same factors will work in reverse leading to a lower value than that of a European indexed linked pension with similar current annual payments.

For those of us in Europe the tax impact of a significant cash pay-out make this option extremely unlikely to be attractive (even if the funds are not repatriated). For UK actually much worse than the 40% indicated by David since it would hit the additional tax rate of 45% but also the tax treshold (amount before tax is due) is reduced to zero.

The real underlying issue is the poor spirit of SLB in ceasing pension upgrades for the past 15 years, which defintely was an expectation and a reality in the past. A moral rather than a legal obligations.

Hi David,

Regarding your point 3, a lump-sum payment from an offshore scheme encounters a tax minefield for UK residents. For what it’s worth, one possible pathway I’m investigating,

1. As a Bermuda master pension trust, HMRC could view ISPP as falling within the employer-financed retirement benefits scheme (EFRBS) framework

2. The buyout payment would then be treated as a “relevant lump sum” under section 574A ITEPA 2003

3. Section 574A(5A) ITEPA 2003 and the Finance Act 2017 grandfathering provisions preserve the pre-6 April 2017 tax treatment for rights accrued before that date

4. Foreign Service Relief under section 395B ITEPA 2003 would therefore continue to apply to those protected rights and, depending on an individual’s service record, could potentially reduce the UK tax charge to nil

5. The absence of pension upgrades, discretionary enhancements or further accrual since 2017 strengthens the argument that the lump sum is represented entirely by protected pre-2017 rights

The key issues appear to be the classification of ISPP itself and the classification of the buyout payment under UK tax law. This is very much a work in progress and not tax advice, but it suggests the position may be more nuanced than simply assuming a 40% or 45% UK tax charge.

Finally, it goes without saying that I would far rather receive a pension upgrade than wrestle with the above tax legislation.

Best,
Jonathan

Hello All,

@ David, thank you for setting up this thread. It’s an important topic, so it’s good to have a forum to share thoughts, concerns and information.

My main concern about taking the lump sum option is how it will be treated by HMRC (your point 3). Like you, I live in the UK.

@ Jonathan, it looks as if you’ve done quite a lot of research already on the way HMRC might view this lump sum payment. I would be really interested to hear what else you find out.

Regards,

Colin

@Jonathan – thanks for the information – please keep us informed. It does seem a bit pointless if we all individually see financial advisers though obviously that is the only way if you want any recourse in the event that the advice proves to be wrong.

As I understand it, the company had minimized it’s risks by investing the money set aside for the pension obligations in gilts that are calculated to return the money needed to provide the pensions. This means that us pensioners have less to fear that the company will go bankrupt and be unable to top-up the fund if needed, but the disadvantage that there is no investment upside and so no money to make discretionary increases for the effects of inflation.

One risk remained – and that was that the life expectancy of the pensioners might exceed the calculations – especially given that it sounds like they may have been using US mortality data, and also that life expectancies may be increasing with new medical breakthroughs, and the retirees may now comprise a greater proportion of office staff rather than type ‘A’ field employees who might have traditionally had shorter life expectancies.

So I think the advantage to the company of the buyout is that it removes even this risk, and also, for the people who remain in the pension scheme and ask “why isn’t there an increase for inflation” – they will be able to reply “Well – you were given the chance to take the money out and invest it yourself”.

I hope the company have taken into account that the people accepting the buyout may be those who expect a shorter life expectancy and thus that those that remain in the scheme may live longer than the average that had currently been used in the calculations.

Another group who might benefit from the buyout are people who do not need the entirety of their pension and wish to pass what is unspent on to descendants.

Hello David,

I saw your post on LinkedIn which said:

“Apparently the SLB scheme is almost identical to the Shell scheme and a number of UK tax specialists understand the rules surrounding return of funds.”

Do you happen to have contact details for any of the UK tax specialists who have this knowledge? If you do, could you please share them?

Regards,

Colin

My calculation (if correct) suggests they are using a 4.5% discount rate to calculate the lump sum buyout amount.

The most annoying thing for me, was to realize how close I was to the US life expectancy. That is a good reminder to enjoy life and spend time with family, though that, I am sure was not the intent of SLB by offering a lump sum. I will have a financial advisor look at these numbers, but it is all a good reminder to enjoy time with our friends and families, to have a nice glass of wine and to have dessert 😉

I will be curious to see other people’s posts here following their analysis. I realize that everyone’s situation is different, but still, it will be interesting to see if a consensus emerges.

Well Said, Michael! Time…keeps on tickin’….

I’m looking into commercial annuities available in the US market (a very competitive market today). We are seeing payouts from 8 to 15% higher than those in the ISPP for SOME people. In addition, these tools give one more flexibility in terms of free withdrawals (often 10% per year with no penalty) and beneficiaries, etc. It’s worthwhile to look into commercially-available options for some people.
(Full disclosure I do retirement planning and have access to all the independent advisor products available in the U.S.)

I am confused as to how to access the data. It looks like having a cell phone with an additional App is required. This is the message I get: “Please open the authenticator app downloaded during registration from your registered mobile device”. Yet, when logging onto the Alumni website, there is also “TWO FACTOR AUTHENTICATION” and it lands on email. Cell phones are not the most dependable items and I am not sure where to obtain the App.
Thanks for letting me know.

Charles: I found that confusing too. I kept waiting for a code to come over. But, you might already have the Google Authenticator on your phone. If not, download the Google Authenticator from the app store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/google-authenticator/id388497605

Very poor offer. It is about 50% less than the minimum most expert calculations predict. Might be good for people in poor health or needs cash.

I send this to slboption@wtwco.com as I am not able to see the presentation live. Anybody knows how???

###########################################################################################
Good Morning,

Can this information session be downloaded / watched to a later time? I am not able to see it live.

Regards,

Gerhard Wolfschuetz

ℹ️ Information Session

The SLB Benefits team will host an information session on June 18, 2:00 P.M. Paris time, where they will present the details of the option. Registration to join is required.

A very poor offer:
The pension has not been adjusted for inflation or cost of living for over 15 years.
I am 80 years old,  my father died at 93 years, my mother is still alive, now 99. 
My wife will be 67 years old in September.  Her father died (accidental) at 87 years, her mother is still alive at 96 years.
When I retired, I took two options, first early retirement, and second the right of my wife to full pension when I pass away. In both cases a considerable reduction on my accrued pension rights at the time.
The chances that my wife will survive at least a further 15 years are possible.The offer I received  would not cover 5 years after taxes paid.

Furthermore, I cannot even have the option for an annual payment after 80 years, the choice affects my wife still 13 years away from 80

If the outcome of the offer has a low response by the pensioners, then SLB/pension should then have enough cash to make pension adjustment for inflation and cost of living.

All:
I have spoken with internationally-aware CPAs on this topic in the last couple of days, and done further investigations…

For any Schlumberger retiree who receives a pension from the ISPP the tax implications are the overriding factor. Any lump sum will be taxed at ordinary income tax rates in the US – and probably in most jurisdictions. This likely will push almost anyone into a nosebleed bracket meaning the government will get a big portion of it.

Also there is no provision to roll it into a qualified account, such as an IRA in the US.

For those who are tax domiciled in zero- or very low-tax jurisdictions, this buyout still may be an option.

Best to you with your decision.

Hi there,

Long shot. I am looking for a copy of Dowell Schlumberger International Staff Manual or International Staff Conditions of Employment from the 1980s or 1990s. Or any official document that states the employee and employer contribution to the ISPP.

I need as much information so I can deal with with the German tax office.

Any help would be appreciated.

my email gerhard.wolfschuetz@t-online.de

Thank You

Soy Residente en España y la oferta no se ajusta a la realidad, no se ha considerado ajustar el programa teniendo en cuenta la pérdida de dinero por inflación desde que inicias a recibir tu pensión, no ha habido incremento alguno, no recuerdo con exactitud cual fue la última vez, (Una oferta muy pobre,la pensión no se ha ajustado por inflación ni coste de vida en más de 15 años.) se ha tomado un solo país como edad para expectativa de vida. Los que ganamos en USD y vivimos en Europa no es nada rentable dado el tipo de cambio, la conversión de USD a Euros.
Con este plan de SLB se pierde entre 35% y 40% del valor actuarial.
Es la peor opción para un residente fiscal en España.
Deberia ajustarse a los números actuales y SLB debería pagar los impuestos en los paises de origen de cada miembro o incluirlo dentro del paquete.

I fully concur with the comments of Jeff Woodward from June 19. The assumptions used to calculate the lump sum (mortality tables, discount rate, etc.) are more or less irrelevant; the key issue is how the buyout would be taxed in your home country.

I consulted a tax lawyer specialized in deferred benefits for expats. The lump sum will most likely be treated as “normal income” and will be taxed at my marginal rate. That is 50% so half would go to the tax man. There is a small chance of qualifying for a special tax treatment at 10%, but that would require providing detailed documentation such as the Articles of Association of the Pension Fund, the Bylaws, the Employee Manuals in effect for all years that I participated, and more. Good luck obtaining those!

So for now my conclusion is to pass on the offer.

Hello all, can anyone help me with historical data for (say the last 10 years) on the year-on-year performance of the ISPS funds? And any recent information about their investment philosophy.

In regard to the pension buyout offer, the likely performance of the funds in the deferred options would be of great interest.

On a related issue, for UK tax resident persons, how would the deferred lump sum (i.e. transfer to the ISPS) be viewed by the tax authorities?

Totalmente de acuerdo con el comentario de René Vermeer. Si el resultado de la oferta tiene una baja respuesta por parte de los pensionistas, entonces SLB/pensiones debería disponer de suficiente efectivo para ajustar la pensión por inflación y coste de vida.

One thing to take into account. If you are 79 years old, you will receive at best the money in two installments. Therefore you will pay more taxes (possibly up to 20% more). In addition, assuming you are to receive 2 installments, you will only benefit from the average interest of 8% (from the ISPP) for one year only. A long term CD currently will give you 4.3% per year with one or two payments per year. For many of us, I am afraid it’s too little too late.

I had a meeting with my financial adviser today. He will be doing some extra ground work, and see how or if the taxes issued could be optimized in a way, having said that, I reviewed all the comments on this Buyout topic, heavy taxes seem to be the norm across many countries.

If there is any person living in France who is considering this option and managed to lower the +/- 40% to 45% taxes , please feel free to advise

erichollebecqur59@gmail.com

Please note my correct email address; erichollebecque59@gmail.com
Previous one given had a tipo

Hello all,

On 15 July, Clarity Global sent a reminder email containing two contradictory statements:
* Please submit your election through the SLB My Retirement Portal by 15 August 2026, even if you decide not to accept the option. Submitting your election early allows sufficient time for review and processing.
* IMPORTANT: Be reassured that if no action is taken, the current ISPP arrangement will remain unchanged by default.

I am going to ask slboption@wtwco.com to confirm this, but I would like to hear your thoughts on this nonsense.

Thanks in advance,
Rafael

(Sorry, I clicked submit twice and couldn’t delete the second one – I can only edit it.)

Hola Rafael,
Gracias por compartirlo. Coincido contigo el correo contiene una contradicción evidente. Por un lado dice que debemos enviar la elección antes del 15 de agosto incluso si decidimos no aceptar la opción, y por otro afirma que si no se toma ninguna acción, el ISPP se mantiene sin cambios por defecto. Ambas cosas no pueden ser ciertas a la vez. La interpretación correcta, según las propias reglas del plan, es que la opción es completamente voluntaria y que, si no se hace nada, la pensión sigue igual. Lo de “enviar la elección” parece más una recomendación administrativa que una obligación real. Me parece bien que consultes con slboption@wtwco.com para que lo confirmen oficialmente. Será útil para todos tener una aclaración definitiva.
Un abrazo,
José

Dear all,

Fyi, please find here below the response I got from the Schlumberger International Staff Pension Plan :

“Yes, we can confirm that if you do not make an election by the election deadline, your current ISPP arrangement will remain unchanged.

Participation in the Pension Exchange Option is entirely voluntary. If you choose not to proceed, or if you do not respond by the election deadline, you will continue to receive your ISPP benefits in accordance with the existing ISPP plan rules.

The reminder communication encourages members to submit an election through the SLB My Retirement Portal so that their decision is recorded. However, if no election is submitted, you will be treated as having opted out of the Pension Exchange Option and your current ISPP benefits will continue unchanged.”

Best regards,
Rafael

FIRST__This is a great forum and I’m happy to have found this link
and have read what other might do!

SECOND__Most of you have drawn the same conclusions as I did.
the BIG, NEGATIVE factor is TAXES! I always thought the USA
was punitive. What I’ve read here is that the Brits are even worse and the French
and Spanish are very strict on their taxes today!

So I’ll keep my pension as it is.

Dave Knox knox77@bellsouth.net

Thank you all for some very useful comments above for people deliberating about the buyout. I hope SLB informs our Alliance what percent of people actually decided to convert their pension to cash. I expect a minority of people will do so – 1. Those in poor health, wanting a cash payout now, even with punitive taxes applied in most countries. 2. Those in tax havens with some pressing need or opportunity for the cash now. Personally, I am leaving my pension as is. I like to balance my investment risks. I already have investments that I manage to support my retirement – so why add more risk and responsibility on myself? It is very convenient that someone else has to find the money each quarter to pay me. There are many risks to managing money that people do not consider. I could invest poorly, I could be defrauded or have accounts hacked. Many countries have huge debts that, within my lifetime, may experience financial crises, currency devaluation and asset seizures or trapped assets – not a great time to search for a safe place to invest! Thank you SLB for taking on the responsibility to manage all those risks!

Does anyone have/obtained the details of the Isle of Man Trust (Trust Deed and Rules of the Trust)?

For a complete analysis of the offer, my tax advisors in Portugal requested some information that BACO has already provided. However, the requested information regarding the Isle of Man Trust (Trust Deed and Rules of the Trust), from where the money will originate, is taking too long to be provided by BACO.

This is because the Isle of Man was, until recently, a tax haven. Adding to this is the fact that it’s managed from Dubai and the transfers are made from the UK to my account in the USA… and so the Portuguese authorities could interpret this as a money laundering scheme.

To qualify for the tax advantages available in Portugal on pensions (0-10% income tax), I need to prove very clearly that it’s a pension and not capital gains/money laundering (48% + 2.5% income tax…).
Therefore, without this information, the offer is meaningless.
Thanks!

Sooo… The saga for the ISPP “Trust Deed” adn “Rules of the Trust” went quite bad.
BACO closed my ticket requesting it on Monday 3rd AUG, after 10 days waiting, telling me to call (+442031240040) WTW help line to request the Documents.
That same Monday I call them (WTW) and they told me they will immediately send the documents, but sent (from slboption@wtwco.com) some copypasted part of the “About the Pension Option V3″” pdf.
I answered their mail, again requesting the documents, and waited until Wednesday and call again… This time they’ll look for my mail and answer next day the latest…
Today, Friday 7th Aug I call again… and they told me to call BACO… because they don’t have that documents.

Up to this point this offer is meaningless without hard documentation to evaluate the fiscal implication of the payment.
It seems to be intentionally low in value and not prepared correctly or in good faith.

And later they will use the mere existence of the offer to retort any reclamation of Pension increase; and that is the only value for them of the offer.

A good faith answer will be to offer a new Trust that increment the pension following the (combined US-EU) inflation to not lose value over time. Of course this will be an “actual” lower annual pension amount, but should maintain purchase power over time.
This should be completely voluntary to keep the actual Scheme or take the new one…
This didn’t produce fiscal complications to the retirees.

Regards
Facundo

Facts. The us pensions have not been adjusted for 16 years (just like the IS PP). I am among the happy few receiving also a US pension (about 300 us per month). If Schlumberger is so eager to eliminate pensions, how come there was no proposed cash out option for the US pensions. I get hit at 30% tax on my US pension which by any standard is very high. A cash out option could be of interest provided there is no taxes applied at the source.

Hello Charles,

I spent 4½ years in the US on an International Mobile assignment in the late 1990s, so I built up benefits in the SLB US Defined Benefit pension.

There was a buyout option offered for this pension in late 2019. I didn’t take up the offer because it wasn’t a very good financial offer (much like the current ISPP offer).

I started taking my US pension in June 2025, so have been receiving it for just over one year. I was hoping to see an increase this year, but none was given. Knowing there hasn’t been one for 16 years is really concerning.

It’s appalling that SLB does not seem to give any cost of living increases to their pensions.

On the topic of taxation of the SLB US pensions, I have some personal experience. If you want to contact me directly, I can share what I’ve learned.

Regards,

No increase or inflation adjustment has been factored into this offer; I have run a simulation analyzing what my annual salary would be in 2026 had the pensions been adjusted.

SLB does not use a fixed formula, but historically, internal adjustments have hovered between 2% and 3% annually—very similar to average U.S. inflation, which SLB typically uses as a benchmark.

For a simple and reasonable calculation, I used:

✔ Average annual inflation: 2.6%
✔ Period: 2013 → 2026 (13 years)
Cumulative inflation calculation
Approximate cumulative inflation: 39%

My pension adjusted to 2026
My estimated pension TODAY (2026): USD 48,450 per year

Year Annual pension Adjustment
2013 USD 34,856 Base
2026 USD 48,450 +39% accumulated inflation

This is the figure SLB should have chosen for its proposal. It represents the value lost from our pensions, and it is the bare minimum SLB should have considered.
I hope this proves helpful to the many people who, I imagine, must have gone through this exercise before deciding to accept the SLB offer.
All the best to all.

It would be interesting to get an idea of how Alliance members responded to the ISPP buyout offer and why.

I will start. I rejected the offer on the grounds that the lump sum itself was on the low side and, more importantly, would have been taxed as normal income at the marginal income tax rate (which for me is 50%).

So I will continue to draw the quarterly pension.

Hope to hear from others.

I agree with the last 2 comments. Tax would be too high on the lump sum. And the offer was not at all attractive to accept. Support to get real figures of contribution was impossible to get. one response came weeks after the closing date. Go figure!

It would be interesting what the cost of the excise was and the figure of acceptance.

Agree. Will we be able to see the numbers? What percentage accepted?