The current system of pension tax relief is "unfairly skewed" leaving those on modest earnings with little reward for saving into a pension, John Lawson has said.
Aviva's head of pension policy said the whole system needed overhauling to make it fairer for low and moderate earners. He said the Chancellor could have used yesterday's Autumn Statement to tackle the issue, however it failed to materialise.
He said high earners and members of defined benefit pension schemes currently get the most out of pension tax relief.
"It needs to be more fairly distributed," he said. "It is not realistic for more money to be go on tax relief. And I don't think it should be cut any further, bearing in mind the recent level of cuts that too would be unfair.
"The main thing that needs to change is the distribution towards low earners and people in defined contribution schemes."
Lawson said pension tax relief redistribution could be seen as a "reward" for low-earners remaining in automatic enrolment schemes.
"More effort should be made to encourage and reward people who are saving into pensions while on modest means."
The Pensions Policy Institute suggested earlier this year a single rate tax relief system could be introduced to make the system more balanced. It also said the current set up was poorly understood by savers.
Elsewhere, Lawson said the government's decision to increase the speed at which the state pension age rises is not going fast enough.
"Life expectancy is improving at twice the rate of the state pension age increase. The rise [announced by the Chancellor yesterday] is half the rate required."
However, he said overall acceptance that age 65 is no long the magic number people work towards is a good thing for both savers and advisers.
"We need to be more realistic about retirement age.
"Government policy has always been short-term when it comes to pensions. The fact that they are prepared to look forward to the 2040s is a good thing.
"People need that time horizon. It helps us communicate with people as well, it makes it easier for advisers as well. ‘Age 65' should have always been a moving target."
Two global vehicles
'Further plug advice gap'
Must appoint separate CEOs and boards
Advisers do come out well
Will report to Mark Till