How PBGC Premium Increases Would Impact DB System

A new report finds that Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) premium increases would negatively impact the defined benefit (DB) pension system.

“Further PBGC Premium Increases Pose Greatest Threat to Pension System,” recently released by the American Benefits Council, finds that PBGC premiums are disproportionately high already and that further increases could force employers out of the DB plan system and erode the PBGC’s premium base.

The report’s authors point out that premiums have increased substantially over the past decade or so. Specifically, between 2005 and 2016, the flat rate or per-participant premium is expected to more than triple, from $19 to $64 per participant. In addition, the variable rate premium is expected to more than triple, from $9 per participant per $1,000 of unfunded vested benefits to at least $29 per participant, during the 2012 to 2016 time period.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

The increases translate to “real and significant liabilities for employers and ultimately for employees,” according to the report. While the rationale given for these premium increases, by Congress, is to avoid short-run liquidity problems, the report finds that the PBGC holds enough assets to pay all benefits to participants in terminated single-employer defined benefit pension plans for many years into the future.

In addition, the report finds that proposed premium increases would impose an estimated $2 billion per year of additional costs on employers in the single-employer DB plan system by fiscal year 2024. Over the short run, employers may address these costs by reducing capital investments or reducing dividends paid to shareholders.

“All available data refutes the notion that the PBGC’s single-employer guarantee program needs additional premium revenue,” contends American Benefits Council President James A. Klein, based in Washington, D.C. “The agency’s self-reported deficit belies the fact that PBGC’s assets and income far exceed its foreseeable payouts.”

The report also finds that:

  • Artificially low interest rates inflate purported underfunding of pension plans and the PBGC’s self-reported deficit. More than 96% of PBGC’s own reported deficit estimates relate to plans that have already exited the DB plan system. So, current sponsors of plans that pose no risk to the PBGC are forced to pay for the actions of employers who long ago terminated their plans.
  • Double counting of PBGC premium increases perpetuates long-term deficit spending. Policymakers perpetuate long-term deficit spending by, in effect, “double counting” premium increases (which can legally only be used by the PBGC) for general revenue purposes, thereby offsetting spending for completely unrelated matters.
  • The mandatory nature of the PBGC program effectively gives employers only one choice to avoid burdensome premiums, which is to exit the system by de-risking. Employers lack a competitive market for the service provided by the PBGC. The only options available to plan sponsors to reduce the burden of PBGC premiums are to reduce risk through buyouts and other measures, or exit the DB plan system completely.
  • The PBGC premiums represent taxes on employees. While employers face the statutory incidence of these taxes, the impact is ultimately felt by employees if the result is to compel employers to freeze or terminate the DB plan.

Klein adds, “The same abnormally and artificially low interest rates that are inadvertently punishing pension plan sponsors are also distorting the true financial position of the PBGC. We urge lawmakers to avoid a third consecutive year of premium hikes and focus instead on making it easier for employers to stay in the system.”

Revised figures about participant longevity, when combined with potential premium increases, could also negatively affect the DB plan system, according to the report. New mortality tables generated by the Society of Actuaries show that plan participants are living longer. Once the Internal Revenue Service approves these new tables, pension liabilities will significantly increase. As a result, the funding levels of DB plans will decrease, resulting in substantially increased funding requirements and higher PBGC variable rate premiums.

The full text of the report can be downloaded here. The American Benefits Council is a national trade association for companies concerned about federal legislation and regulations affecting all aspects of the employee benefits system.

Gens X and Y Educators Need Education About Retirement

Generations X and Y K-12 educators would prefer to learn about financial planning issues at work, and there are certain areas in which they need more education, a survey finds.

Presenting at the 2014 National Tax-Deferred Savings Association (NTSA) 403(b) Summit in Washington, D.C., Lisa Greenwald Schneider, research director at Greenwald & Associates, said contrary to the image the younger generations have of being very connected to the Internet and mobile products, the survey found Gens X and Y respondents regardless of whether they are educators or not prefer to get advice in person. But, more about the overall survey results will be revealed later. Nearly six in ten (58%) Gens X and Y educators reported they prefer to learn about financial planning issues at work, rather than on their own.

According to Schneider, they do preliminary research online and after receiving advice, they like to use online account management, “but for decision points, they want to talk to someone.” She said the generations (X=born between 1965 and 1980, Y=born between 1981 and 1999) also like online tools, but they then want advice about the results they get from the online tools. Nearly half (48%) of Gens X and Y educators believe a financial adviser or planner is a major source of information for retirement products, outranking the Internet by a wide margin (9%).

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

The study shows there’s much Gens X and Y educators need to learn. Sixty-three percent rank saving for retirement as very important (the highest percentage for all financial goals), and 60% of educators say they feel they are “on-track” or “ahead of schedule” with saving money for retirement. However, only 23% of educators in these generations have tried to calculate how much they need to save for retirement. “Do they know what ‘on-track’ means?” queried Schneider. She noted that educators were less likely than the total survey population to feel knowledgeable enough to save and invest for the long term.

Seventy-three percent of Gens X and Y educators reported having access to a defined contribution plan, such as a 401(k), 403(b) or 457 plan. But Schneider notes educators are more likely to have a pension, although more reported having a defined contribution plan than a pension. Schneider said she believes this indicates many educators in these generations do not know what kind of retirement plan they have. “There’s a real opportunity to educate the educators about how they should be saving in and out of the workplace,” she told Summit attendees.

When asked what would prompt them to save more for retirement, the top answer for Gens X and Y educators (68%) was changes to retirement benefits at work (such as elimination or reduction in DB benefits). Sixty-two percent indicated they would save more when their debts are paid off. Nearly six in ten (58%) reported they would participate or contribute more to their workplace retirement plan if there were greater in-person education and advice.

Schneider said advisers in general may not be paying attention to Gens X and Y, with so many Baby Boomers retiring and needing help, but the younger generations are set to offer even more investable assets in the future, and “the workplace is a good place for advisers to get to them and offer them what they need.”

The “Gen XY Financial Maturity: Balance Act” study was performed by Greenwald & Associates, and commissioned by Security Benefit, from April 8 to April 21, 2014. Security Benefit commissioned an oversample of about 500 K-12 educators, mostly classroom teachers. Participants were between the ages of 21 and 48. Results from the overall survey will be revealed soon.

«