Provisions of Tax Reform Could Affect DB Plan Sponsor Strategies

DB plan sponsors may want to make a voluntary contribution to their plans in 2018 to claim a deduction at their former, higher tax rate, according to Michael A. Moran, with GSAM.

Since, under tax reform, the corporate tax rate will be lower in the future than what had previously been in effect, more voluntary defined benefit (DB) plan contribution activity is expected, according to Michael A. Moran, CFA, managing director and chief pension strategist with Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM).

 

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

In a Q&A on GSAM’s website, Moran explains that contributions to corporate DB plans are generally tax deductible up to certain limits. For plan sponsors that were contemplating making a contribution in future years, some decided to accelerate that contribution into 2017 in order to reap the benefits of getting the tax deduction at a higher rate. GSAM observed that Kroger and Valvoline are two examples of companies that explicitly cited potential corporate tax reform as one of the reasons for making a voluntary contribution earlier in 2017.

 

According to Moran, since plan sponsors can under certain circumstances make a contribution up to eight and one-half months after the end of the year and still have it count as a deduction for the previous tax year, the firm expects voluntary contribution activity to continue into 2018 where sponsors claim a deduction at their former, higher tax rate.

 

In addition, changes to repatriation rules under tax reform may make foreign cash more accessible for U.S. multi-nationals, which may enable them to continue to make voluntary contributions in the future.  Moran says estimates of overseas cash for U.S. companies have been in the range of $1 to $2.5 trillion.

 

He points out there have been several other factors which have also provided plan sponsors with an incentive to put more money into their plans sooner rather than later, including Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) premiums.

 

Increased contribution activity leads to higher funded ratios which may be a catalyst for more de-risking activities, according to Moran. This may take the form of increased allocations to long duration fixed income, to better match plan liabilities, as well as more risk transfer activities since better funded plans make it easier for the plan sponsor to transfer liabilities to a third-party insurance company.

 

However, he notes that some DB plan sponsors may not find a borrow-to-fund strategy as compelling as before the enactment of tax reform. “In particular, for certain companies, interest deductions are generally limited to 30% of Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA) for tax years beginning before 1/1/2022, and to 30% of Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT) for subsequent tax years. Given this, the ability to use existing corporate cash for pension funding may become more critical,” he says.

 

Moran also warns that increased flexibility around cash may mean that some U.S. multi-nationals may not need to issue as many bonds going forward to fund buybacks, dividend increases, capital expenditures, etc. “Just as more corporate DB plans are looking to add long-duration fixed income to their portfolios as funded ratios move higher from contribution activity, the new supply of long duration fixed income securities may decline,” he says.

SEC Fraud Charges Bring Settlements and Lifetime Industry Ban

More important than the fact that individual brokers or executives are being punished is the recognition that retirement plans and large institutional investors are routinely subject to fraud schemes.  

The former head of ConvergEx Group’s transition management business has agreed to be barred from the securities industry and has consented to a judgment ordering him to pay more than $975,000 to settle fraud charges the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed in 2016.

The SEC’s complaint alleged that Khaled Bassily “participated in a fraudulent scheme to hide from charities, religious organizations, and retirement funds that they paid substantially higher amounts than disclosed for the execution of trading orders.”

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

Without admitting or denying the SEC’s allegations, Bassily has consented to the entry of a final judgment that ordered him to pay a total of $988,414 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest and a civil penalty. The order also permanently enjoined him from violating Sections 10(b) and 15(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933. Bassily further consented to the entry of an SEC order that barred him from the securities industry. Final judgment was entered on December 21, 2017, and the industry bar was imposed January 3, 2018.

The SEC’s successful charges here follow those announced in August 2014 against Anthony G. Blumberg, a former executive of a ConvergEx Group subsidiary, who remains involved in a federal action currently pending in Newark, New Jersey, and charges announced in December 2013 against three ConvergEx Group subsidiaries that agreed to pay more than $107 million and admitted wrongdoing to settle related charges. The SEC’s complaint filed against Blumberg says one university customer paid about $93,000 in disclosed commissions and about $543,000 in undisclosed trading profits. In another case, $1.6 million in fees allegedly went undetected. 

According to the SEC’s order instituting settled administrative proceedings, the ConvergEx brokerage firms represented to customers that they charged explicit commissions to execute equity trading orders. “However, they routinely routed orders, including orders for U.S. equities, to an offshore affiliate in Bermuda that executed them on a riskless basis and opportunistically boosted their profits by adding a mark-up or mark-down on the price of a security,” SEC charged. “The offshore affiliate often consulted with the client-facing brokers to assess the risk of customer detection before taking the extra money on top of the disclosed commissions. The mark-ups and mark-downs caused many customers to unknowingly pay more than double what they understood they were paying to have their orders executed.”

According to the SEC, customers affected by the wrongdoing included funds managed on behalf of charities, religious organizations, retirement plans, universities, and governments.

“The ConvergEx brokerages believed they would lose business if customers became aware of their mark-ups and mark-downs, so they engaged in specific acts to hide the scheme,” SEC reported. “Typically, they only took mark-ups and mark-downs on top of the disclosed commissions in situations where they believed that the risk of detection was low. They also made false and misleading statements to customers who inquired about their overall compensation, even providing certain customers with falsified trading data to cover up the fact that the offshore affiliate had taken mark-ups or mark-downs on their orders.  The practice of executing orders through the offshore affiliate was not adequately disclosed to customers and was inconsistent with ConvergEx’s advertised conflict-free agency model.  Using this practice, the ConvergEx brokers failed to seek best execution for their customers’ orders.”

In the end, according to the SEC, the subsidiary firms agreed to pay disgorgement and prejudgment interest totaling $87,424,429 and a penalty of $20 million. In determining the penalty amount, the SEC considered ConvergEx’s “substantial cooperation after the agency commenced its investigation.” The SEC also considered the company’s significant remedial measures, including the closure of the Bermuda affiliate and the discharge of a number of employees in management and other positions as it ended the practice of routing U.S. securities offshore for order handling.

«