California Proposes $6 Billion Boost to CalPERS

Gov. Brown says supplemental payment will save state $11 billion over 20 years.

California Gov. Jerry Brown’s revised state budget proposes a $6 billion supplemental payment to The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), which he says will save the state $11 billion over the next two decades.

The supplemental payment effectively doubles the state’s annual payment. It is intended to ease the effect of increasing pension contributions due to the state’s unfunded liabilities and the CalPERS Board’s recent decision to lower its assumed investment rate of return to 7% from 7.5%.

California currently has $282 billion in long‑term costs, debts, and liabilities; $279 billion are related to retirement costs of state and University of California employees, according to the revised budget.

“These retirement liabilities have grown by $51 billion in the last year alone due to poor investment returns, and the adoption of more realistic assumptions about future earnings,” said Brown in his budget.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

As of June 30, 2016, CalPERS was only 65% funded, and reported unfunded liabilities of $59.5 billion. According to the revised budget, without the supplemental pension payment, the state’s contributions to CalPERS are on pace to nearly double by fiscal year 2023‑24. However, the additional $6 billion will reduce the unfunded liability, and help lower and stabilize the state’s annual contributions through 2037‑2038, assuming there are no changes to CalPERS’ actuarial assumptions.

According to the budget, contribution rates as a percent of payroll will be approximately 2.1 percentage points lower on average than the currently scheduled rates. For example, peak rates would drop from 38.4% to 35.7% for state miscellaneous (non‑safety) workers, and peak rates would drop from 69 percent to 63.9 percent for CHP officers.

The funding for the supplemental payment will be paid through a loan from the Surplus Money Investment Fund. Although the loan will incur interest costs of approximately $1 billion over the life of the loan, actuarial calculations indicate that the additional pension payment will lead to net savings of $11 billion over the next 20 years.

For 2017‑18, the state’s contribution to CalPERS is estimated at $5.8 billion ($3.4 billion General Fund). Without the supplemental payment, Brown says that the state’s contribution is estimated to reach $9.2 billion by 2023‑24, due to anticipated payroll growth, and the lower assumed rate of return. However, with the supplemental payment, the state’s 2023‑24 pension costs are projected to be $8.6 billion.

Tags: , ,

DuPont Boosts Pension by $2.9 Billion

But some participants see the contribution as a precursor to closing the fund.

As chemical company DuPont continues to finalize its proposed $130 billion merger with Dow Chemical, it has boosted its pension contributions to $2.9 billion, which is a huge jump from the $230 million the company was required to fund for 2017.

“Our intent is simple,” said Benito Cachinero-Sánchez, DuPont’s head of human resources, in a letter to DuPont US pension fund participants. “As we move closer to our intended merger with Dow, and subsequent creation of three industry-leading companies, we are continuing to create a more secure future for our retirees by improving the plan’s funded status.”

But not all DuPont plan participants see the move in the same light. Some retirees reportedly believe that the company’s real motive behind the massive fund injection is to meet the necessary requirements to begin de-risking the pension plan.

De-risking is a way for a company to reduce the impact of pension obligations and funding requirements on its financial statements. A company can do this by converting the pension to an insurance annuity, or offering retirees a lump-sum payment instead of regular periodic payments. However, a company can’t transfer private pensions to an insurer unless the plan is fully funded, and some retirees are wary that this was the real motive behind DuPont’s recent pension contribution.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

“In a merger like this, de-risking gets DuPont off the hook,” Dave Bartlett, a retired DuPont manager, told Wilmington’s News Journal. Bartlett said DuPont’s generous pension plan kept him at the company, despite comparable jobs offering higher salaries and bonuses. “I sacrificed on the front end so that I wouldn’t have to worry in my retirement,” he said. “Now I want them to keep the promise they made.”

However, DuPont refuted the idea that the pension contribution was a precursor to de-risking the fund.

“We have no immediate plans, and are not currently conducting any work toward annuitization of the pension plan,” a DuPont spokesperson told CIO in response to de-risking concerns. “The $2.9 billion contribution is part of our general trust fund investment portfolio and is not earmarked for any particular project.”

Under the terms of the merger with Dow, the combined company will be divided into three separate companies. However, it is unknown which of the three companies will be responsible for the employees’ pension plan.

Matt Maloney of risk management firm Aon Hewitt said that assuming a company is preparing to de-risk its pension fund because of a large pension contribution was “a very large leap to make.”

He said there was very little overlap among companies making significant pension contributions and those de-risking their pension plan. Maloney said one motive for a company making such a large contribution to its pension fund could be to take advantage of tax deductions before tax laws are changed. He also said that such a contribution is not uncommon, citing telecommunications giant Verizon’s $3.4 billion pension contribution during the first quarter of 2017.

Cachinero-Sánchez added that “from any vantage point, significantly reducing the underfunded pension liability is a positive. Be assured that continuing to fulfill our obligations to plan participants is a top priority.”

 

 

Tags: , ,

«

You have 0 free articles remaining

Become a Washington Technology Insider today!
Already an Insider? Login here