Montana Pensions Face Risk of Fiscal Distress in Recession

Funded levels could tumble if pensions don’t meet 7.6% investment return target, Pew says.


A stress test analysis of Montana’s two largest public pension systems by The Pew Charitable Trusts shows that the pensions would face a “real risk of fiscal distress” in a low-return or asset shock scenario, a possibility during a recession, which many financial experts say the US is currently in.  

The Pew Charitable Trusts’ analysis assesses fund performance under a range of economic scenarios for Montana’s Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers’ Retirement System of Montana (TRS). The two plans account for 87% of Montana’s total pension liability and administer benefits for more than 90% of the state’s public workers and retirees.

The analysis indicates that reforms adopted by state lawmakers in 2013 have had a “significant positive impact,” including increasing pension assets by more than $600 million and improving the combined funded ratio for the plans by approximately 5 percentage points. However, Pew said that despite this, additional policy changes may be needed if future investment returns fall below the plans’ average annual target of 7.6%.

For example, if plan assets earn annual returns of 6.5%, which is the estimated long-term return for the plans based on Pew’s capital market assumptions and the plans’ asset mix, the combined funded levels would fall to 58% by 2039 from 72% now. And if the long-term return is only 5%, the plans’ funded levels would plummet to 14% within 30 years. 

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

Pew said stress testing can help policymakers prepare for the impact of adverse economic conditions on pension balance sheets and government budgets. In January, Montana’s state legislature asked Pew to supplement an in-depth risk assessment performed by the state plans’ actuarial consultant with a report based on Pew-developed guidance known as the Foundation for Public Pensions Risk Reporting.

The analysis found that if current assumptions were met, the financial position of the plans would improve over time. However, under a low-return or asset shock scenario, both of which are possible during the current economic environment, the two systems would risk facing fiscal distress.

Pew also said that the risk of underfunding and insolvency is greater when accounting for market volatility. For example, it said stochastic analysis, which is used to account for real-world market volatility, indicates that, without policy changes, there is a 63% chance of declining funded ratios and a 6% probability of insolvency over the 20-year forecast period.

“These results reinforce the finding that more reforms may be needed to improve long-term funding and mitigate investment risk for both plans,” said Pew, which added that potential reform options include lower assumed rates of return on investments that more closely align with projected market performance, and a commitment to additional funding over time to prevent rising pension debt.

Pew said the findings can provide policymakers with critical insights into how the systems would fare if confronted by the significant volatility and asset losses that can come with a recession. It also said they provide a consistent framework for further analysis, including updated projections and scenarios that Pew has developed and will apply to future stress tests. Montana is the 10th state to require stress testing or risk reporting.

Related Stories:

S&P Global Forecasts Global Recession Due to Coronavirus

AM Best Creates Pandemic-Related Stress Test for Insurance Firms

Pew: Hawaii’s State Pension Ready to Withstand Recession

Tags: , , , , ,

Less Tax-Efficient Funds Cost UK DB Plans £250 Million Yearly, Study Finds

Researchers say pensions must invest in tax-transparent funds, insurance policies to be eligible for tax advantages.


UK defined benefit (DB) pension plans are missing out on hundreds of millions of pounds in additional income each year because they are not taking advantage of certain tax efficiencies available to them, according to a study from Northern Trust and institutional asset management marketplace The Asset Management Exchange.

The study found that UK defined benefit pensions invested £56 billion ($70.24 billion) in less tax-efficient funds in 2019, leading to lost income of up to £256 million last year alone, which extrapolates to nearly £2.5 billion over the next decade. However, the study found that the loss could be mitigated if the pooled equity investments were optimized for tax efficiency through use of a tax transparent fund.

“Asset managers that operate or are planning to launch equity-based European funds would do well to consider how the use of a tax transparent fund may benefit their investors,” Clive Bellows, Northern Trust’s head of global fund services for Europe, Middle East, and Africa, said in a statement. “It is now potentially more cost-effective than ever for them to derive the advantages of tax transparency while optimizing efficiencies across their fund ranges.”

The firms hired Broadridge Financial Solutions to survey 120 UK defined benefit pension plans and found that 72% of them are using fund structures that are tax inefficient, including unit trusts, investment trusts, and open-ended investment companies. Additionally, 69% of plans that are using less-tax-efficient funds said they were unaware of the investment income benefits that tax transparent funds have compared with other fund structures, and 82% said that tax efficient fund structures for equity investments were not included in their risk register.

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

“Tax efficiency has become an important factor for fund performance in recent years—particularly for pension funds that suffer too much withholding tax (WHT) on the dividends of their pooled equity investments,” according to the study. “This is because UK pension schemes, as tax-exempt investors, are entitled to reduced WHT on dividends from global equities under double taxation agreements.”

However, it said that unless the plans invest in tax-transparent funds or insurance policies for their pooled fund investments, they will not be entitled to apply for reclaims or reduced WHT to foreign governments’ tax authorities on their foreign equity holdings. As a result, many UK plans are potentially suffering more WHT than may be necessary, the study said, which may reduce their income and ultimately have a negative effect on the plan sponsors’ ability to meet member payments.

The study recommended using a tax-transparent fund (TTF) structure for tax-exempt institutional investors to benefit most effectively from the use of pooling. Switching to a TTF does not require changes to the plan’s asset allocation policy or to its selected managers. Use of a TTF may offer “superior investment returns” for investors through the potential reduction in withholding tax drag, according to the study. It added that the elimination of tax drag facilitates improvements in investment performance and can make a significant difference to investment returns over time.

“These findings carry particular urgency against the backdrop of economic conditions caused by the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic,” the study reported. “Many schemes collectively face the prospect of widening funding gaps, with some scheme sponsors in potential financial difficulty.”

Related Stories:

UK Defined Benefit Code Revision ‘Biggest Revolution’ in 15 Years

Trade Association Says UK COVID Bill Could Hurt Pension Industry

UK Corporate Pension Funding Hammered by Pandemic in April

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

«