New Jersey Pension Fund Gambles on Bitcoin Miners

In a potential sign of cryptocurrency acceptance among institutional investors—and perhaps a sign of desperation—New Jersey’s pension fund, which is among the worst-funded in the country, recently invested a little over $7 million in two Bitcoin mining companies. And both investments are already down sharply.

In its most recent quarterly Form 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which shows its current investment holdings, the State of New Jersey Common Pension Fund D reported that it owns 97,274 shares of Riot Blockchain and 108,148 shares of Marathon Digital Holdings. Both companies are among the biggest names in Bitcoin mining. The filing was signed by Shoaib Khan, acting director of the New Jersey Division of Investment, who replaced Corey Amon who stepped down in early June to become CIO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

The filing, which is for the period ending June 30, indicates that the pension fund’s holding in Riot Blockchain was worth $3,664,000, or $37.67 per share, while the investment in Marathon Digital was valued at $3,393,000, or $31.37 a share. As of the close of trading on July 29, Riot Blockchain and Marathon Digital shares were down to $31.90 and $27.48, respectively—a decline of 15% and 12%, respectively, in less than a month from what was reported in the filing.

Marathon Digital Holdings said its goal is to build the largest mining operation in North America, and the company says on its website that an investment in the company helps gain exposure to Bitcoin “without having to deal with the complications of holding the asset directly.”

Want the latest institutional investment industry news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters. 

And Riot Blockchain’s Bitcoin mining operations include wholly owned subsidiary Whinstone US, which it says consists of the single largest Bitcoin mining and hosting facility in North America.

High-risk, volatile stocks such as crypto mining companies aren’t typical investments for long-term institutional investors such as a state pension fund. But with dwindling funded levels and full pension contributions that come literally once in a generation, the New Jersey pension fund isn’t in a position to be as conservative as some of its peers.

The aggregate funded level for the state’s retirement systems was only 58% as of July 20, 2020, which is the most recent data available, and has been in a downward trajectory, declining from 61.2% in 2014.

Earlier this month, Gov. Phil Murphy boasted that New Jersey paid the full state-funded portion of the $6.9 billion pension contribution for fiscal year 2022—the first time in more than 25 years that the state made the full actuarially determined contribution to the pension fund.

“Today is a remarkable day for the state of New Jersey,” Murphy said at the time. “Today is not only the day we officially make good on that promise, it is the day we start filling in the hole that has been dug over the last 25 years.”

NJ Pension Fund Returns 6.27% Misses Benchmark, Target

New Jersey State Pension Returns 16.35% in 2019

Tags: Bitcoin, Corey Amon, crypto mining, Marathon Digital Holdings, New Jersey Common Pension Fund, Riot Blockchain

A bill working its way through the Massachusetts state legislature to provide bonuses to public employees who worked during the pandemic would cost billions of dollars to the already overstressed pension system, watchdog groups warn.

Massachusetts House Bill 2808, also known as “An Act Relative to Providing a COVID-19 Retirement Credit to Essential Public Workers,” would add three years of retirement credit to state “employees who have volunteered to work or have been required to work at their respective worksites or any other worksite outside of their personal residences during the COVID-19 state of emergency.”

The Pioneer Institute, a think tank, said in a statement that although that sounds reasonable, “upon reading the brief bill, it quickly becomes clear that this legislation is irresponsible in the extreme.” The group said that the bill, which was sponsored by Rep. Jonathan Zlotnik and Sen. John Velis, was written so broadly that it couldn’t determine which public employees wouldn’t be entitled to the benefit.

Pioneer cited a recent hearing before the legislature’s Joint Committee on Public Service in which Rep. Ken Gordon asked Zlotnik whether any analysis had been done on the bill’s fiscal impact. Zlotnik responded that “the short answer is we don’t have a final number as we sit here today.”

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

The think tank also noted that the bill defines employee as “a person employed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,” including “its political subdivisions,” and therefore would also apply to employees of Massachusetts’ municipalities. It said the bill would be a massive unfunded mandate for the commonwealth’s cities and towns.

“Administrators, accountants, techies, teachers, finance officers, grant writers, trash collectors, and all those paid with public dollars are potentially in line for the benefit,” said Pioneer, which lamented the broad public support the bill has garnered.

To demonstrate its point about the financial impact the bill would have, Pioneer Institute did an analysis of its effect on just one state employee—Marty Meehan, who is president of the University of Massachusetts. Assuming Meehan retires at the end of his current contract in 2025, Pioneer projects that his annual pension would rise to $335,673 from $287,720—an annual increase of nearly $48,000. It also said, based on actuarial tables, that would boost Meehan’s lifetime pension benefit by almost $800,000.

Pioneer also said the bill is “a slap in the face of the tens of thousands of private-sector employees who put themselves in harm’s way” as the public sector did not see employment decrease as sharply as did the private sector during the pandemic.

Siding with Pioneer is the Massachusetts Municipal Association (MMA), a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. MMA Executive Director and CEO Geoffrey Beckwith spoke against the bill at the Public Service committee hearing, saying in written testimony that the group strongly opposes the bill as it “would be very costly for municipalities and local taxpayers, would immediately increase the projected unfunded pension liability in communities across the state, and would translate into reductions in available funding for municipal services in other areas.”

Beckwith said that although there has been no cost analysis to determine the number of people who would qualify for the bonus, “it is clear that the measures would add billions of dollars to state and local unfunded pension liabilities.” He added that “passing presumption bills without first engaging in adequate cost and risk analyses is a leaping-before-looking practice that fails to adequately understand the policy and financial ramifications.”