Pension Funding Relief Allows Contribution Cut of Up to $63 Billion

A recent study by Towers Watson has shown that while legislation recently signed into law could provide a between $19 billion and $63 billion reduction in required contributions over five years, only one-quarter of employers are likely to seek relief.

A study by Towers Watson has shown that as a result of recent legislation signed into law, employers that sponsor defined benefit (DB) pension plans have the potential to receive billions of dollars in temporary pension funding relief, reducing their contributions between $19 billion and $63 billion.

Yet, the study showed only one-quarter of employers will likely seek relief amid significant concerns about the cash-flow rule.

“The pension funding relief law takes a major financial burden off of employers, at least for two years,” Mark Warshawsky, director of retirement research at Towers Watson, told ai5000. “But I was surprised that the percentage of people actually seeking relief was so low,” he said. “It’s obvious that employers are wary of all the conditions that come with the legislation.”

Under the Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act signed by President Barack Obama on June 25, employers with underfunded DB plans may elect to amortize funding shortfalls for any two plan years between 2008 and 2011 either over a 15-year period or by making interest-only payments for two years followed by seven years of amortization. Generally, DB sponsors are required to amortize shortfalls over seven years. The amount of required contributions depends on which of the two provisions and which plan years employers choose.

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

According to Towers Watson analysis, a July survey of 137 Towers Watson consultants on behalf of 367 employers revealed that a quarter of plans are likely to elect either of the relief plans and 60% of those who do plan to opt for the 15-year amortization option.

Prior to the passage of the law, the minimum required contributions in aggregate would have been $78.4 billion for the 2010 plan year, $131 billion for 2011, and about $159 billion for both 2012 and 2013.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

At Top UK Firms, Pensions See Declining Deficits

A study by Aon Consulting has discovered that combined pension deficit at the UK's top 200 firms fell by about a quarter between June and July, buoyed by improving equity markets and declining liabilities.

(August 3, 2010) — A study by consultant Aon has revealed the aggregate pension deficit of the UK’s biggest corporate pension funds fell by 26% in July.

Scheme deficits are at their lowest level since the end of October 2009, as improving equity markets and falling liabilities helped decrease deficits at corporate DB pension schemes, which had a total of 74 billion pounds ($116 billion) of deficit at the end of July, compared with 100 billion pounds the previous month.

Over the year to date, the aggregate pension deficit of the top 200 companies averages out at 91 billion pounds.

Despite the positive news, the consultant also warned of overfunding, saying that surpluses could prove problematic in the relatively near future. The firm cautioned that a proposed change to the inflation measure used to calculate increases to pension benefits could throw a sudden curve ball to many companies making deficit-recovery contributions to their DB pensions. Under the switch by the UK government to consumer price index (CPI) linking in order to track inflation, around half of schemes could find themselves in accounting surpluses depending on how the legislation is applied.

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

“The problem with these schemes is that they’re so volatile,” Sarah Abraham, a consultant and actuary at Aon, told ai5000. “A low aggregate deficit now is good news if deficits stay low, but we do face a risk of overfunding – companies have limited amounts of cash, and don’t want to throw that cash into a pension scheme, where there is a gamble that they may be putting in more than they need to and not maximizing the potential of that cash,” she stated.

Previously, the National Association of Pension Funds had warned that linking UK pension schemes to CPI rather that the retail price index (RPI) could lead to a misalignment of investments versus liabilities.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

«