Archive

Archive for November, 2011

“The $440 billion pension gap”

November 30th, 2011 No comments

The Wall Street Journal looks at “The $440 billion pension gap” and the challenge it poses to the U.S. economy. Here is an excerpt:

It’s been a tough year for corporate pension plans. Weak stock markets and falling interest rates have left a $440 billion hole in the nation’s 100 largest plans, with the shortfall more than doubling in the third quarter.

The shock came just as pension funds appeared to be recovering from the financial crisis of three years ago. And it left many companies scrambling to narrow the widening gap between the value of their pension-fund assets—typically stocks and bonds—and the fund’s liabilities—or, how much the company will owe retirees.

Though many U.S. companies are sitting on large piles of cash, their past few years of struggle to shore up pension funds could lead to a shift in the way the funds invest their money.

“The third quarter of 2011 was the second-worst in history for pension liabilities,” said John Ehrhardt, a principal at actuarial firm Milliman Inc. The firm’s data show that the deficit at the top 100 defined-benefit plans—the kind of company-sponsored funds that guarantee payouts of a specified amount—widened sharply as of Sept. 30 from $186 billion at the end of June.

Only the fourth quarter of 2008, which followed the collapse of investment bank Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., showed a greater percentage increase. Pension-fund deficits widened to $269 billion at the end of 2008 from just $6.7 billion at the end of the third quarter, a nearly 40-fold climb.

The number of Americans covered by defined-benefit pension plans has dropped sharply in past decades as companies have shifted to 401(k)s and other plans that don’t guarantee payouts. But 14% of the country’s private-sector work force still participates in some sort of defined-benefit plan, according to the Washington-based Employee Benefit Research Institute.

To see the latest Milliman Pension Funding Index, go here.

Annuity alchemy

November 29th, 2011 No comments

A new article in LifeHealthPro looks at the hybridization trend as it applies to retirement. Here’s an excerpt:

It’s crept onto your restaurant menu, into your pocket and your retirement portfolio, too. It’s called hybridization—taking distinct elements of one item and combining them with distinct elements of another to yield another distinct multifaceted product. Use that recipe in the culinary world and you get fusion food. Use it in the high-tech arena and the result is an all-in-one device called a smartphone. Apply it to financial and insurance instruments, and to annuities in particular, and the possibilities are seemingly endless.

The drive to innovate and deliver versatile solutions that address multiple client needs has put annuity providers in full hybridization mode. From the structure of the contract chassis itself, on down to other, more granular aspects of their products, insurers are borrowing and blending elements of various insurance and financial instruments to put a unique spin on their annuity offerings.

“Really what they’re doing,” explains Tim Hill, FSA, MAAA, principal and consulting actuary in the Chicago offices of Milliman, an actuarial consulting firm that provides insurance companies with product development guidance, “is mining these features from other things and using them with annuities. That approach seems to rule the annuity marketplace today.”

The result is an influx of specialized, sometimes complex products with hybrid structures, hybrid compensation models, hybrid benefits, even hybrid hedging strategies.

For advisors, this proliferation of hybrid annuity products and features means having a wider range of potential solutions to offer clients. But it also means more product education, observes Hill’s colleague Carl Friedrich, FSA, MAAA, also a principal and consulting actuary at Milliman. “There’s a real learning curve [annuity producers] need to climb when they’re working with some of these [hybrid] products.”

The full article is available here.

Why pay PBGC premiums?

November 21st, 2011 No comments

Defined benefit (DB) plans are subject to annual premiums that must be paid to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). When a DB plan becomes underfunded, sponsors have no choice but to pay an increased premium. Or do they?

The PBGC is the federal insurance agency meant to protect the pensions of DB plan participants in the event of the employer-sponsor’s bankruptcy. They assess a flat dollar annual premium for each plan participant, as well as a “variable” premium based on the plan’s funding deficit, known as the PBGC variable rate premium (VRP). Given current market conditions, there may be a palatable way to reduce the VRP, or in the best case, eliminate it.

With interest rates at historic lows, you may have given thought to the idea that now might be a good time to borrow. After all, money is cheap right now. But if you haven’t considered borrowing to fund your pension plan, maybe you should. And here’s why.

The interest rate you get on borrowed funds can be thought of as being even lower than what you get it at. And that’s because if you contribute the cash from the loan into the pension trust, you reduce the underfunding in your DB plan, which in turn reduces the required premium owed to the PBGC. The variable rate premium requires DB plan sponsors to pay 0.9% of the underfunding. That’s essentially a 1% tax. To the extent you can reduce the underfunding in your DB plan, you can think of your borrowed rate as being 1% lower than what it truly is, because you won’t be subject to the VRP anymore, at least on the dollars contributed.

This strategy works even if you can’t fully fund your plan on a PBGC basis. Every dollar you contribute saves the 0.9% tax. Not all plan sponsors have the ability to borrow, and many surely need to put funds to work elsewhere, but you’d be remiss not to at least consider this potential savings strategy.

Categories: Defined benefit Tags: ,

Auto-enrollment by the numbers

November 18th, 2011 No comments

Last week we asked you what you’re doing to encourage employees to enroll in your company’s 401(k) plan. The majority of those who voted in the poll reported using auto-enrollment and/or auto-escalation to encourage participants to participate in their 401(k) plans. We think auto-enrollment is an effective tactic too. Of course, even 100% participation in a 401(k) plan might not be considered a success if plan participants aren’t contributing enough. So this week we’re wondering…

Year-end compliance issues for single-employer retirement plans

November 17th, 2011 No comments

By year-end 2011, sponsors of calendar-year single-employer retirement plans must act on necessary and discretionary amendments and perform a range of administrative procedures to ensure compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. In addition, there are year-end issues that employers sponsoring nonqualified deferred compensation plans (NDCPs) should consider. This Client Action Bulletin looks at key areas such employers and sponsors of defined benefit (DB) or defined contribution (DC) plans should address by December 31, 2011.

Target-date funds: Know the risk

November 17th, 2011 No comments

An article at Workforce.com looks at the growing popularity of target-date funds. These funds have proven to be useful retirement vehicles for many plan participants, but they are not without certain risks. Here is an excerpt from the article:

For plan sponsors considering a target-date fund, knowing whether the fund goes to or through retirement is critical, experts say. Funds that go to retirement hit their most conservative asset allocation near the retirement date, while through funds don’t hit their most conservative point until after the fund date name.

“Plan sponsors really need to have a good understanding of what they have so they can clearly communicate and monitor” their target-date funds, says Jeff Marzinsky, principal and investment consultant for Milliman in the consulting firm’s Albany, New York, office. “If participants aren’t aware [of the type of plan they are in], they may be taking more risk than they thought.”

Revolutionary risk management for pension plans

November 16th, 2011 No comments

Investment consultants and plan sponsors find themselves in a tough spot these days. Many plans are underfunded, which is due to the financial crisis and rock bottom interest rates. In order to avoid costly contributions, outsized returns are needed to shore up their funded statuses. However, outsized returns may mean taking on outsized risk. And, if the first financial crisis left pension portfolios crippled, a second one could prove catastrophic.

Who has found a solution? Life insurance annuity providers adopted hedging as an industry standard practice by 2006. Such programs proved 93% effective during September and October of 2008, saving the industry an estimated $40 billion in reserves. Variable annuities, similar to pension plans, promise a guaranteed lifetime payout stream backed with equities. Therefore, the compelling success of these programs for annuity providers can be applied to pension plans as well.

The Milliman Managed Risk Strategy is a multi-faceted futures overlay strategy for pension portfolios that aims to capture, on average, 80% of the upside potential of equities with 25% of the downside exposure.

Using equity futures contracts, some of the most liquid and simple financial assets available, MPS adjusts market exposures in order to provide a risk and return profile that is superior to traditional asset allocation models. Through the combination of the capital protection strategy and volatility management, the MPS adjusts market exposures to maintain a nearly constant risk profile while simultaneously providing a cushion of protection against market downturns.

Read more…

Retirement Town Hall rewind

November 14th, 2011 No comments

In November we’ve been giving you some ideas for making your 2012 better than 2011. If you haven’t been checking in here’s what you’ve missed.

Setting the stage for 2012

First off this month, Penny Plante reminded us of the value of Outsourcing for mid-sized organizations. It’s a brief but insightful “must read” for anyone considering outsourcing in 2012. More recently Brandy Cross highlighted the importance of doing a Compensation checkup at year end to keep your 401(k) plan operating smoothly. Speaking of 401(k) plans, our latest poll asks what you are doing to generate interest from employees as open enrollment season approaches for many companies.

Pensions bounce back

Also this month, John Ehrhardt dissected the latest numbers from the Milliman 100 Pension Funding Index. For the first time in a while there’s good news, as Investment gains fuel pension-funded status improvement. Still, low interest rates continue to be the big story in pension funded status.

401(k) contributions leap forward

Last week’s poll noted how the IRS is giving Americans 500 more reasons to save for retirement by raising the 401(k) contribution limit, for most employees, by $500. We asked you how this news changed your contribution plans.

Be sure to check in regularly as we continue to add more news and notes for employee benefits professionals every week. Follow us on Twitter @millimaneb to stay up-to-date.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

New disclosure rules

November 11th, 2011 No comments

The latest Client Action Bulletin looks at the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s new disclosure rules for employers participating in multiemployer plans. The CAB is available here.

Categories: Defined benefit, Multiemployer Tags:

401K enrollment

November 10th, 2011 No comments

With the end of the year coming many 401(k) plan sponsors are gearing up for open enrollment. Now is the time to get your employees motivated to enroll and contribute to your company’s 401(k) plan. But what are the most effective ways to do that? It seems simple, but in difficult times, when many Americans are facing tough trade-offs to make ends meet, it can be hard to get employees to plan for the future. So we’re asking you: