Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Pension - Social Security
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-05-2014, 08:22 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

sorry,not familiar with him. Alicia Munnell, I am familiar with.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-05-2014, 08:44 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Dear lord, that piece was almost contentless.

Instead of

WONT ANYBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN

this piece was essentially

WONT ANYBODY THINK OF THE RETIREES



the trajectory to Social Security, etc, turning into explicit senior welfare continues apace
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-05-2014, 07:02 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

http://www.pionline.com/article/2014...ion-provisions

Quote:
Multiemployer pension provisions in the Pension Protection Act of 2006 set to expire Dec. 31 would gain another year in a tax extension passed by the House Wednesday.

H.R. 5771, the “Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014,” which extends more than 50 expired business and individual tax breaks, has to be scheduled for a vote in the Senate, which does not have its own package, before Congress adjourns Dec. 11.

__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-09-2014, 04:20 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...ns-to-collapse

Quote:
Nearly 230,000 Chicago-area union workers and retirees risk not getting the pensions they've been promised, and some may not get any retirement benefits at all unless Congress comes up with a fix soon.

While lawmakers wrestled with the issue for at least 10 years, $6.26 billion in unfunded retirement obligations was racked up by 30 union-affiliated plans in the city and suburbs that are in financial danger. That doesn't count the Teamsters Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas pension fund, which alone is $17.55 billion short of what it needs to pay benefits for its nearly 408,000 members nationwide, including 30,000 in Illinois.

It has been a quiet, slow-moving crisis, but Central States could change that. If a solution isn't in place by 2017, the Rosemont-based plan is expected to go belly-up in 10 years or so, experts say.

......
The problem for all multiemployer plans across the country is that a Central States insolvency will swamp PBGC, causing it to go bankrupt, too. The agency reported last month (see its PDF) that it has more than a 50-50 chance of going bust in eight years.

“There could be a complete benefit cut if PBGC has no money,” says Josh Gotbaum, the agency's executive director from 2010 to 2014 and now a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C., think tank.

Even with $17.77 billion in assets, Central States largely is unsustainable because deregulation of the trucking industry in 1980 has wiped out all but two of the 50 biggest contributors to the plan. Today it's paying out $4 for each dollar it collects from employers, including about 415 firms in Illinois (see their PDF).

__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-10-2014, 12:01 AM
exactuary exactuary is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,033
Default Picked up from @jeremygold tweet

http://amendments-rules.house.gov/am...1934463446.pdf

Amends PPA to extend benefit cutbacks for troubled MEPs (scheduled to sunset 12/31).
__________________
An exact actuary
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-12-2014, 06:46 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Academy alert about the bill:

https://cv.actuary.org/members/alert...014-PEB-15.pdf

Quote:
U.S. House Passes Multiemployer Pension Reform

The U.S. House of Representatives yesterday passed multiemployer pension reform as part of the omnibus government funding bill (H.R. 83). The Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014, which was added as an amendment to the funding bill, allows distressed plans projected to become insolvent in the next 15 or 20 years to cut the benefits they pay to both current and future retirees in order to prevent insolvency.

This legislation would:

• Prohibit the monthly benefit of any participant or beneficiary to be reduced below 110 percent of the monthly benefit which is guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC).

• Prohibit benefits to be cut for the disabled or those over 80 years old and cuts would be less burdensome for those between 75 and 80.

• Increase the PBGC premium from $13 to $26 for all multiemployer plans.

.....
On Nov. 19, the Academy alerted members that the multiemployer program deficit increased dramatically from $8.3 billion to $42.4 billion, according to the PBGC’s Annual Report.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-12-2014, 06:50 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

some commentary:

http://time.com/money/3630348/congre...cuts-retirees/

Quote:
A bailout, it is not. The centerpiece is a provision that would open the door to cutting current beneficiaries’ benefits, a retirement policy taboo and a potential disaster for retirees on fixed incomes.

Developed by the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans (NCCMP), a coalition of multiemployer pension plan sponsors and some major unions, the plan addresses a looming implosion of multiemployer pension plans. Ten million workers are covered by these plans, with 1.5 million of them in roughly 200 plans that are in danger of failing over the next two decades. Two large plans are believed to be much closer to failure—the Teamsters’ Central States fund and the United Mine Workers of America fund.

The central premise is that Congress won’t—and shouldn’t—prop up the multiemployer system.

.....
The problem is partly structural. Multiemployer pension plans were thought to be safer than single employer plans, owing to the pooling of risk. As a result, the level of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) insurance protection behind the multiemployer plans is lower. But many industries in the system have seen declining employment and have a growing proportion of retirees to workers paying into the pension funds. And many of the pension funds still have not fully recovered from the hits they took in the 2008-2009 market meltdown.

These problems pose a major threat to the PBGC. The agency reported recently that the deficit in its multiemployer program rose to $42.2 billion in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, up from $8.3 billion the previous year. If big plans fail, the entire multiemployer system would be at risk of collapse.

......
The legislation does prohibit benefit cuts for vested retirees over 80, and limited protections for retirees over 75—but that leaves plenty of younger retirees vulnerable to cuts. And although workers and retirees would get to vote on the changes, pension advocates worry that the interests of workers would overwhelm those of retirees. (Active workers rightly worry about the future of their plans, and many already are sacrificing through higher contributions and benefit cuts.)

The big problem here is that the plan fails to put retirees at the head of the line for protection. When changes of this type must be made, they should be phased in over a long period of time, giving workers time to adjust their plans before retirement. For example, the Social Security benefit cuts eneacted in 1983 were phased in over 20 years and didn’t start kicking in until 1990.

....
Friedman’s organization, AARP and other advocates reject the idea that solvency problems 10 to 15 years away require such severe measures. They have pushed alternative approaches to the problem; one that is included in the deal, DeFrehn says, is an increase in PBGC premiums paid by sponsors, from $13 to $26 per year. Advocates also have called for other new revenue sources, such as low-interest loans to PBGC by the once-bailed-out big banks and investment firms.


__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-12-2014, 07:01 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

how it's playing out in some states...

http://www.startribune.com/politics/...285446761.html

Quote:
WASHINGTON – Dave Erickson of Isanti, Minn., believed his pension benefits were guaranteed when he contributed a fixed portion of his pay into the Teamsters Central States Pension Fund.

On Wednesday, Erickson learned that those benefits might be cut under a provision that Minnesota Rep. John Kline aims to tack onto the new federal budget bill.

.....
“They’ve sneaked this in,” Erickson said. “They don’t have the guts to come out and tell us they’re taking our money. It makes me sick. The pension payment was something I counted on.”

Of the nation’s 40 million people in defined benefits pensions, 10 million are in multi-employer plans. Roughly 1.5 million of them currently receive payments from underfunded plans, some of which are within a decade of being insolvent.

Kline said in an interview Wednesday that the financial problems of pension funds are urgent and plans for reforms have been discussed for more than a year. A Republican representing Minnesota’s Second District, Kline said he is protecting pensioners.

He added that including the pension cuts bill in the big budget bill rather than introducing it as a separate bill is necessary to take advantage of existing bipartisan support and the backing of employers and some unions.

.....
The Service Employees International Union and several other unions support it. And the Teamsters Central States Pension Fund, which faces insolvency without adjustments in the next decade, was looking for help.

.....
At his home in south Minneapolis, 64-year-old retired truck driver Jeff Brooks said he felt betrayed. Brooks spent 39 years driving, including 20 as a Teamster.

He believes there was time to debate solutions to the Central States Fund problems without ramming through reform. What Kline is doing “seems like a shabby way to handle this,” he said.

Although he would be spared major cuts under the proposed rules, 76-year-old Bob McNattin of Minneapolis echoed Brooks. McNattin said he knows that young workers worry “there will be nothing there when they retire.” But what is happening “is cynical as hell,” he said. “It has a lot to do with why approval of Congress is in single digits.”

.....
Still, advocacy groups such as AARP and the Pension Rights Center cried foul and urged members to call their Congress members.

At the same time, both groups admitted that chances of keeping the pension benefits bill out of the larger budget bill are slim. “This has the blessing of House leadership so it will be hard to stop,” said AARP’s legislative policy director, David Certner.

Karen Friedman, the Pension Rights Center’s policy director, complained that “retirees never had an opportunity to examine or be consulted on the bill.”

The larger problem, she said, is that “this sets a precedent for cutting Social Security and single-employer plans.”

well, according to some Teamsters, at any rate.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-13-2014, 01:14 AM
exactuary exactuary is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,033
Default

Quote:
one that is included in the deal, DeFrehn says, is an increase in PBGC premiums paid by sponsors, from $13 to $26 per year
Let's do the math

10 million participants (maybe not all subject to premiums)

$42 billion PBGC short fall

4200/participant

4200/13 = 323 years to pay it down (0% interest)

Ought to work out just fine
__________________
An exact actuary

Last edited by exactuary; 12-14-2014 at 11:52 PM.. Reason: Let's do the math right
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-13-2014, 06:30 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 80,149
Blog Entries: 6
Default

They're doing something! They should get cookies!
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.32600 seconds with 10 queries