Category Archives: Benefits

Growing school pension burdens will require more state support

Source: Matthew Butler, Joshua Grundleger, Emily RaimesMoody’s, Sector In-Depth, State government – US, April 9, 2019
(subscription required)

Recent actions by states signal growing recognition that as pension burdens — unfunded liabilities and annual costs — escalate for K-12 school districts, state assistance will likely need to increase. California (Aa3 positive), Indiana (Aaa stable) and Oregon (Aa1 stable) all recently proposed budget legislation that would boost school funding by making increased payments to teacher pension plans on behalf of districts. The proposals call for one-time contributions to the pension plans rather than recurring pension contribution support on behalf of local districts like Colorado (Aa1 stable) and Michigan (Aa1 stable) have recently committed to provide. Additional states are likely to increase funding for teacher pensions,reflecting the growing credit risks underfunded plans present.

Pensions and retiree healthcare challenge some of the largest mass transit enterprises

Source: Thomas Aaron, Timothy Blake, Moody’s, Sector In-Depth, April 11, 2019
(subscription required)

Pensions and retiree healthcare pose a credit risk for some of the largest mass transit enterprises. Transit enterprises with material unfunded liabilities face budget challenges that can limit capital reinvestment, contribute to rising debt loads and/or lead to lower service levels.

Managing the Conflicting Interests of Workers and Shareholders: Evidence from Pension-Assumption Manipulations

Source: J. Adam Cobb, ILR Review, Volume: 72 issue: 3, May 2019
(subscription required)

From the abstract:
Whereas research on corporate governance typically attends to the conflicting interests between shareholders and executives, in practice executives must frequently adjudicate the demands of multiple stakeholders. To investigate how executives cope with the divergent interests of workers and shareholders, the author examines how much firms claim they will earn on the assets in their defined benefit (DB) pension plans. In a DB arrangement, employees forgo wages in the present in order to receive postretirement income, and they rely on executives to properly fund and manage plan assets. Executives, however, can increase the amount they expect the firm to earn on plan assets, which increases firm earnings in the current period but may undermine workers’ retirement security if expectations do not match actual returns over time. The author shows that the influence and interests of employees and shareholders as well as the decision-making schemas of the CEO affect whether executives exercise this discretion.

Cities make slow progress in addressing retiree healthcare liabilities

Source: Sunny Zhu, Thomas Aaron, Eric Hoffmann, Leonard Jones, Moody’s, Sector In-Depth, Local government – California, March 18, 2019
(subscription required)

Similar to pensions, other post-employment benefits (OPEB) — principally retiree healthcare — are liabilities that pose credit risks for some local governments. With rising healthcare costs, longer life spans and aging workforces, OPEB costs are escalating rapidly in some casesand unfunded liabilities are becoming a material source of balance sheet leverage. Positively,numerous California (Aa3 positive) cities, including San Jose (Aa1 stable), San Francisco (Aaa stable) and San Diego (Aa2 stable), have taken proactive steps to curb OPEB costs. Few cities have meaningfully reduced these liabilities to date because most cost-containment strategies will take years to provide substantial savings. If unaddressed, rising OPEB expenses threaten to curtail other local government spending priorities.

OPEB Brief: The Credit Impacts Of OPEB Obligation Bonds

Source: S&P Global Ratings, March 11, 2019
(subscription required)

Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) underfunding of obligations is pervasive across U.S. state and local governments, and costs are likely to continue to rise rapidly. Although, compared with pensions, these obligations may have some more flexibility in how they’re provided, we recognize that funded levels are almost universally lower than those of pensions and could quickly become a challenge to budgets if not addressed. With the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements Nos. 74 and 75, many governments are seeing large new OPEB liabilities on their balance sheets that are growing due to insufficient contributions (see “Credit FAQ: New GASB Statements 74 And 75 Provide Transparency For Assessing Budgetary Stress On U.S. State & Local Government OPEBs,” published March 14, 2018, on RatingsDirect). In response, governments are looking to OPEB obligation bonds (OOBs) as a way to address funding concerns. Depending on the circumstances surrounding the OOB, issuance could have rating implications.

Pension Brief: Are Asset Transfers A Gimmick Or A Sound Fiscal Strategy?

Source: S&P Global Ratings, February 19, 2019
(subscription required)

(Editor’s note: This publication marks the start of a series of short comments on credit matters of interest in the municipal retirement space. This first “Pension Brief” follows up on our publication one year ago surveying pension reform initiatives across the states (“Recent U.S. State Pension Reform: Balancing Long-Term Strategy And Budget Reality,” Feb. 9, 2018). ….)

…. To face persistent and growing pension challenges, some U.S. state and local governments have looked to develop creative solutions to help mitigate expanding liabilities and bolster wanting asset levels. ….

Illinois Budget Proposal Places Risky Bets On Asset Transfers and Graduated Income Tax

Source: S&P Global Ratings, February 22, 2019
(subscription required)

S&P Global Ratings believes that Illinois’ (BBB-/Stable) executive budget proposal precariously balances the current budget, but punts measures to address fiscal progress to future years. It prioritizes service solvency at the expense of lower pension contributions and does not make meaningful progress toward tackling the $7.9 billion bill backlog or projected out-year deficits….

State and local government — US: Market volatility underscores risk of high pension investment return targets

Source: Thomas Aaron, Timothy Blake, Moody’s, Sector In-Depth, February 20, 2019
(subscription required)

Equity market losses in late 2018 will translate into larger than expected pension cost hikes in 2021 for many governments because of equity-heavy investment allocations within their pension systems’ assets. Despite the long-term investment focus of US public pension systems and favorable returns in the past two fiscal years, recent market losses highlight the uphill credit challenge facing governments that rely on high-return/high-risk pension assets to cover a large portion of their pension benefit promises.

State and local government – US: Retiree benefits drive growth in fixed costs, posing greater challenges than debt

Source: Benjamin J VanMetre, Grayson Nichols, Thomas Aaron, Rachel Cortez, Alexandra S. Parker, Moody’s, Sector In-Depth, February 5, 2019
(subscription required)

Fixed costs — the combination of debt service, pension contributions and retiree healthcare— continue to rise for many US state and local governments. While retiree benefits (pensions and healthcare) will continue to drive this trend, the growth level is heavily dependent on unpredictable factors such as pension investment performance and workforce demographics. Debt service costs, on the other hand, are largely stable and unlikely to increase materially,continuing the trend of the last decade. Still, total fixed costs create budgetary challenges for some governments, potentially affecting their ability to deliver core services, a dynamic also known as “crowd-out” risk…..

ReDefined Contribution Plans: 2018 Defined Contribution Language Study

Source: Invesco, 2019
(subscription required)

From the executive summary:
Despite the great strides plan sponsors have made over the past 30 years in providing participants with in-depth education, guidance and tools, many are still challenged in their ability to engage, inform and motivate employees to save for retirement. Participant communications continues to be named a top-three “area of focus” in 2018,1 as plan sponsors of all sizes continually seek to refine their existing programs.

Based on more than 10 years of in-depth research, focused on the language used when communicating with investors, we believe a disconnect remains between what plan sponsors say and what participants hear. To that end, our 2018 ReDefined Contribution Plans defined contribution (DC) language study focused exclusively on the language of DC plans, specifically testing how participants reacted to various language as it related to their understanding of, and interest in, key aspects of DC plan design and investments.

Together with Maslansky + Partners, we conducted a national survey of more than 800 large-plan participants of various genders, income levels and ages (broken out by millennials, Generation X, and boomers).

We then reviewed our key findings within the construct of our four key principles of credible communication, designed to help plan sponsors communicate more effectively and build trust with participants.