The Massachusetts ‘Essential Worker’ Pension Boost Proposal Is A Case Study In Public Pension Failures

Link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2021/08/19/the-massachusetts-essential-worker-pension-boost-proposal-is-a-case-study-in-public-pension-failures/

Graphic:

Excerpt:

The text of the bill, H. 2808/S. 1669, is brief. All employees of the state, its political subdivisions, and its public colleges and universities, a bonus of three years “added to age or years of service or a combination thereof for the purpose of calculating a retirement benefit,” if, at any point between March 10, 2020 and December 21, 2020, they had “volunteered to work or who [had] been required to work at their respective worksites or any other worksite outside of their personal residence.”

…..

In subsequent reporting, government watchdog group The Pioneer Institute voiced its opposition. In a statement posted on their website, they criticized the broad coverage — acting as an unfunded mandate for municipalities, including workers even if they had worked outside their home for a single day, encompassing both blue collar and white collar workers. They estimate the bill’s cost at “in the billions of dollars” and point to a massive boost even for a single individual, the president of the University of Massachusetts, whose lifetime pension benefit would increase by $790,750.

…..

And left out of Zlotnik’s proposal is a recognition that the state’s main retirement fund is 64% funded, and the teachers’ fund, 52%, as of 2019.

Author(s): Elizabeth Bauer

Publication Date: 19 August 2021

Publication Site: Forbes

Claims that Illinois pension reform would fail at federal level just aren’t true: The case of Arizona – Wirepoints

Excerpt:

Perhaps one of the best examples for successful reform is Arizona’s recent effort, where the state amended its constitution and passed pension reforms to, as Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey described it, set its public safety “pension system on a path to financial stability while improving the way it serves our brave cops and firefighters.”

No federal challenges to Arizona’s reforms have been made – which is part of a longstanding pattern nationally. Dozens of states over the past several decades have reformed their public pension systems as problems became apparent over the years. None has been sued successfully under the U.S. Constitution – whether under the contract clause or any other provision – in all that time.

Author(s): Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner

Publication Date: 10 August 2021

Publication Site: Wirepoints

Illinois governor signs bill that increases Chicago’s pension liabilities

Link: https://fixedincome.fidelity.com/ftgw/fi/FINewsArticle?id=202104061236SM______BNDBUYER_00000178-a783-de03-a7ff-b7e7bf7e0001_110.1#new_tab

Excerpt:

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed legislation that benefits retired Chicago firefighters, rejecting city warnings adding to its already burdensome pension tab could damage ratings and drive up taxes.

The added cost to bring cost-of-living adjustments for all firefighters in tier one up to a simple 3% annual increase despite their birth date amounts to $18 million to $30 million annually and up to $823 million in full by 2055 when the fund is slated to reach a 90% funded ratio.

Pending legislation to do the same for the police fund carries a steeper price tag of up to $90 million annually and $2.6 billion through 2055.

Author(s): Yvette Shields

Publication Date: 6 April 2021

Publication Site: Fidelity Fixed Income

Puerto Rico Gov Rejects Pension Cuts in POA

Link: https://www.theweeklyjournal.com/politics/puerto-rico-gov-rejects-pension-cuts-in-poa/article_e661e724-80f7-11eb-ace6-7b42750d090c.html

Excerpt:

Puerto Rico Gov. Pedro Pierluisi reiterated his stance against the pension cuts outlined in the government’s Plan of Adjustment (POA), presented last night by the Financial Oversight and Management Board (FOMB) before the Title III Court.

“My administration has been emphatic that this cut to pensions is not reasonable and it is not necessary to confirm the Adjustment Plan, so we will leave it established in the confirmation process before the Title III Court,” Pierluisi said in written statements.

The POA is based on the agreements previously reached by FOMB with the Official Committee of Retirees (ORC) and other unions, for which it envisions a reduction of 8.5 percent in the pensions of government retirees who earn more than $1,500 per month, as stipulated by the past POA. This represents between 26 percent and 27 percent of all pensioners.

Publication Date: 9 March 2021

Publication Site: The Weekly Journal

Vermont Treasurer Calls for Pension Cuts for State Employees, Teachers

Link: https://www.ai-cio.com/news/vermont-treasurer-calls-pension-cuts-state-employees-teachers/

Excerpt:

Vermont Treasurer Beth Pearce released a report containing recommendations that she said could reduce pension UAAL for the Vermont State Employees’ Retirement System (VSERS) and the Vermont State Teachers’ Retirement System (VSTRS) by $474 million and reduce the actuarial determined employer contribution (ADEC) by $85 million.

“While shy of the total target of $604 million in the UAAL and $96.6 million for the ADEC, it is a significant reduction to the existing liabilities and costs to the taxpayer,” said the report, which added that the net other post-employment liabilities could be reduced by $1.68 billion by directing a “minimal amount” of funds for prefunding. “All in, these recommendations will reduce the state’s post-employment liabilities by $2.2 billion.”

Author(s): Michael Katz

Publication Date: 21 January 2021

Publication Site: ai-CIO

The Consequences of Current Benefit Adjustments for Early and Delayed Claiming

Abstract:

Workers have the option of claiming Social Security retirement benefits at any age between 62 and 70, with later claiming resulting in higher monthly benefits.  These higher monthly benefits reflect an actuarial adjustment designed to keep lifetime benefits equal, for an individual with average life expectancy, regardless of when benefits are claimed.  The actuarial adjustments, however, are decades old.  Since then, interest rates have declined; life expectancy has increased; and longevity improvements have been much greater for high earners than low earners.  This paper explores how changes in longevity and interest rates have affected the fairness of the actuarial adjustment over time and how the disparity in life expectancy affects the equity across the income distribution.  It also looks at the impact of these developments on the costs of the program and the progressivity of benefits.

The paper found that:

The increases in life expectancy and the decline in interest rates argue for smaller reductions for early claiming and a smaller delayed retirement credit for later claiming.

Specifically, the benefit at 62 should equal 77.5 percent, as opposed to 70.0 percent, of the full age-67 benefit, and the benefit at 70 should equal 119.9 percent, instead of 124.0 percent, of the full benefit.

The outdated actuarial adjustments are a modest moneymaker for the program – about $1.9 billion in 2018, with most of the gains coming from those claiming at 62, who are typically lower earners. Surprisingly, the correlations between earnings and life expectancy and between earnings and claiming behavior have only modest implications for both the cost and progressivity of Social Security benefits.

Finally, the cost and distributional effects of earnings-related life expectancy and claiming cannot be addressed through the actuarial adjustments for early and late claiming. They reflect the fact that high earners get their large benefits for a long time and low earners get their more modest benefits for a shorter time.

The policy implications of the findings are:

Increases in life expectancy and the decline in interest rates suggest smaller reductions for early claiming and a smaller delayed retirement credit for later claiming.

Accounting for differential mortality would involve changing benefits, and is not a problem that can be solved by tinkering with the actuarial adjustments.

PDF link to full paper: https://crr.bc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/wp_2021-3_.pdf

Authors: Andrew G. Biggs, Anqi Chen, Alicia H. Munnell

Publication Date: January 2021

Publication Site: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College