actuarial measures of defined benefit pension plans for the national accounts marshall reinsdorf bea...
Post on 24-Dec-2015
220 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Actuarial Measures of Defined Benefit Pension Plans for
the National AccountsMarshall Reinsdorf
BEA Advisory Committee MeetingMay 11, 2012
bea.gov
Preview of Questions
Tables in this presentation are illustrative, and are intended to facilitate discussion of questions, including: Should the NIPAs leave DB pension plans in the personal sector or
put them in their own sector? Do DB plans have an implicit claim on the employer in the amount
of the unfunded actuarial liability? Do employers pay imputed interest on this claim? If so, can they
receive imputed interest if the plan is over-funded? Should government plans be measured on an ABO basis or a PBO
basis? (For Federal plans, PBO is a more practical option.)
bea.gov
Treating DB Plans like DC Plans
In a defined contribution (DC) pension plan, the benefit level depends on the value of the assets in the participant’s account.
We therefore measure households’ DC plan wealth by the plan assets, and we measure the corresponding income flow by employers’ contributions + property income on plan assets.
In a defined benefit (DB) plan a formula that typically depends on years of service and final pay determines the benefit level.
Currently we account for DB plans in the same way as DC plans.
bea.gov
In 2013 Comprehensive Revision of the NIPAs Accounting for DB Pension Plans
will change Wealth of DB plan participants is the actuarial value of their
claims to future benefits, and their compensation income is the value of the benefit claims accrued by working.
Treating plan assets as pension wealth and employer contributions as compensation is cash accounting approach to measuring DB pension plans.
Plan is to use actuarial estimates of accrued claims to benefits. Will reduce volatility of compensation of employees covered by
private plans;
Will give more accurate measures of saving by persons and by employers (but will have no effect on national saving).
bea.gov
Contributions aren’t always a good approximation for benefits accrued through
covered employment Unfunded actuarial liability (UAL) is the difference between the
actuarial value of benefit entitlements of current and former employees and the value of the assets held by the pension plan.
Private DB plans are supposed to be fully funded (UAL = 0) (and indeed, aggregate UAL for these plans is often not far from 0).
Holding gains and losses can leave plans under- or over-funded.
Employer contributions respond to investment gains and losses as needed to move the UAL towards zero. Employers also tend to under-contribute when their cash flows are weak.
Sponsors of mature, underfunded plans must make high contributions just to maintain plan solvency.
bea.gov
New Treatment of DB Pensions in 2008 SNA
Besides providing better information about the economy, the change in treatment of DB plans is called for in the new SNA.
Household DB pension wealth and income in the 2008 SNA: Household wealth = value of participants’ benefit entitlement as
measured using actuarial techniques. Employer imputed contributions = benefit entitlements accrued
during the time period – actual contributions. Households’ imputed interest income = (interest rate) × (the
actuarial value of the benefit entitlements). Even though DB plans pay imputed interest, they don’t receive any
imputed interest. They are included with financial corporations.
bea.gov
Proposed Treatment
For an underfunded pension plan, proposal is to impute a claim on the employer equal to the unfunded actuarial liability and to impute payments of interest on this claim.
Rationale: When an employer puts off making an actuarially required
contribution, the plan is deprived of the opportunity to invest the contribution and earn property income.
Both the contribution and the property income that it would have earned are needed for the plan to be able to pay the benefits that are due.
Failing to pay a contribution that is due creates an implicit loan from the pension plan to the employer.
bea.gov
Basic Concepts for a DB Plan
Benefit entitlement of plan participants = plan’s Actuarial Liability.
Current change in benefit entitlement = benefits accrued through service to employer + interest on ben. entitlement – benefits paid.
Current change in plan assets = employer & employee contributions + investment income on assets – benefits paid – administrative exp.
Not included in national accounts definition of saving: Change in benefit entitlement due to actuarial gains & losses,
assumption changes and plan amendments; and
Change in assets from holding gains & losses and capital transfers.
Private and state & local government plans attempt to fund much of their benefit expense from holding gains.
bea.gov
Implications of Holding Gains
Multiplying interest rate assumed in actuarial calculations by the value of plan assets typically predicts a higher value for the plan’s property income than it actually receives.
For a typical plan with a positive UAL (or unfunded benefit entitlement):
interest accruing on the benefit entitlement = interest cost of UAL + predicted property income from assets
Predicted property income from assets = expected holding gains + actual property income from assets
With DB plans in their own sector, plans’ dissaving equals (expected holding gains on assets – plan’s actual property income from assets).
bea.gov
Cash and SNA 2008 Measures of Households
Measurement Concept Current Cash Measure Accrual Measure of SNA 2008
Compensation income Employer contributions
Benefits entitlements accrued through service to employer net of employee contributions + plan administrative expenses
Household property income
Property income on plan assetsInterest accruing on benefit entitlement
Household saving Employer contributions + income from plan assets – administrative expenses
Net benefits accrued through service to employer + interest on benefit entitlement
bea.gov
Receipts & Expenditures for Private Plans
2000 2001 2002Receipts 122.9 131.3 144.1 Employer contributions 73.1 77.0 81.9 Actual 32.8 48.6 99.8 Imputed 40.3 28.4 -17.9 Employee contributions 0.8 0.7 1.1 Property income from assets 63.3 58.0 49.1 Imputed interest on claim on employer for unfunded liability -14.3 -4.4 12.0Expenditures 180.3 188.4 200.3 Benefit entitlements accrued through covered employment 66.6 70.5 76.1 Interest on benefit entitlements 106.4 110.7 117.3 Administrative expenses 7.3 7.2 6.9Saving (property income – interest_rate × Assets) -57.4 -57.1 -56.2 Current change in assets -28.6 -24.4 8.3 Current change in claim on employer for UAL (4+7) 26.0 24.0 -5.9 LESS: Current change in household benefit entitlement 54.8 56.7 58.6Household income from participation in DB plans (8-5) 179.5 187.7 199.2Employer expenses (2+7) 58.8 72.6 93.9Change in net worth of DB pension plans -164.0 -273.2 -214.3
bea.gov
Effect on Estimates for Private Plans (billions or percent)
2000 2001 2002Revision to employer saving -26.0 -24.0 5.9Revision to household saving 83.4 81.1 50.3Pension plans' saving (new concept) -57.4 -57.1 -56.2Revision to national saving 0.0 0.0 0.0
Revision to employer saving if employers don't benefit from plan overfunding -40.3 -28.4 5.9
Corporate profits with IVA and CCAdj 819.2 784.2 872.2
Revision to employer saving as a percent of corporate profits -3.2 -3.1 0.7Revision to employer saving if employers don’t benefit from overfunding -4.9 -3.6 0.7
Revision to personal saving rate 1.1 1.1 0.6
bea.gov
Receipts & Expenditures, State & local Government Plans (billions)
2007 2008 2009Receipts 332.5 332.1 378.8 Employer contributions 193.7 202.2 201.2 Actual 75.2 82.5 84.2 Imputed 118.5 119.7 117.0 Employee contributions 35.5 38.1 39.9 Property income from assets 93.0 77.4 62.2 Imputed interest on claim on employer for unfunded liability 10.3 14.5 75.5Expenditures 413.1 436.1 449.4 Benefit entitlements accrued through covered employment 213.9 226.5 230.7 Interest on benefit entitlements 183.9 195.8 208.3 Administrative expenses 15.3 13.8 10.5Saving (property income – interest_rate × Assets) -80.6 -104.0 -70.6 Current change in assets 14.4 -2.0 -24.5 Current change in claim on employer for UAL (4+7) 128.8 134.2 192.5 LESS: Current change in household benefit entitlement 223.8 236.2 238.7Household income from participation in DB plans (8-5) 377.6 398.0 409.5Employer expenses (2+7) 204.0 216.6 276.7Change in net worth of DB pension plans -74.9 -1109.9 106.3
bea.gov
Effect on Estimates for State & Local Government Plans (billions or
percent)2000 2001 2002
Revision to employer saving -128.8 -134.2 -192.5Revision to household saving 209.4 238.1 263.1Revision to pension plans' saving -80.6 -104.0 -70.6
State & local government saving (official) 12.2 -72.2 -78.0State & local government saving--Revised -116.6 -206.4 -270.5
Revision to personal saving rate 2.0 2.2 2.4Pension plan saving as percent of DPI -0.8 -0.9 -0.7
bea.gov
Receipts & Expenditures, Federal Government Plans (billions)
2007 2008 2009Receipts 194.8 200.1 204.5 Employer contributions 42.6 46.1 49.8 Actual 98.1 106.1 115.6 Imputed -55.5 -60.0 -65.8 Employee contributions 4.3 4.3 4.2 Property income from assets 50.0 51.3 45.7 Imputed interest on claim on employer for unfunded liability 97.9 98.4 104.8Expenditures 194.8 200.1 204.5 Benefit entitlements accrued through covered employment 46.8 50.3 53.9 Interest on benefit entitlements 147.9 149.7 150.5 Administrative expenses 0.1 0.1 0.1Saving 0.0 0.0 0.0 Current change in assets 47.7 52.4 48.6 Current change in claim on employer for UAL (4+7) 42.4 38.4 39.0 LESS: Current change in household benefit entitlement 90.1 90.8 87.6Household income from participation in DB plans (8-5) 190.5 195.8 200.3Employer expenses (2+7) 140.5 144.5 154.6Change in net worth of DB pension plans -77.2 -131.1 -62.8
bea.gov
Effect on Estimates for Federal Plans (billions or percent)
2007 2008 2009Revision to employer saving -40.9 -36.7 -36.0Revision to household saving 40.9 36.7 36.0
Federal government saving (official) -245.2 -613.5 -1217.9State & local government saving--Revised -286.1 -650.2 -1253.9
Revision to personal saving rate 0.4 0.3 0.3
bea.gov
Receipts & Expenditures, All Plans, 2007
Receipts 692.0 Employer contributions 323.7 Actual 240.8 Imputed 82.9 Employee contributions 40.6 Property income from assets 227.6 Imputed interest on claim on employer for unfunded liability 100.1Expenditures 833.2 Benefit entitlements accrued through covered employment 339.5 Interest on benefit entitlements 468.9 Administrative expenses 24.8Saving -141.2 Current change in assets 55.1 Current change in claim on employer for UAL (4+7) 183.0 LESS: Current change in household benefit entitlement 379.3Household income from participation in DB plans (8-5) 792.7Employer expenses (2+7) 423.8Change in net worth of DB pension plans -85.6
bea.gov
Effect on Estimates for All Plans (billions or percent)
2000 2006 2007 2008Revision to employer saving -118.7 -173.0 -181.5 -170.9Revision to household saving 232.6 301.9 322.7 274.8Pension plan saving (new concept) -113.9 -128.9 -141.2 -104.0
Revision to personal saving rate 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.2Revision to saving rate if plans in personal sector 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7
bea.gov
Questions for the Committee
Should the NIPAs include the detailed data on DB pension plans shown in the illustrative Receipts & Expenditures tables of this presentation?
Should the NIPAs leave DB pension plans in the personal sector or put them in their own sector (where plans will typically have negative saving equal to the difference between their actual property income and the property income implied by the interest rate assumption)?
Do DB plans have an implicit claim on the employer in the amount of the unfunded actuarial liability (so that the plans’ net worth is zero)?
Do employers pay imputed interest on this claim, and can they receive imputed interest if the plan is over-funded?
Should government plans be measured on an ABO basis or a PBO basis? (For Federal plans, PBO is a more practical option.)
bea.gov
Concluding Th0ughts
Moving from cash to accrual measurement changes the economic picture significantly.
Based on the illustrative numbers in this presentation, under one of the accrual options, estimates personal saving would be revised up by over 3 percent points in 2007 (over 2 points from state & local government plans, 0.7 from private plans, and 0.3 from Federal government).
Allowing DB pension plans to have non-zero saving will require a modification of the breakdown by sector of national income.
top related