A movement is afoot to require public
pension plans to calculate and publish their market value of
liabilities, a figure akin to a plan's termination
liability. MVL is determined by using a) a
risk-free rate of investment return--generally
around four to five percent--to discount
liabilities, rather than a return based on a
diversified portfolio, which is generally seven to
eight percent; and b) the accumulated benefit
obligation, which accounts for liabilities accrued
to-date, rather than the pension benefit
obligation, which projects future service and
salary growth. Corporate
pension plans are required to calculate a MVL,
chiefly so that in the case of bankruptcy or sale
of the firm, the plan's liabilities are known. The
Governmental Accounting Standards Board is
studying the issue of how public pension
liabilities are calculated and disclosed, as
mandated in its Statements 25 and
27. Possible changes to
these standards may include elements of MVL.
|
|
|
| |
NASRA Resolution on Public Employee Retirement System Accounting Standards and Actuarial
Methodologies |
| |
Papers Presented at the Society of Actuaries Public Pension Finance Symposium,
May 2009 |
| |
The Rationale for Traditional Actuarial Models, Brian Murphy, Norm Jones, and Paul Zorn, presented at the SOA Public Pension Finance Symposium, May 2009 |
| |
NASRA White Paper: Public Pensions and Market Value of Liabilities |
| |
Ensuring Realistic Employer Costs for Retirement Plans: Why “Market Value of Liabilities" Makes No Sense for Governmental Accounting, National Education Association |
| |
Oral and Written Statements Submitted to American Academy
of Actuaries Public Interest Committee Forum |
| |
Joint Letter and Statement to American Academy of Actuaries Board of Directors |
| |
Why Public Sector Accounting and Financial Reporting Is--And Should Be--Different, Governmental Accounting Standards Board |
| |
The
Pension Actuary's Guide to Financial Economics, Joint AAA/SOA Task Force on Financial Economics and the Actuarial Model |
| |
An "ASOP" Fable: The Illusion of Market Value, Gary Findlay, MOSERS, |
| |
The Advantages of Using Conventional Actuarial Approaches for Valuing Public Pension Plans, NCPERS
and Paul Zorn |
| |
Why Pension MVL is a Misapplication of Financial Economics, Daniel P. Moore, FSA, EA. |
| |
The Case for Stocks in Pension Funds, David T. Kausch, FSA, Gabriel, Roeder, Smith & Co. |
| |
The Case Against Stock in Public Pension Funds,
Lawrence N. Bader and Jeremy Gold |
| |
The Case For Marking Public Pension Plan Liabilities to Market, Jeremy Gold
and Gordon Latter |
| |
Financial Economics and Public Retirement Systems, Presentation by Paul Angelo of The Segal Company |
| |
What Ails Public Pensions? And What Can Be Done to Strengthen Them?, Richard Ennis, CFA,
Ennis Knupp & Associates, Inc. |
| |
Valuing Public Pension Plans: Comparing Financial Economics With Conventional Approaches, GRS Insight, April 2008 |
| |
Liability Aware Investing for Defined Benefit Pension Funds, Armand Yamboa, FSA, Ennis Knupp
& Associates, Inc. |
| |
The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly of Pension Accounting,
Dimitry Mindlin, CDI Advisors |
| |
In Support of the Weatherman, Dimitry Mindlin, CDI Advisors |
| |
Windmill Fighters in Potemkin Villages, Dimitry Mindlin, CDI Advisors |
| |
The Case for Stochastic Present Values, Dimitry Mindlin, CDI Advisors |
| |
Press Release: PBGC Announces New Investment Policy |