Virginia’s Pension Bomb Is Still Ticking

by James A. Bacon

Back in February the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) and Gov. Bob McDonnell were disputing what rate of return to assume on the VRS’s $54 billion in assets –8% as McDonnell wanted, or 7%, as the more conservative VRS board preferred. By assuming that the VRS will make more money on its investments, the governor’s assumption of a higher return would allow the state to contribute less money to make up the gap between VRS assets and retirement liabilities.

I’m not sure how that discussion was resolved, but the issue needs to be revisited. One could argue that even the VRS’ conservative assumption was too generous. Recent news and analysis suggests that there are at least two reasons for doing so, and I would add a third.

Thank you, Helicopter Ben. Responding to the sluggish pace of economic growth, Federal Reserve Board Chair Ben Bernanke has indicated that the Fed may engage in another round of monetary stimulus, which means that the Fed will act to keep interest rates lower… for longer… than ever before. I’ll leave it to the pundits to debate whether or not the flood of dollars has kept the U.S. out of another depression. But one thing we can say for certain is that Fed policy has held down the borrowing costs of the world’s largest debtor, the U.S. government, which otherwise would be paying $100 billion or so more per year in interest payments than it is now. The flip side is that savers and creditors are making less money. Among the largest creditors in the country are Social Security and state, local and corporate pension funds.

Thanks to lower interest rates, Social Security earned only 4.4% on its $2.4 trillion portfolio of Treasury bonds in 2011, compared to 5.9% on a smaller portfolio ten years before. That’s one reason, among several, that the Social Security trust funds will run out out sooner than previously forecast. Meanwhile, writes Martin Hutchison with the Prudent Bear, the unfunded pension liability of the S&P 500 companies reached a record level of $355 billion in 2011, an increase of over $100 billion from the end of 2010 and $50 billion more than at the bottom of the 2008 bear market.

Finally, despite widespread actions by state legislatures to shore up their state-employee pensions, as reported by Reuters earlier this month, the average “funded” ratio — assets versus liabilities — for the 50 U.S. states had declined in 2010 to 73.7%, down from 75% in 2009. That represented an improvement from the previous year, which had seen a 7% decline. But down is still down. (Performance varied widely from state to state. Funding ratios varied from 45.4% in Illinois to 99.8% in Wisconsin.)

One rule for me, another rule for thee. The pension situation is actually worse than it looks, contends Andrew G. Biggs in “Public Sector Pensions: How Well Funded Are They Really?” writes Biggs:

The accounting rules followed by U.S. public sector pensions are more forgiving than those required for private sector pensions or public sector plans in other countries. So-called “fair market valuation” more fully reveals the value of public sector plan liabilities and shows that the average public employee pension plan in the United States is only around 41 percent funded while total unfunded liabilities as of 2011 are roughly $4.6 trillion.

The trick is how to account for risk. Once upon a time, pension funds invested primarily in lower-return, lower-risk bonds. Over time, to increase their returns, they have taken on more risk by investing in stocks, private equity and hedge funds. Those alternate investments may, in fact, generate a higher rate of return. But they also have a higher risk of loss. To insure against that risk is a cost that public U.S. pension funds aren’t taking into account. Both Canada and Great Britain accounting rules are stricter for government pensions. Writes Biggs:

The International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board … dictates that the discount rate should not incorporate a risk premium and should be based upon government bonds or high-quality corporate bonds, not, as U.S. public pensions do, the expected return on stocks, private equity or hedge funds.

For what it’s worth only 21% of the VRS’s portfolio is invested in fixed income.  The rest is in a diversified portfolio of riskier assets.

Boomergeddon or Boomergeddon Lite, take your pick. We are not in normal times. There is enormous downside risk to all categories of investments, which are currently being held aloft by super-low interest rates and a general expectation that somehow we’ll manage to muddle through. As I have argued for two or more years now, the U.S. economy is spinning out of control. We may be experiencing crummy, sub-par growth, but with $1 trillion-a-year fiscal stimulus and zero-interest rate monetary stimulus, this is as good as it gets. We have jammed the pedal to the floor, and the ol’ jalopy can’t move any faster.

I hew to the school of thought that the U.S. political class will continual to defer the hard choices that must be made, that U.S. fiscal integrity will continue to erode slowly at first, and then, triggered by some external event, it will unravel with terrifying speed. Borrowers will stop buying federal debt, the government will be unable to sustain its spending, the Fed will become the T-bond buyer of last resort, flooding the economy with dollars, the dollar will collapse and runaway inflation will ensue. The unlikely, best-case alternative is that Congress finds a fiscal spine and actually brings the fiscal gap under control by means of spending cuts and/or higher taxes. In either case, the effect will cripple economic growth. Whichever scenario you choose, the outcome is highly bearish for pension fund investments (and everyone else’s).

Bacon’s bottom line: Virginia’s pension-funding issues are far from over. We have patched them up for now, but the fundamentals continue to deteriorate. The United States has entered an age of austerity, and we had better get used to it. Making unrealistic assumptions about future returns on the VRS portfolio may ease Virginia’s fiscal pressures today, but will wreak a terrible vengeance when those assumptions prove to be unfounded and the commonwealth is legally committed to meet its pension obligations.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

  1. larryg Avatar

    I would still make my same complaint about proportionality of problems.

    While it is true that social security will gradually be less able to pay full benefits as the number of retirees grow and FICA revenues can no longer keep up – the issue with the trust fund is primarily one of symbolism rather than anything near as big and bad as, for instance our deficit and debt and what the primary expenditures are that are driving the deficit and debt.

    You could wipe out/dissolve the trust fund today and it would have no effect on social security other than the fact that the transition to less than 100% benefits would be more immediate but other than that there would be no benefit at all to the deficit – although we would reduce the debt by 2.1 trillion.

    When you compare this issue to the unfunded liabilities of both private and public pensions – as well as the erosion of people’s own 401(K) and IRA retirement funds – the social security issue is a flea on a dogs butt except in the eyes of those who want to make it a proxy for armageddon.

    I attribute this to two things:

    1. – unrelenting propaganda and disinformation spewed by organizations like Heritage who oppose the CONCEPT of SS from the get go.

    2. – our sound-bite culture where if you tell a lie often enough and it gets repeated by others – few people are willing to actually dig for the truth so the lie takes hold.

    If you look at the SS trust fund, and dig a bit, you’ll find that there are over 100 trust funds in the govt ranging from the gas tax trust fund to trust funds for civilian and military pensions – and all of them have the same problem with the money in those funds being used to pay the debt and exchanged with redeemable IOUs ( which are redeemed every single day).

    No one talks about the Civilian or Military pension funds unfunded liabilities or the fact that their trust funds have been “looted” by Congress and are broke… Nope. no dialogue about that at all – not from Heritage or Cato and not from folks who dig into the issue for the truth.

    Then we have Mr. Cantor who says that the GOP has saved the American people 22 billion dollars because they have “frozen” Obama’s new regulations while Mr. Cantor voted for 40 billion in subsidies and deficit spending when he supported Medicare Part C & D.

    So Cantor blathers on about Social Security going broke … the same guy who added 40 billion to the deficit and about 400 billion to our debt.

  2. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Jim’s point is well taken …

    http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2012/07/15/all-of-you-owe-the-county-2500-more/

    I believe the Fairfax County number is about $1,750 per man, woman and child.

    What is the count in Spotsy? Henrico? Chesterfield?

    1. DJR’s figure is accurate. Fairfax County’s unfunded pension liability is $1.7 billion, according to the County. That does not include Other Post Retirement Benefits (health care).

  3. larryg Avatar

    Who gets the blame? We blame Congress and the Govt for the Social Security issue so who do we blame for the unfunded liabilities of a crap load of states, counties and private pensions to include people’s individual 401(K) and IRAs?

    Bacon takes up the right wing shtick that the blame is govt spending, entitlement spending, etc but the “problem” affects pensions public and private almost unilaterally.

    DJ asks about Spotsylvania. My impression is that county pensions are part of the state system. Some counties like Fairfax do their own but many other counties use the state system.

    that’s really neither here nor there in the bigger scheme of things which affects pensions public and private because:

    1. – the economy
    2. – demographics

    What I get from the right these days is that it’s someone’s fault that we have boomers and their effect on social security and public pensions but no such vitriol on private and individual pensions.

    We have a huge problem in the country today. It’s called propaganda and misinformation, and disinformation – that is so prevalent and embedded in the dialogue that we can not even get to an honest discussion of the issues.

    Everything is the fault of the govt and the solution seems to be to take us back to a 3rd world style govt and economy.

    ObamaCare is BAD but heaven forbid we get any kind of a real competitive alternative from the opponents – Nope – the “solution” is for us to adopt 3rd world type health care because God Forbid we do it like the rest of industrialized countries who are all “socialist” and “doomed to fail”.

    We have huge debt and we have to “cut” but if we propose to do across the board cuts over the next 10 years – it’s a fiscal cliff that will eviscerate us.

    Obama is response for the continuing deficit – even though the only thing he really had a had in was the stimulus – the rest was embedded in the budget from 2008 and carried forward: http://goo.gl/osbQF

    So we cannot have any substantiative discussion on what we should do because we: 1. cannot agree on what the problem really is 2. would rather assign blame that move to fixing it.

    SS is a flea on a dogs butt compared to the other money problems we have yet we have to continue to chew on that bone – not because it has unfunded liabilities – but because the concept of Social Security is under attack and it’s “solvency” problems are used as proxies to advocate for it’s repeal all together.

    These are the kind of discussions we are having … Virginia has an unfunded liability problem with pensions.. It MUST be SOMEBODY’s fault and it’s more important to designate blame for the problem rather than accepting simple realities like a stock market that cratered and demographics.

    1. Larry, I don’t know about the other “right wingers,” but I’m a lot more concerned about making sure that people understand we have a problem than in assigning blame. If you pushed me, I would say that here in Virginia, the “blame” can be attributed to a general collective ignorance.

  4. larryg Avatar

    When I say “right wing”, I mean people who are using Heritage and Cato propaganda in their language.

    Orgs like Heritage continue to foster simply wrong ideas about things like trust funds and unfunded liabilities – and the causes – and the fixes.

    We end up with debates as to what pay-as-you-go insurance is and if it is social security then the whole concept of pay-as-you-go insurance is attacked as a govt scheme as opposed to recognizing that virtually all insurance is pay-as-you-go.

    When the very concept of insurance is attributed to government malfeasance, getting to the real issues is futile.

    When people think the trust fund is what pays for Social Security – then further substantiative discussions about the program are futile.

    This is my point. We argue not about substantiative issues and how to deal with them – we argue about what they are or are not. We cannot agree, for instance, whether or not SS is primarily an insurance annuity or a pension plan.

    You can buy a product exactly like SS on the private sector market – it’s called a Life Annuity but we can’t call SS an annuity – because “clearly” (sic), it’s a pension.

    these kinds of debates NEVER let us get to the real issues.

    I used SS but it’s the same with public (and private) sector pensions and unfunded liabilities.

    we are so taken up with assigning blame that we completely overlook what actually caused the unfunded liabilities and it had little to do with unions as the vast majority of unfunded liabilities in Va pensions are totally unrelated to union employees.

  5. Richard Avatar

    I think it important to note that pension underfunding is also an issue for private companies. If you looked at the pension plans of our largest US companies, you’d find similar funding ratios, or worse. Public pension plans are actually more conservative in their investments (debt/equities = higher) that private plans.
    The big difference of course is that private companies are not subject to constitutional limitations that prevent the suspension or termination of promised benefits. Consequently, most large companies have suspended, terminated, or put in 2-tier or cash balance plans.
    A lot of this is based on social norms. It used to be if you worked for the government or a bank or some big company, you expected to get a pension, and the costs were routinely taken into account, and they were not considered a big deal. However, since 1980 (does that date sound familiar?), the retirement system has made a dramatic shift to 401(k) and other defined contribution plans. This has been good for business, good for shareholders, but bad for rank-and-file employees.
    Some might look at the statistics on wealth in this country and noticed the dramatic shift of wealth from the middle class to the top tiers and see this change as part of a general trend.
    What is incontrovertible is that the move from a defined benefit pension system (like what government employees have now) to a defined contribution system represents a fundamental change in attitudes towards the responsibilities of employers for their employees’ retirement that has hurt most middle class employees, especially the much maligned boomers; statistics show that most boomers are woefully unprepared for retirement, and that Social Security will be the primary (sometimes only) means of support for most. The problem for boomers is that they thought (based on what they saw with their parents) that the retirement system would provide them a significant retirement benefit.
    Getting back to the public pensioni plans, my own view is that they were a promise made to employees at the beginning of their careers that was not an unreasonable promise based on social norms at that time. Government can’t act as quickly or decisively as business because it is subject to the political process, and this slowness is usually good in the public arena (see for example the recent UVA brouhaha, and the weird social agenda of the General Assembly). The attack on public employees’ pensions is misplaced and unfair, as they are getting what they were promised and in fact they are covered by a pension system that is in many ways more rational than what we in the private sector get.

  6. Richard, you make a number of valid points and, in a way, you are reinforcing one of the larger points I was trying to make. As a nation, we are under-funding our retirement programs. That includes Social Security, public pensions and private pensions. As a nation, we are addicted to short-term thinking — the next election, the next quarterly statement.

    1. Richard Avatar

      It’s good to be in agreement(not the first time). Of course short-term thinking is part of the American DNA (probably literally) and sometimes has its advantages, but does make us vulnerable to charlatans and emotion.

  7. larryg Avatar

    guess who ends up picking up the private pension costs when a company goes belly up?

    the “fix” for SS is pretty darn simple compared to the “fixes” for other things like abandoned private pensions, Medicare Part C&D subsidies, etc.

    My issue is that we treat SS as if it was an immediate and intractable problem that in turn justifies dropping the program – AT THE SAME TIME – we are totally ignoring the much more immediate budget threats in the regular budget.

    Gov McDonnell could have taken a principled position on the sequestration by saying that the idea of cutting the debt was good and needed to go forward even if he had some major misgivings about DOD cuts.

    Instead, he adopts the partisan position that basically opposes sequestration in total because it involves DOD cuts.

    This is feckless and cowardly behavior for anyone who claims to be a fiscal conservative IMHO.

    If the self-proclaimed fiscal conservatives will not take principled position on the deficit and debt then why would we expect those who don’t claim fiscal conservative credentials to do so?

    We DOUBLED the DOD budget from 2000 to 2010. At the same time we cut taxes. We ended up with a trillion plus deficit. But NOW, it is the current President’s “fault” and when he supports sequestration, we get what from the “fiscal conservatives”?

    By the way there are a number of options for reforming SS:
    http://www.actuary.org/pdf/socialsecurity/votingcard_0801.pdf

    It’s not at all an intractable problem. The problem is it’s being held hostage by those who oppose the CONCEPT of SS.

  8. larryg Avatar

    To give an example of what it would take to “fix” SS:

    Raise the retirement age to 70 by 2030 and keep adjusting
    the age as people live longer Since Social Security was enacted, life expectancy has increased from 61 to 76 years, and we are healthier at
    older ages. It makes sense to keep pace by asking people
    to work longer before claiming full retirement benefits.

    fixes 68%l of the shorfall

    Reduce the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) by _ percentage point
    A Congressional commission felt that the Consumer
    Price Index (CPI) was overstated by 1.1 percentage
    points, meaning the annual COLA is too high.
    The Bureau of Labor Statistics decreased the CPI
    estimate by _%. COLA reductions are cumulative,
    which means the oldest retirees fall far behind in
    purchasing power. Very elderly women already
    have very high poverty rates
    fixes 37% of the problem

    two.. easy common-sense changes take care of the SS “problem”

    we should be so lucky to have such easy fixes for things like Medicare.

  9. I agree with Larry’s proposal to raise the full-benefit retirement age for SS to 70 on a phase-in basis. The same should occur for other pension systems. We are living longer and are more healthy longer in life generally. It doesn’t make sense economically for retirement systems to ignore this.

  10. larryg Avatar

    the interesting thing to me is that unfunded liabilities are not a rare and isolated thing – but fairly widespread, however the gloom & doom folks automatically attribute it to irresponsible actions, caving in to unions, etc and not the simple reality of actuarials and really awful stock market performance – across the board. What killed many personal 401(K)s and IRAs ALSO killed many state pension systems yet the “solution” is to assign blame to those receiving pension benefits AND to mitigate the risk by moving it from professional fund managers (defined benefits) to the individual (defined contributions).

    So basically, the professional fund managers failed in their fiduciary duties of protecting the pensions and preventing unfunded liabilities and the solution is to blame the pension-holders and from now on make them responsible for the inherent risks in the stock market.

  11. Richard Avatar

    Social Security is a relatively easy fix. Medicare’s the big issue for boomers and the country. There are different proposals, but nothing serious by legislators. I’d like to see a system that focuses on health, and doesn’t reward medical providers for volume or expensive, but only slightly improved, results. It can be done with a defined contribution approach that covers everyone or a national system like they have in Canada and UK – at this point I just wish someone would have some guts and take it on.

    Also, it’s just political grandstanding to go after public employees. In Wisconsin they’ve apparently done some important things, and the thing I like about it (I only know what I read in the newspapers) is that they actually did something and at first didn’t demonize the employees – it was a matter of fiscal responsibility. Of course, Virginia doesn’t have public employee unions – it’s a different situation entirely, and attacks on public employees pensions is pandering to the envy that private sector employees feel because they were cheated out of a real pension by a mid-stream change in the retirement system (to their detriment and to the benefit of stockholders and the executives who are compensated by the stockholders).

    1. I don’t think anyone is “attacking” public employees in Virginia. Do you? Can you cite examples. People are just saying that the old pension system was fiscally unsustainable. I sense a real commitment on the part of the McDonnell administration and the General Assembly to honor the state’s commitments to its employees.

  12. larryg Avatar

    I think Richard has it right on all counts.

    For Bacon to say that public sector employees have not been under the gun both in Va and other places is denying the obvious IMHO.

    They are, in effect, blamed for the fiscal condition of the pension system by implication that they have it better than many others, and especially those who lost their pensions or had their own 401(k)s harmed. There is envy and a mindset that public sector employees should have to “suffer” like everyone else is.

    Having said that, I do agree that pensions have to go from defined benefit to defined contribution and I point out that the Federal govt did that with it’s employees at least a decade perhaps two ago.

    They did it by grandfathering the existing employees and having a different pension plan for new hires.

    but when Bacon says that the pension system is not fiscally sustainable, what does he mean if not that public sector employees are getting more than they should?

  13. “When Bacon says that the pension system is not fiscally sustainable, what does he mean if not that public sector employees are getting more than they should?”

    You have two options. Contribute more into the system. Or cut benefits. If you do neither, the system is not sustainable. Virginia seems to be muddling through by cutting some benefits (for young workers) and contributing a bit more into thes system. Fine. I don’t see anyone being “blamed” here. We’re just recognizing reality.

    If you think someone is being singled out and blamed, please give me examples of the rhetoric. I don’t see it.

    1. Richard Avatar

      Jim – I was thinking of the “commenters” when I complained about attacks on public employees. You’ll see these commenters whenever there is an article about underfunded public pensions. [However, not from the sophisticated commenters on this site.] Now that you mention it, it’s not really worth it to get into a lather about a bunch of trolls.

  14. larryg Avatar

    re: sustainability

    what is the reason for the unfunded liabilities? Is it because we are paying them too much or is it because the stock market under-performed and/or boomer demographics?

    I still perceive a general environment of public sector workers being blamed for being paid too much and getting too rich benefits…. when others in the private sector are taking hits.

    and Social Security has a very similar problem and the govt is being blamed for “looting” the trust fund and SS is “broke”… instead of recognition of the same boomer demographics impacts.

Leave a Reply