Looking to Keep Pension Agency Solvent, Congress Fears
Backlash
Michael Schroeder. Wall
Street Journal. (Eastern edition).
|
Abstract (Document Summary) |
|
Such
defaults, along with the bursting of the stock-market bubble five years ago,
have exacerbated financial strains for the agency. Meanwhile, pensions'
funding shortfall across the The
vast majority of plans taken over by the PBGC have been from companies that have been liquidated. In those cases, the PBGC asks the
bankruptcy courts to agree to turn over the pension plans to the agency. In
other cases, companies on their own can use bankruptcy proceedings to
convince the judge that they can't survive without
shedding their pension liabilities. The PBGC must accept the court's rulings.
Also, the PBGC can initiate a pension-plan takeover
by going to court and asking for the termination of company plans. Congress
is preparing to consider legislation that's expected
to mirror many White House proposals that would improve the PBGC's financial standing and pressure companies to make
their plans more secure. Taking the lead is Rep. John Boehner, an Ohio
Republican who is chairman of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce. In a statement yesterday, Mr. Boehner said that
the United Airlines situation "highlights the uncertainty many employees
and employers face in today's defined-benefit pension system." He's working on a bill, expected to be introduced in the
next few weeks, that's expected to include many of the administration's
proposals. |
|
Full Text (1531 words) |
|
Copyright (c) 2005, Dow Jones & Company Inc. Reproduced with
permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission. While
UAL Corp. was getting approval this week to dump United Airlines' pension
woes on the federal government, Congress was working to make that a harder
act to follow for other companies with underfunded
pension plans. In dealing with the growing problem, though, legislators face
a tough balancing act. Congress
has been drafting legislation that would strengthen the finances of the
beleaguered Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the federal agency that insures
private-employer defined-benefit pension plans. It's the
PBGC that would be responsible for $6.6 billion of United's unfunded
pensions. Last
year, the PBGC had $62.3 billion in long-term obligations to pay workers'
pensions, but only $39 billion in assets taken over from failed employer
plans. The $23.3 billion shortfall was double the previous year's gap. The
legislation being drafted likely would make
thousands of companies with defined-benefit pension programs -- that is,
plans that provide workers with a set amount each month, based on wages and
number of years on the job -- pay much higher premiums to the PBGC. Chances
are the changes would affect companies with shakier plans, as well as those
with healthier ones. But while the legislation could shore up the PBGC's finances, lawmakers must avoid steps that could
give companies another reason to abandon defined-benefit plans by making it
even more costly to keep them afloat. The
upshot is that the government's pension safety net faces not only severe
strains, but also significant changes in how it works. Congress
is acting because the prospect of more bankrupt pension plans would plunge
the PBGC, which already has billions of dollars more in commitments than it
can cover, even more deeply into the red -- and raise questions about whether
a taxpayer bailout will be needed down the road. Employer groups warn that
companies will be tempted to freeze or end their plans if they're
compelled to pay higher premiums. More
than two-thirds of large companies, typically those in unionized industries,
offer defined-benefit pension plans. According to the PBGC, defined-benefit
plans cover 20% of private-sector workers at companies of all sizes -- down
from 40% two decades ago. On
Tuesday, a Such
defaults, along with the bursting of the stock-market bubble five years ago,
have exacerbated financial strains for the agency. Meanwhile, pensions'
funding shortfall across the By
far, the industry accounting for the biggest portion of underfunding
is auto makers and automotive-parts companies. The
plans of those companies are $45 billion to $50 billion shy of promises made
to workers. Delphi
Corp., the No. 1 U.S. auto supplier, is struggling with declining sales at
its top customer and former parent, General Motors Corp., plus
big pension obligations and higher raw-materials costs. The PBGC was created by Congress in 1974 after some
high-profile auto-industry bankruptcies -- including Studebaker-Packard Corp.
-- left retirees without pensions. Its mission is to guarantee, up to a
point, defined-pension plans. (It's currently the
trustee of 3,500 plans with about one million participants.) If
a pension plan shuts down without enough money to meet its obligations, the
PBGC guarantees up to $45,614 annually for employees who retire at age 65.
Often, companies replace those plans with a new defined-contribution program,
such as a 401(k). The
vast majority of plans taken over by the PBGC have been from companies that have been liquidated. In those cases, the PBGC asks the
bankruptcy courts to agree to turn over the pension plans to the agency. In
other cases, companies on their own can use bankruptcy proceedings to
convince the judge that they can't survive without
shedding their pension liabilities. The PBGC must accept the court's rulings.
Also, the PBGC can initiate a pension-plan takeover
by going to court and asking for the termination of company plans. Most
of the PBGC's money comes from investment returns
on corporate assets assumed from companies that turn over their pension
liabilities to the government. The agency also collects premiums -- totaling
on average $1 billion annually -- from employers whose plans it guarantees.
So far, the PBGC hasn't gotten any taxpayer money,
and has only a relatively small line of credit from the U.S. Treasury of $100
million. Besides
the airline and automotive companies, the PBGC is keeping a close watch on
the retail sector, with its financially strapped department stores and underfunded pensions. Companies in the wholesale and
retail sector had a $4.3 billion funding shortfall in 2003, the PBGC said. Some
industries with significant pension underfunding,
including utilities and aerospace and defense companies, aren't
considered at high risk to offload their pension obligations. Defense
contractors, for example, include pension expenses in their government
contracts. Utilities typically raise customer rates to pay employee benefits. Companies
with the most well-funded plans are those in the
computer, real-estate, biotechnology and financial-services sectors. At
the other end of the spectrum are the airline and steel industries. So far,
the agency has taken over the pension plans of 141 steel companies, with underfunding totaling $10.2 billion, and 12 airlines,
with underfunding of $11.6. billion
-- including the United Airlines plans. In both industries, a few
bankruptcies have had a domino effect, triggering similar bankruptcy filings
by rivals seeking to cut costs to be competitive. That
is less likely to occur in the auto-parts business, where a
half-dozen companies with a total funding deficit of less than $1
billion are trying to terminate their plans in bankruptcy court. Most parts
makers aren't unionized, so a bankruptcy filing
wouldn't pressure rivals to do the same to lower labor costs. Some
analysts warn that a bailout of the PBGC funded by taxpayers could be on the
horizon. Without major changes, such as higher premiums, and assuming $2.7
billion in new unfunded pension plans each year, the agency will run out of
cash and rack up a $78 billion deficit in 16 years, according to a new
analysis by the Center on Federal Financial Institutions, a Washington think
tank. Congress
is preparing to consider legislation that's expected
to mirror many White House proposals that would improve the PBGC's financial standing and pressure companies to make
their plans more secure. Taking the lead is Rep. John Boehner, an Ohio
Republican who is chairman of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce. In a statement yesterday, Mr. Boehner said that
the United Airlines situation "highlights the uncertainty many employees
and employers face in today's defined-benefit pension system." He's working on a bill, expected to be introduced in the
next few weeks, that's expected to include many of the administration's
proposals. Two
ideas being pushed by the White House -- and considered by Mr. Boehner -- are
stirring concern among employers. One would boost premiums paid by companies
to the PBGC to $30 a year from $19 for each employee covered by a pension
plan. The premium proposal also would increase so-called variable premiums
pegged to the level of a companies' underfunding.
Another administration proposal would create a new formula for measuring
assets and liabilities. James
Klein, president of the American Benefits Council, a trade group for large
employers, said that businesses are worried that the new formula for
measuring pension-plan health would cause nearly all plans to be considered less than 100% funded. In that case, most
companies that offer defined-benefit pensions would have to pay both the
higher flat rate and an additional variable premium. The
result would be that healthy companies would see their total premiums
increase 240% under the proposal, more than double the increase for weaker
companies, according to an analysis by Watson Wyatt Worldwide, a consulting
firm. "While
the pension funding environment desperately needs fixing, we believe that the
administration's proposal will likely damage an already weakened
defined-benefit system," said Sylvester Schieber
of Watson Wyatt. PBGC
Executive Director Bradley Belt said the administration is sensitive to the
negative impact of legislation. But the United
situation "is a wake-up call," he said. "We have to have
tougher funding rules, we need more transparency in the system, and we need
to address risk in a more meaningful way." --- The Weak and the Strong Industries
most and least exposed to problems in defined-benefit pension Five Strongest --
Software --
Real estate --
Biotech --
Hotels, restaurants, leisure --
Thrifts, mortgage finance Five Weakest --
Auto components --
Auto makers --
Airlines --
Aerospace and defense --
Construction and engineering Note:
Excludes industries without defined-benefit plans Source:
Credit Suisse First |