Critical Data On Multiemployer Plans

Pensions & Investments covered it but no other media outlet seems to take the institutionalization of theft by government bureaucracy as newsworthy. The sad part is that the participants in the United Furniture Workers Pension Fund A are hardly alone. According to a spreadsheet created from 1,234 Schedule MB filings for 2015 there are 333 other multiemployer (union) plans with larger deficits.

The Pension Benefit Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) keeps track of troubled multiemployer plans and form 5500 filings have these MB actuarial certifications but you have to know what to look for. Here it is….

There are letter codes reported but they are based on the actuarial (pretend) value of assets and liabilities:

Critical and Declining is the worst and this website will now have a dropbox link above to the 5500 filings of those union plans. Broken down by status:

 

However when assets are valued at market and liabilities at RPA rates we get:

 

37 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by dentss dunnigan on July 25, 2017 at 2:44 pm

    As you can see smart money is leaving or already left which means the pool of suckers (taxpayers) left holding the bag is getting smaller all the time ….http://www.howmoneywalks.com/irs-tax-migration/

    Reply

    • Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 5:25 pm

      Call me skeptical, but…

      Correlation does not imply causation.

      http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/jan/08/rick-scott/people-moved-2-trillion-worth-income-escape-high-t/

      “Estimates say individuals who escaped these high-tax states have taken with them around $2 trillion in adjusted gross income.”

      That stat comes from an anti-tax advocate who measured the adjusted gross income of people who moved between states. There is disagreement about how much can be assumed by measuring that income migration, and even whether the $2 trillion in movement is among all 50 states or just from high-tax locations to lower-tax ones.

      In either case, there is plenty of research showing that of the relatively small number of people who move between states, very few of them cite taxes as a reason.

      Reply

  2. Posted by Anonymous on July 25, 2017 at 3:47 pm

    Regarding the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico being the possible lithmus test for ailing States’ pension funds. I don’t remember any mention here or elsewhere of a Federal government bailout.

    In essence their 2012 tax reforms allows for significant tax reductions and redirection from the US Treasury to Puerto Rico to help stimulate their economic recovery. While the Feds couldn’t grant such direct tax incentives to a State there are other mechanisms at their disposable.

    Doesn’t 4-5 % Federal tax liability paid directly to Puerto Rico sound better than whatever your Federal tax bracket is? Why should all us privates be paying such high Federal taxes to support all the Federal, including military, P&B!

    Reply

  3. Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 11:21 am

    John, I’m not clear on what you mean by “institutionalization of theft by government bureaucracy” in this case.
    Who is the thief, and who is the victim?

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 11:30 am

      Unethical practices in the public sector
      institutionalization of theft by government bureaucracy
      Other Names:
      Corruption in the public sector
      Bureaucratic corruption
      Administrative corruption
      Corrupt bureaucracy
      Fraud by government bureaucrats
      Embezzlement by civil servants
      Corruption practiced
      by government agents
      Official profiteering
      Fraud by government agents
      Official corruption
      Corruption of officials
      Corruption in government

      Corruption in governmental institutions
      Corruption of public servants

      Reply

      • I was more referring to the specific mis-regulation of Defined Benefit plans where you allow massive underfunding and when it becomes obvious that even the mini-contributions ‘required’ cannot be made you cut benefits arbitrarily. It disturbs me to have that done in my name.

        Reply

        • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on July 26, 2017 at 12:42 pm

          Thank you.

          It appears that in this case, the employer promised “x” in wages and “x+1” in pensions.

          If regulated correctly, the employer should have paid more for the “x+1” (or promised less).

          As I understand, the same applies to single employer private plans, to a somewhat lesser extent because the multi-employer plan regulations are even less stringent.

          In the union plans, and some single employer, it looks like chances are slim to none to recoup from the employer. No blood left in that stone. No, it’s “not fair” to the retirees.

          Public plans, also mis-regulated, should have paid more, or promised less (more institutionalization of theft by government bureaucracy). Also “not fair” to the employees. (Make no mistake, there will be haircuts, probably not as drastic as the MEPs.)

          Also “not fair” to taxpayers.

          Reply

          • Posted by PS Drone on July 26, 2017 at 8:47 pm

            You are correct; x+1 should have instead been something like .5x. Remember, it’s a pension. Not the Life of Reilly at age 55 paid for by the sweat hogs still working into their late 60’s.

          • Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 10:23 pm

            Actually, I think the regulation is more critical. If the pension is fifty percent smaller, and contributions are fifty percent smaller also, the pension fund will still be underfunded.

            It did make sense, though, in California to put a lid on pensionable income. No need for pensions over $100,000. Those who make over $100,000 can save on their own if they want more in retirement.

        • Posted by Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 10:08 am

          Oh but not the Feds cause of the printing presses…..

          Reply

      • Posted by Earth on July 26, 2017 at 12:09 pm

        Earth to Anonymous:

        All heat, no light.

        Reply

  4. Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 6:47 pm

    Big News:

    https://www.aol.com/article/finance/2017/07/26/foxconn-announces-u-s-manufacturing-plant-in-wisconsin/23049934/

    Notice that the new plant will be located in Wisconsin …. Union-busting Gov. Scott Walker’s Wisconsin, where Taxes WON’T be going through the roof providing ludicrously generous pension & benefits to it’s Public Sector workers.

    And why DID GE and why IS Aetna leaving CT?

    Answer, …. their ludicrously excessive Public Sector pensions & benefits and these Corporations voting with their feet NOT to be suckered into paying for it.

    *********************

    There’s a MESSAGE here !

    Outlaw Public Sector Unions and END Collective Bargaining.

    Reply

  5. Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 8:05 pm

    Maybe…

    Or… Maybe Wisconsin will shell $3 Billion for 3,000 “maybe” jobs.

    Or… Maybe “There’s a MESSAGE here !”

    and the message is…

    “one of its biggest geographic advantages: being wedged between two of the Great Lakes, with taps into more than 20 percent of the world’s fresh surface water by volume. Manufacturing flat-panel displays requires lots of water, which presumably is a reason Foxconn has been focusing on the Upper Midwest.”

    It ain’t always about “the unions”.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2017/07/26/eager-for-an-economic-jolt-wisconsin-must-avoid-getting-conned-by-foxconn/#2d811420547d

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 8:59 pm

      The “expected” response …………

      ANOTHER example of how Transparent California’s Robert Feller pinned you out PERFECTLY, when he said ….

      “You didn’t bat an eye in blindly defending your pre-existing bias”

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 11:25 pm

        SMD,

        I was responding to your comment that …..It ain’t always about “the unions”.

        It sure is. It’s ALWAYS about the Public Sector Unions……….. a CANCER inflicted upon civilized society,

        Reply

  6. Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 10:45 pm

    Don’t shoot the messenger. Your disagreement is with Forbes. What does Robert Feller [sic] say about Forbes’ bias?

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 26, 2017 at 11:26 pm

      SMD,

      I was responding to your comment that …..It ain’t always about “the unions”.

      It sure is. It’s ALWAYS about the Public Sector Unions……….. a CANCER inflicted upon civilized society,

      Reply

      Reply

  7. Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 12:26 am

    “The unions” is a pussy cat. Although, I have learned, you can’t blame Wall Street, or “The Corporations”, because, according to Ed Ring, those guys are in cahoots with the unions.

    A blast from the past…

    I was just rereading Ed’s article on the seven ways government unions are destroying America.

    http://californiapolicycenter.org/how-government-unions-are-destroying-america/

    The article itself is just routine Ed Ring re-hashing, but the comments are classic. The coup de grâce (literally, the final comment)…

    Referral Networks for Lawyerssays:

    June 6, 2017 at 11:02 am

    Excellent site. A lot of helpful info here. I am sending it to some friends ans also sharing in delicious.
    And obviously, thanks on your sweat!

    ………………………….

    Not sure what that means, but it really captures the essence of the article.

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 1:12 am

      Re your linked article………….

      Ed Ring appropriately responded to one of your many comments as follows:
      ******************************************

      Ed Ring says:
      September 24, 2015 at 2:46 pm

      SMD – it’s probably fair to wonder how you find all the time to respond with several, if not dozens of comments on every post we put up. If you are a paid “influencer,” a not uncommon position these days especially on the part of the government unions who have far, far more money than fledgling think tanks, what you’re doing would be a legitimate tactic. Dominate the discussion, repeat your key points over and over, and undermine the impact of whatever points the author was trying to make. ……………………………… We appreciate your comments, SMD. But try to contribute your “fair share” instead of posting as many as everyone else put together.

      Reply

      • Posted by S Moderation Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 2:51 am

        Good quote.

        That Ed Ring has a way with words, don’t he? Imagine that… “undermine the impact of whatever points the author was trying to make. ……………………………… ”
        He’s got me dead to rights, right there. I wish I had a dollar for every time someone said I was a “paid influencer”.

        As Referral Networks for Lawyers says:

        “…also sharing in delicious.
        And obviously, thanks on your sweat!”

        Reply

  8. Posted by Earth on July 27, 2017 at 12:30 am

    Earth to Anonymous…

    Oh! Nevermind.

    Reply

  9. Posted by Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 11:37 am

    If (not when) Illinois finally begs the Federal Gov’t for a bailout of it’s ludicrously excessive Public Sector pensions, a copy of THIS article should first be distributed to all Senate and House members who will vote on any such bailout.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/07/25/why-illinois-is-in-trouble-63000-public-employees-with-100000-salaries-cost-taxpayers-10b/#752883911141

    Reply

  10. Posted by Anonymous on July 27, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    An “issue Brief” from the American Academy of Actuaries……

    “Assessing Pension Plan Health: More Than One Right Number Tells the Whole Story”

    A great education on how to better understand the “health” of a DB pension Plan.

    http://www.actuary.org/content/assessing-pension-plan-health-more-one-right-number-tells-whole-story

    Reply

  11. Posted by Anonymous on July 28, 2017 at 1:15 pm

    I read about this EXTREME example of Public Sector pension abuse/greed several years ago (see link below). Thankfully, a Judge reversed the law that allowed the abuse, calling it “unconstitutional special legislation.”

    On first glace, it appears that the abuse/greed should be singularly directed to the Union lobbyist who benefited from it, UNTIL I got to THIS statement:

    “The judge’s order said the provision at the heart of the matter was drafted by the Illinois Federation of Teachers.”

    Just MORE evidence that Public Sector Unions are a CANCER inflicted upon civilized society.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-substitute-teacher-pension-windfall-met-728-20190727-story.html

    Reply

  12. Posted by Anonymous on July 29, 2017 at 2:20 pm

    Trump’s new chief of staff infection hints an EO outlawing DBP EXCEPT the actor guild the POTUS is currently receiving benefits. No double standard just draining the SWAMP.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: