Catching Up With MPRA Plans

Pensions & Investments (P&I) had an article reporting that:

Two more multiemployer pension funds have applied for permission to reduce benefits to remain solvent, according to the Treasury Department’s website listing applications under the Kline-Miller Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014.

As it turned out these were two plans we reported on two months ago but P&I did add some detail.

Composition Roofers Local 42, Cincinnati, Ohio, is proposing to implement a flat 45% benefit suspension to all participants, except for those aged 80 or more or disabled. The plan, which had $25.2 million in assets and $76.3 million in liabilities as of Jan.1, 2017, projects that it will be insolvent by plan year 2030 without the benefit reductions, which would start April 1, 2020.

I.B.E.W. Local Union No. 237 Pension Plan, Niagara Falls, N.Y., is projected to be insolvent by plan year 2028, and is proposing the start the benefit reductions on July 1, 2020. In 2017, the latest available filing, the plan had assets of $19.1 million and was 29.1% funded.

14 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 18, 2019 at 6:43 pm

    I.B.E.W. Local Union No. 237 Pension Plan, Niagara Falls, N.Y., is projected to be insolvent by plan year 2028, and is proposing the start the benefit reductions on July 1, 2020. In 2017, the latest available filing, the plan had assets of $19.1 million and was 29.1% funded.
    Look I know the public is not responsible for these unfunded plans, but seeing a plan just 29% funded, for working blue collar employees, is troubling to many on a number of different levels. Very troubling. I have to ask myself (and you should too), HOW did they get so LOW? And WHY didn’t someone CUT benefits sooner, so there would be some principal left to earn $$$?

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on September 19, 2019 at 1:02 am

      Rex, The real question is why the Plan was allowed to continue granting ADDITIONAL accruals year after year as the funding ratio continued to decline.

      IRS/Treasury Regs. for Single-employer Corporate-sponsored Plans do not allow the crediting of additional accruals once the funding ratio falls below 60%.

      Reply

      • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 21, 2019 at 6:40 pm

        Rex, The real question is why the Plan was allowed to continue granting ADDITIONAL accruals year after year as the funding ratio continued to decline.
        Wish I knew the answer …

        Reply

  2. Posted by stanley on September 19, 2019 at 12:05 pm

    Off topic: Mary Pat Campbell has an excellent blog post up at http://stump.marypat.org/article/1262/taxing-tuesday-a-conundrum-how-to-tax-retired-folks-when-that-s-what-you-ve-got-a-lot-of

    IMO, this is a topic that people should be attentive to. Next they’ll be taking away my retiree prices for national park campgrounds!

    Reply

    • To be honest, this may be a one generation thing. These millennials are waiting longer and having less kids overall. Some countries have negative population growth like Japan. And just about every one has a lower birth rate than a generation ago. This is a good thing. We need to curb population growth especially if we plan on living longer, this will invariably help the planet and someday may ameliorate the effects of climate change. It does present problems for the current generation.
      Lifestyle choices when it comes to food may be the answer. They indeed should tax food like McDonalds and hot dogs etc. , white bread and other nutritionally valueless foods. If less people by them as a result, God bless us we will become less damn overweight as a nation. Being overweight/obese harms every system in your body. Fruits and vegetables should be subsidized. Not beef.
      Financial issues aside, please don’t tell me this planet wouldn’t be better off with 2 or 3 less billion people in it a generation or two down the line as a result of falling birth rates.

      The selfless man is the one who plants a tree seed knowing he will not be around to enjoy the shade that tree will provide.

      Reply

      • Posted by NJ2AZ on September 19, 2019 at 2:46 pm

        the issue is that our governing overlords have made countless decisions that were dependent on population growing forever

        i agree with everything you said, but the adjustment period is going to be a rough one

        Reply

      • Posted by stanley on September 19, 2019 at 7:07 pm

        Officer EG, I can agree that a largely vegan type diet is healthier than a meat centered diet. We will see in a few years that there are too few people. It will be a problem finding support staff to look after the Alzheimer dementia patients. Maybe robots will be designed to do that.

        Look at the huge number of people who are living better lives than ever. The poverty in the world is almost exclusively politically driven–communist or other despots messing everything up. South Korea has 50M and North Korea has 25M so in your view N Korea is doing it right and S Korea is a problem.

        NYC is very crowded, but as far as I know the people there prefer it to living some place else. And those who don’t relocate. I disagree that there are too many people. Maybe too many democrats. LOL

        Reply

      • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 19, 2019 at 9:46 pm

        They indeed should tax food like McDonalds and hot dogs etc. , white bread and other nutritionally valueless foods…
        Are you INTENTIONALLY trying to bankrupt me EG????🐶🐶🐶
        🦴🦴🦴

        Reply

        • No Rex. Just trying to make you healthier. Lol.
          @ Stanley — I think the world population is probably a little too high. Not saying it is catastrophic, but less demand for natural resources would not be a bad thing. As it is women today as a whole cohort are having less children per capita.
          Hell, these kids nowadays are virgins till later in life and most have far fewer sexual partners by the time they are 25 then a generation ago. They don’t know how to talk to one another. And lots of men are afraid of the #metoo movement types etc.

          Reply

    • Posted by geo8rge on September 20, 2019 at 1:44 am

      Not really off topic as the benefits cuts without a bailout are a sort of tax on the elderly.

      Reply

  3. Posted by geo8rge on September 20, 2019 at 1:13 am

    What happened to the Butch Lewis act?

    29 cosponsors from 23 states:
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/2254/cosponsors

    Reply

  4. E……have to disagree a bit with you here on population growth. Those on government handouts and of certain ethnic, religious and cultural groups are having kids left and right not to mention the illegal populations. Popping out kids every year. Tons of them. Millenials are having children later and less of them because they are establishing their careers and paying down student loans or leaving NJ all together for better employment options.
    Translation, less and less tax payers to fund pensions, lifetime healthcare and public job security. You may not be concerned but other categories of publics should be very concerned. IDK maybe I sound like a Debbie downer but its just the reality.

    Reply

    • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 21, 2019 at 11:21 pm

      Those on government handouts and of certain ethnic, religious and cultural groups are having kids left and right not to mention the illegal populations. Popping out kids every year. Tons of them. Millenials are having children later and less of them because they are establishing their careers and paying down student loans or leaving NJ all together for better employment options.
      MJ having worked and lived in some of the poorest and poverty stricken areas in the USA, I generallyagree with you. One major disagreement I do have with you is I would not try to pigeon hole these characteristics on an ethnic, religious or cultural basis (far too easy to make sweeping, broad incorrect and generalizations). I think POVERTY is the driving force for the very poor in having children, they do so to ensure they have that “safety-net” of welfare, as limited as that “safety-net” and welfare is. Trust ME when I say this, the common, average, TYPICAL US citizen, be it from whatever race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or gender, would PREFER to have a living wage job and EARN their way through life. The typical American does not want to ride a welfare train that does not even cover the basic necessities of life- they want DECENT JOBS. You can thank every President since Carter who shipped all the manufacturing jobs off-shore for the majority of this problem. Especially Bill Clinton’s NAFTA, which is why Billary LOST EVERY fly-over/mid-west/rust belt state in the union. DECENT JOBS, this is what makes countries great, and keeps them great.

      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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: