Ted Ballantine | Pension360

Three New Tax Hikes in Chicago As Emanuel Looks For Revenue To Pay Down Pension Debt

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is leaving no stone unturned in his search for revenue sources that could help pay down the city’s unfunded pension liabilities, which total over $25 billion.

Complicating the search is the upcoming election; Emanuel has said he will not touch property, sales or fuel taxes, all of which are politically unpopular.

In the past year, Emanuel has increased the “telephone tax” and cigarette taxes. This week, he added three more tax hikes to the list. From the Chicago Tribune:

Mayor Rahm Emanuel plans to raise taxes on drivers who park in garages, those who own luxury skyboxes at Chicago stadiums and companies that try to avoid city taxes by making purchases in the suburbs to balance next year’s budget, aides said Monday.

The three tax hikes would net the city $31.4 million as the mayor seeks to close an estimated $297.3 million budget gap without raising property, sales or gas taxes ahead of the Feb. 24 city election, when Emanuel will ask voters to give him a second term.

Under Emanuel’s plan, the tax on parking in public lots would rise 2 percentage points, to 22 percent on weekdays and 20 percent on weekends. The city expects to collect $10 million from the increase in 2015, mayoral spokeswoman Kelley Quinn said.

As part of his first budget, Emanuel added a $2-a-day fee on cars parked in public lots on weekdays. And in 2013, Emanuel pushed through the City Council a switch from a flat parking tax of $5 to a percentage parking tax, which the mayor said would cost more for parkers in “premium” garages like those at hotels but potentially lower costs for people parking in economy garages.

The city estimates it would make $4.4 million by ending a 1995 “amusement tax exemption” on the cost of renting skybox suites at sporting events and concerts.

And the Emanuel administration says $17 million would flow into the city’s coffers next year by closing a loophole in the use tax charged to Chicago businesses that buy certain goods outside the city.

A breakdown of the city’s unfunded pension liabilities by system, from the City of Chicago website (data from 2012):

Municipal Employees’ Annuity & Benefit Fund of Chicago (MEABF): $8.2 billion

Laborers’ & Retirement Board Employees’ Annuity & Benefit Fund (LABF): $0.9 billion

Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund (PABF): $7.0 billion

Firemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund (FABF): $3.1 billion

Chicago Teachers Pension Fund (CTPF): $7.1 billion

Park Employees Annuity and Benefit Fund (PEABF): $0.4 billion

Former Illinois Attorney General Pushes For “Plan B” On Pension Reform

In all likelihood, a judgment on the constitutionality of Illinois’ 2013 pension reform law will in the next six months.

Former Illinois attorney general Ty Fahner doesn’t want the state to be blindsided by the result. If the law is overturned, he says, there needs to be another plan in place.

Fahner is asking lawmakers from around the state to start developing alternate reform ideas. From the News-Gazette:

“I still hope and expect, I truly do, that the court may find Senate Bill 1 constitutional. Whether that’s a false hope or not, I need to make the point that even if they do, after all of that, we’re still in terrible shape as a state,” Fahner said. “If they overturn it, there will be incredible hardship, which is what we are trying to get people to focus on now, not because it will change their decision, but I think there has to be a debate, a discussion, right now, because if you wait until the spring when the court finally rules, it’s going to be a little bit too late.

“They’re going to be in the middle of the budget at the end of the session. Whether it’s Quinn or Rauner, they’re going to have a difficult time. I think they need to talk now.”

He’s encouraging candidates for governor and the Legislature to address the question, and wants voters to ask them about it.

“That’s all we’re trying to do with this,” said Fahner, whose group is pushing what it calls a “What If?” initiative. “It’s so profound and the damages could be so terrible that people have to think about it now and not just give a political reaction later that, ‘We’ll have to sort it out.'”

State Rep. Adam Brown, R-Champaign, said he was “more than happy to be a part of the conversation” about an alternative pension plan.

“But at this point, there are just too many unknowns,” he said.

[…]

[Senate President John] Cullerton’s spokesman John Patterson advised patience.

“It has been a long struggle to get a law through the General Assembly and now a case to the courts,” he said. “Given the complexity of the issue and the difficulty in gettting to this point, we should now see what the courts have to say. There are a lot of people with a lot of opinions, but they aren’t on the Illinois Supreme Court, and it is the justices who will ultimately tell us what can and cannot be done.

“At this point the case is still before the trial court, so it seems a bit premature to already be predicting its demise. Let’s let the judiciary do its job.”

As for Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner’s proposal that state employees be moved into 401(k)-style, Fahner said, “The idea of a 401(k) is great, but I’m not sure it would work in the current situation.”

Fauher also questions whether the reform law goes far enough. From the News-Gazette:

“[The law] only scratches the surface of the state’s problems. We also have to look at what drives jobs from the state. We’ve got to do a lot to make this a more jobs-friendly state.”

This year, he said, 26 percent of the state budget is devoted to pension payments. By 2024, pension payments would eat up a third of the budget.

He said that would lead to higher property taxes, fewer teachers and less money for social services.

“A lot of people say this isn’t a problem, all you do is just raise more taxes. This goes back to the jobs issue. We could raise taxes again, but we already know what the job losses have been,” Fahner said. “We’re losing jobs because it’s a very hostile work environment with regulations and everything else. If you have less jobs, you have less people to pay the taxes which fund all of these needs, and that’s what is happening to us.”

Governor Pat Quinn has said he doesn’t have a “plan B” in place if the law is deemed unconstitutional.

Cutting Investment Fees – A Key To Secure Retirement?

Charles D. Ellis wrote a thoughtful article in the Financial Analysts Journal recently about the hard choices that people– and institutions – must face sooner than later regarding retirement and pension systems.

One of the main facets of the article’s thesis:

We need to make hard choices on how much to save, how long to work, how to invest, and how much to draw from our savings for spending in retirement.

The article is full of great discussion on these points. After someone stops working, a big part of their financial security stems from controlling costs – not just living expenses, but investment expenses, as well.

From the article:

Most investors somehow believe that fees for investment management are low. Fees are not low. Here’s why: By convention, fees are shown as a percentage of the assets, say, just 1%. But that’s seriously misleading. The investor already has the assets, so the manager’s fee should be stated as a percentage of the benefit (i.e., returns).

If returns are 7%, then the same fee in dollars is 15% of returns. And because index funds deliver the full market return with no more than the market level of risk for a fee of 0.1%, the real cost of active management is the incremental cost as a percentage of the incremental benefit of active management. That’s why the true cost of active management is not 1% or even 15%. Because the average active manager falls short of his chosen benchmark, the average fee is more than 100% of the true net benefit.

Increasingly, investors are learning that one way to reduce costs—and increase returns—is to save on costs by using low-cost index investments, particularly with their 401(k) or other retirement plans.

How your retirement funds are invested is important because many of those dollars are invested for a very long time—20, 40, even 60 years.

The article, titled “Hard Choices: Where We Are”, is available for free from the Financial Analysts Journal.

Photo by 401kcalculator.org

Chart: CalPERS’ Real Estate Returns Since 2000

CalPERS announced last week plans to increase its real estate investments by 27 percent. This graph [above] shows the performance of the pension fund’s real estate portfolio since 2000.

As the graph indicates, the fund’s real estate investments have generally performed well, consistently netting returns of 15 percent or more.

But 2009 and 2010 were disastrous, and CalPERS lost $10 billion on real estate investments over that period.

CalPERS’ latest foray into real estate will be marked by investments in properties with “established demand”, according to the fund’s CIO, Ted Eliopoulos. Such investments include apartment complexes in cities and fully leased office buildings.

Graph credit: The Wall Street Journal.

Raimondo, Fung Fight Over Pension Funding, Fees

Allan Fung, Rhode Island’s Republican candidate for governor, released an ad last week slamming his opponent Gina Raimondo for paying “high fees” for “poor returns” on pension investments.

[The ad can be viewed above.]

Raimondo’s campaign issued the following statement refuting Fung’s claims and accusing Fung of mismanaging Cranston’s pension system:

“Allan Fung is recycling the same tired, misleading attacks on Gina that Rhode Islanders have already rejected. Everything Gina has done as Treasurer is to protect workers’ pensions. The fact is, Gina’s investment strategy is working and is providing strong returns with less risk.”

“In contrast, as mayor, Fung has failed to make full payments to the Cranston pension system and is proposing that we actually default on a debt the state owes. That’s reckless, risky and will hurt taxpayers,” she said of his stance on the 38 Studios bonds.

She cited annual financial reports indicating that the city never paid more than 87 percent of its required pension contribution the first four budget years Fung was mayor.

Fung’s spokesman responded to that attack with a subsequent statement:

“Cranston’s locally administered pension plan had been severely underfunded for years before Allan was elected mayor. … He increased contribution levels and negotiated a responsible pension reform plan,” and is “proud of the fact” the city budgets have had enough money to make full payment the last two fiscal years.

The Raimondo campaign has previously acknowledged that the pension system’s investment fees totaled $70 million in fiscal year 2012-13. Around $45 million of those fees were from hedge funds.

The Raimondo campaign has also clarified that the pension system’s hedge fund investments returned 8.8 percent in 2013. The system’s overall portfolio, meanwhile, returned 15 percent.

CalPERS Weighs Foray Into Riskier Loan Securities

The CalPers Building in West Sacramento California. — The CalPERS building in West Sacramento, California.

CalPERS is considering investing in collateralized loan obligations (CLOs), or securities backed by a pool of (sometimes low-grade) corporate loans.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Fixed-income executives for the nation’s largest public pension fund told their investment board committee Monday they want to buy riskier versions of “collateralized loan obligations,” which are securities backed by corporate loans. The plan already invests in triple-A rated slices of these securities.

“We think we have expertise in this area,” said fixed-income head Curtis Ishii. He added: “You get more spread if you take more risk.”

Mr. Ishii did not disclose how much the system, which is known by its abbreviation Calpers, would like to invest in the riskier loan-based securities. The move still needs to be approved by an investment strategy group comprised of the fund’s top investment officers.

Any shift it makes will likely influence others because of its size and history as an early adopter of alternatives to traditional stocks and bonds.

CalPERS announced last week that it is increasing its real estate holdings by 27 percent.

Photo by Stephen Curtin

Christie’s 2017 Challengers Already Forming Pension Policies

New Jersey’s next gubernatorial election is still three years away – but Christie’s potential Democratic challengers are already meeting with stakeholders and gearing up their pension policies.

Those potential challengers include Senate President Stephen Sweeney, Assemblyman John Wisniewski, former U.S. ambassador Philip Murphy and Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop.

They all have one thing in common: they believe pensions will be a big issue in the 2017 election, and Christie will be on the wrong side of it.

From NorthJersey:

Although the contest is still three years away, several Democrats are already conducting a fierce, behind-the-scenes pre-primary.

And, for the time being, the best way of wooing unions representing police, firefighters and thousands of government workers appears to be to trumpet one of labor’s bottom-line demands: Unless Governor Christie reverses course and makes his promised payments to the pension system, any further discussion of more changes, including a call to scale back workers’ benefits, is dead in the water.

“The employees are paying their share, [Christie] should do the same,’’ said state Senate President Stephen Sweeney.

Christie’s reform push — a public tour over the summer and creation of the 10-member panel of experts who issued last month’s report — looks like it may run smack into the Democratic Party’s solidarity with public employee unions.

That unity will most likely be seen in the Senate, where Sweeney, a Gloucester County Democrat, has the power to derail Christie’s agenda when it suits him. Sweeney has cooperated with Christie on a whole range of deals — including the hotly contested 2011 reforms that forced public workers to pay more for pension and health care benefits, raised the retirement age and cut cost-of-living adjustments. Sweeney is not cooperating this time.

Other potential Democratic candidates in the 2017 race are also lining up behind the union position.

“We have no credibility as a government unless we stand up and meet our obligation to the pensioners,” said Philip Murphy, who served as a U.S. ambassador to Germany and led the Democratic National Committee’s fundraising from 2006 to 2009. “I think it’s very hard to go back to the well until the state can prove that it’s a reliable partner in this.”

Assemblyman John Wisniewski, D-Middlesex, who opposed the first round of benefit changes in 2011, also toed the union line. “Why would anybody believe assurances about any new set of promises about the pension fund when the promises that were made under heavy skepticism to begin with have not been lived up to?”

Unions were angry when Christie cut the state’s pension payments and used the money to plug budget shortfalls elsewhere. Union leaders said that workers were doing their part by contributing money, but the state was shirking its responsibility. From NorthJersey.com:

“We can’t take anyone seriously who talks about fixing the pension system without putting in additional resources,’’ said Ginger Gold Schnitzer, director of governmental relations for the New Jersey Education Association, the powerful teachers union. “It’s ridiculous to think a pension system can survive without regular [state] contributions. Our members have made those contributions.”

According to a recent report from the New Jersey Pension and Benefit Study Commission, the state if shouldering $37 billion of pension liabilities. That number has tripled since 2005.

Corbett: “Entrenched Interests” Preventing Pension Reform in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R) is trailing by double-digits in many polls to opponent Tom Wolf (D) – but his campaign strategy of pushing the need for pension reform appears to be unchanged.

Corbett has been the most vocal critic of his state’s pension system, but most of his fellow lawmakers – and voters, for that matter – have not reciprocated that enthusiasm for major reform.

On Monday Corbett said that “entrenched interests” are preventing pension reform. And those interests, according to the governor, have seeds in both parties.

Reported by the Intelligencer:

“There are entrenched interests out there,” the governor said. “The public sector unions are all against change … There are Republicans that don’t like me. I’m pushing change. It’s very hard to get change in Pennsylvania.”

[…]

Corbett traces the current pension problem to 2001.

That’s when the state Legislature boosted the retirement package for state lawmakers and judges by 50 percent and increased pensions by 25 percent for 300,000 active state workers and school employees. Corbett wants to roll back those increases to pre-2001 levels for current employees — an annual multiplier of 2.0 rather than 2.5 for employees and from 3.0 to 2.0 for lawmakers and judges — and place new employees in a 401(k) style retirement plan.

But the Legislature, backed by the might of public section unions, has stood in his way.

“We said to present-day employees, going forward, that we need to ratchet it back to two,” Corbett said of the annual multiplier. “Did you earn that (2.5)? I don’t think so. You did nothing new.”

Corbett said he favors the state rolling back the benefits and letting the courts decide when the unions sue. The real problem for taxpayers, he said, would occur once the issue landed in court because the judges who benefited from the enhanced pensions would be asked to rule on the matter.

“What judge in this state can hear that case?” he asked. “It’s an economic conflict of interest. … People should be upset with that. I say, let’s try it.”

Corbett re-iterated that, if re-elected, he would call a special legislative session to push through pension reform measures.

Study: Has a 400 Percent Increase in Alternatives Paid Off For Pensions?

A newly-released study by CEM Benchmarking analyzes investment expenses and return data from 300 U.S. defined-benefit plans and attempts to answer the question: did the funds’ reallocation to alternatives pay off?

The simple answer: the study found that some alternative classes performed better than others, but underscored the point that “costs matter and allocations matter” over the long run.

In the chart at the top of this post, you can see the annualized return rates and fees (measured in basis points) of select asset classes from 1998-2011.

Some other highlights from the study:

– Listed equity REITs were the top-performing asset class overall in terms of net total returns over this period. Private equity had a higher gross return on average than listed REITs (13.31 percent vs 11.82 percent) but charged fees nearly five times higher on average than REITs (238.3 basis points or 2.38 percent of gross returns for private equity versus 51.6 basis points or 0.52 percent for REITs). As a result, listed equity REITs realized a net return of 11.31 percent vs. 11.10 percent for private equity. Net returns for other real assets, including commodities and infrastructure, were 9.85 percent on average. Net returns for private real estate were 7.61 percent, and hedge funds returned 4.77 percent. On a net basis, REITs also outperformed large cap stocks (6.06 percent) on average and U.S. long duration bonds (8.97 percent).

– Many plans could have improved performance by choosing different portfolio allocations. CEM used the information on realized net returns to estimate the marginal benefit that would have resulted from a one percentage point increase in allocation to the various asset classes. Increasing the allocations to long-duration fixed income, listed equity REITs and other real assets would have had the largest positive impacts on plan performance. For example, for a typical plan with $15 billion in assets under management, each one percentage point increase in allocations to listed equity REITs would have boosted total net returns by $180 million over the time period studied.

– Allocations changed considerably on average from 1998 through 2011. Of the DB plans analyzed by CEM, public pension plans reduced allocations to stocks by 8.5 percentage points and to bonds by 6.6 percentage points while increasing the allocation to alternative assets, including real estate, by 15.1 percentage points. Corporate plans reduced stock allocations by 19.1 percentage points while increasing allocations to fixed income by 10.5 percentage points (consistent with a shift to liability driven investment strategies), and to alternative assets by 8.6 percentage points. For the DB market as a whole, allocations to stocks decreased 15.1 percentage points; fixed income allocations increased by 4.3 percentage points; and allocations to alternatives increased by 10.8 percentage points. In dollar terms, total investment in alternatives for the 300 funds in the study increased from approximately $125 billion to nearly $600 billion over the study period.

The study’s author commented on his findings in a press release:

“Concern about the adequacy of pension funding has focused attention on investment performance and fees,” said Alexander D. Beath, PhD, author of the CEM study. “The data underscore that when it comes to long-term net returns, costs matter and allocations matter.”

[…]

“Many pension plans could have improved performance by choosing different allocation strategies and optimizing their management fees,” Beath continued. “Listed equity REITs delivered higher net total returns than any other alternative asset class for the fourteen-year period we analyzed, driven by high and stable dividend payouts, long-term capital appreciation and a significantly lower fee structure compared to private equity and private real estate funds.”

Read the study here.

Canada Pension To Invest Up To $500 Million In Mexico Real Estate Projects

Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec, the entity that manages Quebec’s public pension assets, has unveiled plans to invest up to $500 million in residential and urban housing projects in Mexico.

First up: a $100 million investment in two yet-unbuilt condo complexes.

From the Yucatan Times:

Ivanhoe Cambridge, the real estate unit of the Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec, a public pension funds manager, is teaming up with United States-based Black Creek Group with an investment of up to US $500 million.

Its first project, reported to be its first foray into Mexico, will be a residential development in the borough of Cuajimalpa in Mexico City consisting of two residential condominium buildings with 479 units in total.

It will invest $100 million in the 46,500-square-meter project.

Black Creek is a private-equity firm and real estate company with 17 years’ experience in Mexico in building infrastructure, retail and residential developments, targeting low and middle-income Mexican families. Another market is second homes for American and Canadian baby-boomers.

“With this investment, Ivanhoe Cambridge is setting a major foothold in Mexico, which will provide excellent access to opportunities, including long-term investments in a portfolio of high-quality assets,” said Rita-Rose Gagne, an executive vice-president with Ivanhoe Cambridge.

“The investment is part of Ivanhoe Cambridge’s strategy of developing a long-term, active presence in growth markets. The economic growth and demographic trends in Mexico are producing a large and sustained local demand for commercial and residential real estate.”

Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec manages around $180 billion (USD) of assets.

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/mhuddelson/public_html/pension360.org/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 3712