Congress | Pension360

Government Panel Likely to Call For Military Pension Changes

The Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission has spent the last two years drawing up policy proposals to decrease the cost of military benefits, including retirement benefits.

The Commission will make the proposals to Congress on Thursday, but people familiar with the report have already been revealing its contents to the USA Today and the Military Times.

According to the sources, the report will propose big changes to the military’s retirement system – including the phase-out of the military’s current defined-benefit plan, in favor of a hybrid plan that features characteristics of a 401(k).

More details from USA Today:

The Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission will propose detailed legislation to phase out the current 20-year cliff-vesting pension payable immediately upon leaving service, according to people who have been briefed on the report but requested anonymity before discussing its recommendations.

The plan calls for Congress to create a hybrid system that includes a smaller defined-benefit pension along with more cash-based benefits and lump-sum payments. A significant portion of troops’ retirement benefits would come in the form of government contributions to 401(k)-style investment accounts, those familiar with the report told Military Times.

Specifically, the proposal calls for automatically enrolling each service member in the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan, or TSP, an investment account that accrues savings. Individual troops will be responsible for managing their accounts, and the money is typically not available for withdrawal without penalty until age 59.5.

But that same proposal would make it easier for troops to keep their retirement benefits after leaving the military. USA Today reports:

By allowing many troops to keep their TSP government contributions after separation, the new proposal would give limited retirement benefits to the vast majority who leave the military before hitting the traditional retirement milestone of 20 years of service, most of them enlisted members who do four, six or eight years, then leave.

That’s a big potential change from a system that now offers retirement benefits to about only 17% of the force — many of them officers — who serve 20 years.

The retirement changes would only apply to new troops – not anyone currently enlisted or retired.

All of these proposals would still need to get through Congress to become law. Military compensation is a controversial area for cuts, so it’s unclear if the political will exists to move forward with the retirement system changes.

Photo by Brian Schlumbohm/Fort Wainwright PAO

What Congressional Gridlock Means for Federal Pensions

Gridlock has become the new norm in Congress. The last two Congressional sessions (112^th and 113^th) were arguably the two least-productive sessions in the history of the country.

Republicans now control both chambers, but that doesn’t mean the gridlock will end.

In fact, some observers say that in 2015, the trickle of meaningful bills coming out of either Congressional chamber could slow even further.

That could be good news for federal workers.

Why?

Because trimming federal retirement benefits is a popular idea among a group of lawmakers, and gridlock could stave off those cuts.

Federal News Radio explains:

In 2014, the to-do-list of many pols included plans to charge workers more, via payroll deduction, for their CSRS and FERS benefits. It could have resulted in a pay cut of 2, 3 or even 4 percent.

Also on the list was a big budget saver — a plan to trim future cost-of-living adjustments for current and future retirees by 0.3 percent each year, every year. People would still get COLAs. But in a diet-version.

NARFE’s Jessica Klement estimated the typical CSRS retiree would miss out on $50,000 in future benefits if the COLA calculation change was made. It wasn’t, in part because of gridlock.

[…]

There is an upside to gridlock, especially for active and retired members of the federal family. It kept politicians with political, personal or fiscal axes to grind (out of your hide) from chopping up your benefits package. Feds even got a token raise. While only 1 percent (same as this year) it was 100 percent more than they got in 2013, 2012 and 2011.

The gridlock also gives retiree advocates and labor groups more time to combat those policies.

Two lawmakers, Rep. Jason Chaffetz [R-Utah] and Rep. Mark Meadows [R-N.C.], are leading the push for civil service reform, including pension changes.

OpenRetirement covered their plans here.

New Congress Likely to Attempt Federal Pension Reform

The New Congress has already proved it has its eye on retirement benefits.

But even with lawmakers’ eyes locked on Social Security, there may be federal pension changes coming down the pipeline.

Many lawmakers are weighing changes to the federal pension system, and new legislation on that front could surface this year, according to two key committee chairmen.

The two lawmakers leading the push for federal pension reform are:

* Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee

* Rep. Mark Meadows R-N.C., chairman of a subcommittee of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that focuses on the federal workforce.

More on their plans from the Federal Times:

As the new Congress kicks into gear, lawmakers want to take another crack at reforming the civil service.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he will look at reforming all aspects of the federal workforce, from hiring and firing authorities to pensions and pay.

“We have jurisdiction on the federal workforce and there is no doubt we are going to bring that up,” Chaffetz. “From soup to nuts: Everything from how we hire them on the back end to how we pay them out in the retirement system.”

[…]

As Congress kicks into gear, Meadows believes the committee will be working on legislation for at least some parts of civil service reform.

“I would be very surprised if there were not a number of legislative initiatives and certainly, as a subcommittee chairman, I am prepared to be very proactive,” Meadows said.

What might the reforms look like? A likely bet is legislation that would shift new federal hires into a 401(k)-type plan, as opposed to the current defined-benefit system.

The reforms might be rolled out slowly at first, and could be focused on a particular government agency to study the effects before implementing the reforms across all agencies.

The outgoing Postmaster General has even suggested that any pension reforms be “tested” out on the Post Office first.

The Postmaster said:

Outgoing Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe has called for an end to the defined-benefit pension system and instead shift to a 401(k)-style retirement policy. He said Postal Service reform could also serve as a precursor to governmentwide civil service reform.

“I would encourage Congress to view the Postal Service as a test bed or laboratory of change that might be applied to the rest of the federal government,” Donahoe said.

He said agencies need to be be able to control costs and plan for the future while getting the flexibility to experiment without rigid workforce rules and he said the Postal Service could be at the forefront of that change.

“In today’s world, does it really make sense to offer the promise of a government pension to a 22-year-old who is just entering the workforce? And how reliable is that promise?” Donahoe asked. “I’d like to see the Congress encourage much more experimentation at the federal level. “

No legislation has yet been proposed.

Photo by Bob Jagendorf via FLickr CC License

CalSTRS Set To Receive Last $15 Million Payment from Congress

CalSTRS has received $315 million from the U.S. Congress since 1999.

In 2015, the pension fund will receive one final payment from Congress totaling $15.6 million.

What’s the purpose of the payment, and why are they stopping?

The Daily Journal News explains:

The California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) will receive its final $15.6 million payment of compensation from the 1997 sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve as part of the $1.1 trillion budget appropriation bill passed by Congress Saturday.

[…]

The federal government began making payments to CalSTRS under a settlement agreement two years after the Elk Hills land was sold to Occidental Petroleum in 1997. The annual payments, each of which was subject to an annual Congressional appropriation, compensated CalSTRS for its interest in the state school lands that were part of the Elk Hills Reserve.

The petroleum reserve sits on 47,000 acres near Bakersfield, and the two tracts of state school lands in it were dedicated to California’s schools by the federal government upon statehood in 1850. It became a Naval Petroleum Reserve shortly before World War I, about the same time as California established the Teachers’ Retirement System in 1913.

[…]

“This final payment is welcome support to California’s retired educators, the oldest of whom greatly benefit from these proceeds, which support efforts to safeguard retiree pensions from the erosive effects of inflation,” said CalSTRS Chief Executive Officer Jack Ehnes. “State law directs any proceeds from state schools lands, on which the petroleum reserve sat, to support retired teachers’ pensions when they fall below 85 percent of their original purchasing power.”

CalSTRS manages $190 billion in assets.

Photo by Stephen Curtin

“Pension Smoothing” Makes WaPo’s List of Worst Policy Ideas of 2014

This year, the U.S. Congress addressed the insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund by allowing companies to engage in a practice called “pension smoothing”.

The plan addresses the Fund’s insolvency but comes with future costs.

On Wednesday, the Washington Post named pension smoothing one of the 11 “worst policy ideas of 2014”.

From the Post:

The Highway Trust Fund, which helps states pay for vital infrastructure, has been running out of money for years (here’s a quick explainer on why). This summer, Congress needed to find about $10 billion dollars to temporarily prop up the fund (in the absence of a long-term solution, that is). So what did Congress do to generate that money? Raise the gas tax? Create a better road user fee? In a rare act of bipartisanship, Congress found more than half that money instead through “pension smoothing,” which is widely derided by everyone outside of Congress as a mere budget gimmick.

In effect, Congress allowed corporations to underfund their future pensions to create the semblance of more tax revenue today. A succinct NPR explainer of the trick:

It allows employers that offer traditional pensions to set aside less money for future retirees. That makes the companies appear more profitable in the short run so they — or their employees — pay more money to the government in taxes.

Read more Pension360 coverage and analysis of pension smoothing here.

CalPERS Hires Lobbying Firms to Represent Interests Before Congress

CalPERS announced Monday it has hired two lobbying firms to represent its retirement policy and market regulation interests in front of the U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch.

From a CalPERS press release:

The joint venture between Lussier Group/Williams and Jensen was selected as [CalPERS’] federal representative for retirement policy issues, and K&L Gates was selected as its federal representative for investment and financial market regulation issues.

A third firm, a joint venture of Avenue Solutions/Jennings Policy Strategies was selected in November to represent CalPERS’ health care-related interests.

“Having specialized representatives in these areas will enable us to play a stronger role in retirement and investment national policy development that will continue to enhance the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of our programs,” said Board President Rob Feckner. “We look forward to working with both of these firms and are eager to have their skill and expertise put to work for us.”

Earlier this year, the CalPERS Board directed staff to begin the search for specialized representatives in the policy areas of health care, retirement, and investments. Three firms were selected as finalists for the retirement policy representative, while two firms were selected as finalists for the investment policy representative. After a thorough review and interview process, Lussier Group/Williams and Jensen, and K&L Gates were selected by the Board this week. The selections are contingent upon satisfactory negotiations of terms and conditions in order for the contracts to be awarded.

“Engaging nationally on retirement security issues is a priority for CalPERS and an important part of our commitment to our members,” said Anne Stausboll, CalPERS Chief Executive Officer. “Having three separate and focused representatives broadens our reach and ability to influence outcomes.”

CalPERS is the largest public pension fund in the United States with assets of about $300 billion.

Photo by rocor via Flickr CC License

In Congress, Leadership Shifts Could Lead to Retirement Plan Changes

Republicans control both houses of Congress, and there are many leadership shifts underway at the committee level as well. These shifts open the door for changes to retirement plans coming from the federal level.

One idea sure to be brought up is Senator Orrin Hatch’s SAFE Retirement Act. From Pensions and Investments:

At the committee level, the change of leadership raises the prospects for serious consideration of new retirement ideas, like incoming Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch’s SAFE Retirement Act proposal, which would expand the use of multiple employer plans, allow public defined benefit pension funds to purchase private annuities, and create a “starter 401(k) plan” for small, private-sector employers.

Lawmakers could also take a closer look at defined-contribution plans and cash balance plans. From P&I:

As the tax reform debate heats up, “Republicans are going to want to cut expenses and raise revenue,” said Michael Webb, vice president of Cammack Retirement Group, Wellesley, Mass., a consulting firm specializing in defined contribution plans. “How do you do that? By changing things like deductibility on retirement plan contributions.”

Along with those discussions, “there might be opportunities in 2015 for retirement plan proposals that would enhance coverage and benefits,” said Kent Mason, an attorney at law firm Davis & Harman LLP, Washington, who is outside counsel for the American Benefits Council, Washington. He and others note that multiple employer plans enjoy bipartisan support in Congress, which could convince regulators to make them easier to create.

Both Republicans and Democrats would like to see more automatic enrollment and escalation in defined contribution plans. “This is showing up in bipartisan bills because (current default rates) are not high enough” for retirement security,” said Mr. Mason. “This is an area where I could see common ground.”

Hybrid retirement ideas like cash balance plans will come up early, starting with a Jan. 9 hearing on IRS regulations finalized in September for plan years after 2015. “I do think there is pent up demand for some type of DB (proposal),” said Alan Glickstein, Dallas-based senior retirement consultant at Towers Watson & Co. Hybrid pension plans for the military will also come up early in the year, when recommendations from the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission are due, sources said.

Read the full article here.