Research Preview: Pensions at Risk – A Perfect Storm? PDF Print E-mail
Written by R.D. Norton   
Friday, 01 May 2009 00:00

Chrysler has declared bankruptcy, and General Motors may soon follow. Will taxpayers be expected to cover the costs of the pensions the companies promised their workers? The pension shortfall for GM alone is estimated at $13.5 billion.

An analysis in our May 4th Research Reports explores the risks to taxpayers stemming from the pension commitments of Chrysler and GM. The article is “Pensions at Risk: A Perfect Storm?” It notes that the government guarantees autoworker pensions, which are insured for as much as $54,000 a year.

At the same time, the agency that provides such coverage has itself made highly risky investment decisions, such that another taxpayer bailout may prove necessary.

This agency is the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC, created by Congress in 1974.  Also known as “Penny Benny,” PBGC insures the traditional, defined-benefit pensions of workers whose employers go broke or otherwise come up short.  Some 44 million workers and retirees fall under its protective umbrella.

Earlier this decade, United Airlines, Bethlehem Steel, US Airways, LTV, Delta Airlines, TWA, National Steel, Weirton Steel, Kaiser Aluminum and several other major companies declared bankruptcy and turned their pension obligations over to PBGC. As a result, PBGC paid out $4.3 billion during fiscal year 2008. At the end of the fiscal year, the agency’s liabilities were $72.3 billion; its assets, $61.6 billion. 

To date, general revenues have not been used for PBGC pension payments. Instead, the agency uses funds from three different sources: assets it recovers from failed companies, insurance premiums (currently $33 per worker) collected from companies with defined-benefit pension plans, and investment earnings. In fiscal 2008, the insurance premiums brought in $1.5 billion.

The problem – and what could leave U.S. taxpayers holding the bag for GM and other pension obligations – is that PBGC’s management seems to have “taken a flier” last year on high-risk investments to put the agency back in the black.

Previously, three-fourths of Penny Benny’s portfolio had been in long-term corporate bonds and Treasury securities. These are safe if unexciting investments yielding commensurately low rates of return.

As the chart below shows, the new, more-aggressive allocation put 39 percent into U.S. and foreign stocks and another 25 percent into real estate, private equity, junk bonds (also known as “high-yield fixed income”), and other more exotic assets.

Changes in PBGC Target Portfolios in 2008

Unfortunately, the agency shifted gears at exactly the wrong time, just as the stock market plummeted. The September 2008 strategic shift had a head-on collision with the October rout. In effect, Penny Benny placed a big bet and lost. How big a loss remains a secret.

What this means is that it is not a good time for GM or Chrysler to try to unload their pension obligations. 

It is also not a good time for taxpayers.

If GM now follows Chrysler into bankruptcy, PBGC could come under intense political pressure to take on their pension obligations, adding to the agency’s woes and increasing the likelihood that taxpayers will face another huge bill.

If that happened, millions of people with no pensions of their own could wind up paying higher taxes to maintain pension benefits for autoworkers.

This commentary is based on a longer discussion of the pensions and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation in the May 4, 2009, issue of Research Reports. This is available free to AIER subscribers or $2 for non-members.

To subscribe to AIER Research Reports, please become a Sustaining Member of AIER. Membership starts at just $39 per year.

Already a member? Keep your eye out for the May 4 issue of Research Reports hitting your mailbox soon.

Bookmark this article:

Deli.cio.us    Digg    reddit    Facebook    StumbleUpon    Newsvine
 

Other articles by Pat Norton:

Comments (11)
Providing for self and the less fortunate
11 Friday, 15 May 2009 13:19
Lester John
Smaller banks and companies have provided the successes of America. I was born in 1937, grew up in a Union member family, in the construction trades. I watched my father work hard, and my mother and dad watching their weekly budget, and saving for the rainy and unemployed days. I remain pro-union with union management restrains that have been missing. I choose to be self-employed, after working for large companies. I messed up, on my own, many times with sales to companies that went into bankruptcy and couldn't collect money owed even after winning law suits. Life is rough. It is the real thing. We each need to take responsibility for our actions and seek the assistance of God, like the motto 'IN GOD WE TRUST". We all need to let free enterprise operate, and not attempt to control each industry and company. We need to inspire each other to get up, from the adversities of life. and volunteer out talents, time and treasures to assist the truly less fortune. Manure and failure is part of life. Smaller banks and small companies have been the success of America. Let's get it right, and replace those in government that are not going in the right direction.
Penny Benny and Politicians
10 Friday, 08 May 2009 11:24
Frank C.
When is the "average taxpayer" going to wake up? Penny Benny is chump change compared to the trillions of dollars politicians are spending of "our" money!!! When will the politicians stop and say enough is enough. In order to stay in office they need to please their voters with more and more "entitlements" and give aways. As proof of their motivations look at Senator Spector's defection,purely political survival for HIS own interest. But I digress.
Penny Benny is bankrupt, Chrysler is bankrupt, GM is bankrupt and on and on. Why do we taxpayers have to continually bail them out? I believe the answer is purely political.
Pension payouts
9 Tuesday, 05 May 2009 07:46
Pat Norton
The phrasing, "as much as $54,000," is based on recent comments by acting PBGC director, Vince Snowbarger, as posted on the www.pbgc.gov website: "For the year 2009 that guarantee is basically $54,000 a year. ...That number represents the maximum amount that we can guarantee for a worker age 65.... ...That presumes again that they don't retire early.... And there's some other complicated limits that we have, but basically it's $54,000 a year."
As to the Chrysler pension guidelines per se, new guidelines as of April 30 have now been posted on the site, giving some specifics for the Chrysler case.
Pension Payouts
8 Monday, 04 May 2009 10:36
danohunt
I am surprised to hear that the government is on the hook for $54,000/year. My brother lives in auto country and his info from auto workers is that retirement benefits are coordinated with Social Security. About a year ago I ran into an article explaining how much less airline employees were getting when their pensions got slammed through bankruptcy. These two pieces of info don't match with what the article says. Can anyone clarify? Thanks
Your father's retirement plan
7 Saturday, 02 May 2009 01:40
R Holewinski
I guess my question is...where were these companies,(the auto makers) when over the last 40 years, every other corporation that was determined to make a profit, shifted over to 401(k)'s and profit sharing plans to releave themselves of the burden of asset management as wells as cost reduction...
Pennies for Pensions
6 Friday, 01 May 2009 23:11
veeek
How ironic that GM and Chrysler are going broke paying pension benefits to the very same workers and designers that wrecked the reputations of both companies over the past 40 years.
Thanks for the article, and the warning.
Auto workers pensions.
5 Friday, 01 May 2009 22:17
Mike Sullivan
Don't blame the unions, they negotiate in good faith with the companies their members work for. For years the auto industry even tho mismanaged,was happy with big profits and willing to give more benefits to the unions to keep the workers on the job and the money flowing in to pay outragious salaries to incompetent management. Pensions were a negotiated and agreed on item in contract agreements.
r jallo response to auto worker's pensions
4 Friday, 01 May 2009 19:50
j. howell
You seem to forget what the real problem is with most large American company's and it's not their workers pension plans. It's something called greed and most large companies have too many upper management people, board of directors and CEO'S that are granted huge compensation packages for results they never produce.The Steel companies were never updated correctly; profits were taken out and wasted and they fell victim to their own managerial stupidity and lack of keep up with foreign competition.
pensions at risk Friday, 01 May, 2009 20:45 W. Brahm
3 Friday, 01 May 2009 19:44
william brahm dds
This is still again another instance of the immorality of stealing from Peter and giving to Paul. What moral system is the engine running the economic show here? It's ALTRUISM! If you've an active mind, searching for answers and willing to question your premises, look no further than "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. Be forewarned: if you take ideas and principles seriously this book will change your life--for good and for the better!
Penny Benny
2 Friday, 01 May 2009 12:38
R. Walton
Really, the last sentence says it all, "If that happened, millions of people with no pensions of their own could wind up paying higher taxes to maintain pension benefits for autoworkers." As an entreprenuer without a pension, this would be me.

Clearly, our government has gotten too big for our own good. PBGC is going to be one more tool used for the redistribution of wealth in America. Pretty soon there will be so many people carving up the pie that there will be nobody left to make the pies!
Auto Worker's Union
1 Friday, 01 May 2009 11:16
R Jallo
Serval years ago the average income for a direct union auto worker with all the benefits was just under $80,000.00.

There is no question that management is overpaid and did a poor job of managing the companies. However I also feel that the union played a big part in the demise of GM.

Some will recall the Steel Union did pretty much the same thing to the Steel Companies.

While I am not anti-union I do feel that the scales have to be perfectly balanced otherwise one side or the other will take advantage.

Insofar as the taxpayers picking up the tab for the auto workers pension....I would think making $80,000. over the past decade should have provide sufficient funds for these workers to provide for their own welfare...isn't that what the free market is all about...

Add your comment

Your name:
Subject:
Comment:
  The word for verification. Lowercase letters only with no spaces.
Word verification: