The influence of pension plan risk on equity risk and credit ratings: a study of FTSE100 companies

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 405-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
DONAL MCKILLOP ◽  
MICHAEL POGUE
Keyword(s):  
Direct Relationship ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Credit Ratings ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Rating Agency ◽  
Equity Risk ◽  
Funding Risk ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis paper examines the relationship between funding risk of defined benefit pension plans and both corporate debt ratings and equity risk measures for FTSE100 companies. Panel based models highlighted a direct relationship between pension plan risk and equity risk. Pension risk was also demonstrated to be factored into credit ratings with the analysis highlighting that the greater the pension risk, the greater the probability of obtaining a lower debt rating. From a rating agency viewpoint, this is positive news, particularly at present when agencies are being criticized for a perceived failure to reflect sub-prime mortgage problems in firm-specific ratings.

The Potential for Inflating Earnings through the Expected Rate of Return on Defined Benefit Pension Plan Assets

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Adams ◽  
Mary Margaret Frank ◽  
Tod Perry
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Cumulative Effect ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Rate Of Return ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Operating Income ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Reported Earnings

SYNOPSIS Using a sample of firms over the period of 1991 through 2005, we examine the opportunity that exists for firms to inflate earnings through the expected rate of return (ERR) assumption associated with defined benefit pension plans. The evidence suggests that, on average, the ERR is not overstated relative to several benchmarks, including contemporaneous actual returns, historical cumulative actual returns, and expected future returns based on asset allocation within the pension. We also find that actual changes in the ERR are infrequent and typically have less than a 1 percent impact on annual operating income. We also estimate that a 0.5 percent change (50 bps) in the ERR will result in a cumulative effect on operating income over a five-year period of approximately 0.5 percent or less for the majority of firms. When we examine firms with the highest ERRs or with the greatest opportunity to inflate earnings, again, we find that the ERR is not overstated relative to several benchmarks. Although we do not observe pervasive inflating of reported income through the ERR during our sample period, we do find that for some firms, small increases in ERR can have a material impact on reported earnings. Our results provide evidence related to the pervasiveness, materiality, and impact of overstated earnings through the ERR, which helps regulators assess the costs and benefits of eliminating this discretion in financial reporting.

Financial health and the valuation of corporate pension plans

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-490
Author(s):  
Jun Cai ◽  
Miao Luo ◽  
Alan J. Marcus
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Financial Health ◽  
Valuation Effects ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Corporate Pension ◽  
Standing Question

AbstractWe return to the long-standing question ‘Who owns the assets in a defined benefit pension plan?’ Unlike earlier studies, we condition the market's assessment of implicit property rights on the sponsoring firm's financial health. Valuations of financially strong firms, and those that are strengthening, are more responsive to pension plan funding. For these firms, each extra dollar of net plan assets is valued at between $0.50 and $1.00. In contrast, for weak and weakening firms, valuation effects are statistically indistinguishable from zero. This result is consistent with the higher likelihood that they will renege on their pension obligations.

How defined contribution plans and 401(k)s affect employer pension costs

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
TERESA GHILARDUCCI ◽  
WEI SUN
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Ordinary Least Squares ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Pension Costs ◽  
Administrative Expenses ◽  
Pension Contribution

We investigate the pension choices made by over 700 firms between 1981 and 1998 when DC plans expanded and overtook DB plans. Their average pension contribution per employee dropped in real terms from $2,140 in 1981 to $1,404 in 1998. At the same time, the share of their pension contributions attributed to defined contribution plans was 23% in 1981 and increased to 68% in 1998. By analyzing pension plan data from the IRS Form 5500 and finances of the plan's sponsoring employer from COMPUSTAT with a fixed-effects ordinary least squares model and a simultaneous model, we find that a 10% increase in the use of defined contribution plans (including 401(k) plans) reduces employer pension costs per worker by 1.7–3.5%. This suggests firms use DCs and 401(k)s to lower pension costs. Lower administrative expenses may also explain the popularity of DC plans. Although measuring a firm's pension cost per worker may be a crude way to judge a firm's commitment to pensions, this study suggests that firms that provide both a traditional defined benefit and a defined contribution plan are the most committed because they spend the most on pensions. Further research, especially case studies, is vital to understand employers' commitment to employment-based pension plans.

The outlook for pension contributions and profits in the US

2004 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALICIA H. MUNNELL ◽  
MAURICIO SOTO
Keyword(s):  
Stock Market ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Ageing Population ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Bear Market ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
Corporate Profits ◽  
The Impact

The bear market that began in 2000 focused attention on two issues – pensions and profits. The initial pension problem was the big decline in value of individual 401(k) accounts. The profit issue was misconduct and stock options. In fact, there is another compelling issue involving both pensions and profits – the impact of the bear market on defined benefit pension plans.Plan sponsors have a projected benefit liability, which until recently was covered by the rise in asset values during the extended bull market. When stock values fell by 50 percent, sponsors for the first time in decades had to contribute to their pensions. But even without the decline in the stock market, sponsors of defined benefit plans were going to face increased pension contributions in the coming decade. The reason is a host of regulatory and legislative changes in the late 1980s that slowed or limited pension contributions.Our analysis suggests that in the absence of the stock market boom and the regulatory and legislative changes that reduced funding, the average firm's contribution to its pension plan would have been 50 percent higher during the 1982–2001 period; corporate profits would have been roughly 5 percent lower.The deferred contributions are coming due. The decline in the stock market and an ageing population imply that contributions would double from their current level. As the economy emerges from recession and the bear market draws to a close, firms and investors must be prepared to contend with a strong headwind from pension funding obligations that could slow the recover.

scholarly journals Pension Funding and the Actuarial Assumption Concerning Investment Returns

2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (02) ◽  
pp. 289-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Iqbal Owadally
Keyword(s):  
Discount Rate ◽  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Return On Assets ◽  
Investment Return ◽  
Investment Returns ◽  
Pension Liabilities

An assumption concerning the long-term rate of return on assets is made by actuaries when they value defined-benefit pension plans. There is a distinction between this assumption and the discount rate used to value pension liabilities, as the value placed on liabilities does not depend on asset allocation in the pension fund. The more conservative the investment return assumption is, the larger planned initial contributions are, and the faster benefits are funded. A conservative investment return assumption, however, also leads to long-term surpluses in the plan, as is shown for two practical actuarial funding methods. Long-term deficits result from an optimistic assumption. Neither outcome is desirable as, in the long term, pension plan assets should be accumulated to meet the pension liabilities valued at a suitable discount rate. A third method is devised that avoids such persistent surpluses and deficits regardless of conservatism or optimism in the assumed investment return.

scholarly journals Life After Defined Benefit Plans

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin A. Goldberg ◽  
Robert E. Wnek ◽  
Michael J. Rolleri
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plan ◽  
Profit Sharing ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Cash Balance ◽  
Benefit Plan ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Recent Developments

Employers have moved from traditional pension plans to cash balance and other alternative defined benefit plans. However, it may be that the best approach lies beyond defined benefit plans completely. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) was enacted to protect workers. Its focus was on the defined benefit plan, which at that time meant a traditional pension plan that provided lifetime income to retired workers. Over the years traditional pension plans have declined in number, often due to their increasing costs. Many of these plans have been replaced by the 401(k) plan, a profit-sharing plan partly or wholly funded by employee contributions. There has also been a rise in hybrid plans, plans that have features of both defined benefit and defined contribution plans. Recent developments highlight the weaknesses in traditional pension plans. Replacing a traditional pension plan with a cash balance plan, a hybrid plan that qualifies as a defined benefit plan, does not fully address all the problems. It may be that there is limited advantage to the continued emphasis on defined benefit plans. Instead, defined contribution plans that contain some features of defined benefit plans may better address the current retirement-plan issues.

Missing Participants and Beneficiaries From Private-Sector Pension Plans

2021 ◽  
pp. 088636872110451
Author(s):  
John G. Kilgour
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Pension Benefit ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Social Security Administration ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Department Of Labor ◽  
For Profit

This article examines the problem of missing and nonresponsive participants and beneficiaries from defined-benefit (DB) and especially defined-contribution (DC) pension plans, mainly in the private (for profit) sector of the United States. It focuses on the current search requirements of the three government agencies involved in finding missing participants and beneficiaries: the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), the Department of Labor (DOL) and its Employee Benefit Services Administration (EBSA), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The article also reviews the efforts of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in this area. It then reviews proposed legislation, the Retirement Savings Lost and Found Act of 2020 (now S. 1730; RSLFA). The issue of missing participants and beneficiaries often becomes critical when an employer goes out of business or for some other reason stops sponsoring a pension plan. The missing participants are owed their earned retirement benefits. They, not the employer, own them.

Opinions Of Financial Analysts On Accounting For defined Benefit Pension Plans

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth E. Stone ◽  
David W. Joy ◽  
Cynthia J. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Balance Sheet ◽  
Financial Analysts ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Fair Value ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Service Cost ◽  
Prior Service ◽  
Gains And Losses ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plans

Responding financial analysts preferred pension plan accounting which contrasts with requirements of SFAS No. 87. The preferred model included: (1) Plan assets and accumulated benefit obligations are on the balance sheet. (2) Prior service cost is recognized in the year of plan adoption or amendment. (3) Gains and losses are recognized when they occur. (4) Annual pension expense is computer by netting the change in fair value of plan assets, deposits to the pension plan, and the change in accumulated benefit obligations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document