Description: The article outlines a shareholder value framework for pension risk management and applies this framework to pension funding decisions in light of rising PBGC premiums due to 2013’s BBA legislation. The article finds that the new legislation significantly incentivizes plan sponsors to increase pension funding. Moreover, many tax-paying pension plan sponsors can increase shareholder value by increasing pension plan contributions.

Description: The basic goal of this paper is to develop a generalized statement of aggregate actuarial cost methods and relate to it certain ideas developed by Trowbridge, Nesbitt, and others. A secondary goal is to describe practical methods which bear the same relationship to unit credit funding that the 'usual' forms of frozen initial liability and aggregate bear to entry age normal funding. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1967, Vol. 19, Pt. 1, No. 53 AB.

Description: Panelists discuss: [1] overview of new minimum-funding rules in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act [OBRA] effective during the 1988 plan year, including Section 412[l] rules in particular, [2] maximum-funding rules, illustrated by a case study, and [3] implications of these rules that impact funding for 1988 and 1989. From the 1988 Record of Society of Actuaries, Vol. 14, No. 4A.

Description: This 1981 discussion session focuses on funding policy for pension Plans in the United States and Canada from the plan sponsor's viewpoint. Topics include: 1.Alternative uses of cash, 2. Selection of the actuarial cost method, 3. Selection of actuarial assumptions, 4. External constraints such as regulatory constraints, labor agreements, accounting constraints and government contract reimbursement, 5. Use of projections and immunization theory, and 6. The effect of investment strategy on funding policy.

Description: This 1991 panel discussion: 1. Compares and contrasts standards set by various U.S and Canadian agencies- FASB, CICA, GASB, and IRS- for calculations under the Projected Unit Credit Cost Method, 2. Discusses certain types of retirement and ancillary benefits that are not easily handled under the Projected Unit Credit Cost Method, and 3. Provides insight into the nuances of using the Projected Unit Credit Cost Method for pension expense and funding purposes. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries Vol. 17, No. 3B.

Description: Discussion on problems encountered in filling out the Schedule B and how to solve them. The session will cover reconciliation account, current liability calculations and suggestions for improvement. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries 1992, Vol.18, No. 1A.

Description: Discussion of competing theories for valuing public pension liabilities. Emphasis on revised Actuarial Standards of Practice that focus on the purpose of the measurement.

Description: This discussion is about problems that encounter when seeking general acceptable criteria for minimum sound funding. From Transaction of Society of Actuaries 1961 - vol. 13 pt 2

Description: This discussion focuses on group retirement plans and takes a look at the possibility of future problems as a result of offering group annuity plans permitting the employer to choose method of funding. The discussion further seeks to discover what considerations are involved in determining minimum size for group annuity contract of the deposit administration type and if insurance company proposals include cost estimates involving labor turnover rates. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1951, Vol. 3, No. 5.

Description: This research report, based on Ontario pension plan data, examines differences between going concern and solvency valuations.