Description: This presentation was made at the 1975 Spring Cincinnati Joint Meeting of the Conference of Actuaries in Public Practice and Society of Actuaries and it highlights the following issues: What are the retirement needs of a population?, what are suitable methods of providing social insurance, private pensions,and savings?, what are the political, economic, and sociological implications of various solutions?, and what perspective on this problem does Canadian experience provide.

Description: This session discussion is a review proposals to modify the plan termination provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Current projections of the corporate funding problems and the alternatives under consideration will be included. From Record of the Society of Actuaries Vol. 14, No. 1.

Description: This panel discussion from the 1979 SOA Spring Meeting examines mergers and acquisitions from the perspective of the pension plans of the acquiring and acquired companies including financial and accounting considerations, the determination of the liability and design considerations.

Description: Retirement isn't a solo endeavor and the prospect of retirement looks starkly different depending on your family, your generation, your income and a host of other socioeconomic factors. The presenters will review the study, 'Financial Perspectives on Aging and Retirement Across the Generations' with an eye towards how these findings impact public policy, plan design for employers and financial planning for individuals and families.

Description: This is a discussion about various legislative proposals in the United States and Canada furthering the regulation of private pensions. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1968, Vol. 20 Pt. 2, No. 58.

Description: This session is about the philosophy and implications of investment income allocation for individual and group products, bases available for subdivision of investment income by line and within lines of business, applicability of new money rates to individual and group products, and regulatory restraints.

Description: This open forum is from the 1991 Meeting of the Society of Actuaries, held June 3-5 in Colorado Springs. The panelists discuss actual experiences related to consulting on plan design issues, including the effect of regulatory restriction on plan design, such as the nondiscrimination rules, further application of cash balance plans, and other recent developments that affect plan design. Discussion from participants is included. From the Record of Society of Actuaries Vol. 17, No. 3B.

Description: This session from the 1995 SOA Vancouver Meeting covers discrimination in plan design specifically addressing 401a4 and 410b regulations. It defines what benfits, right and features are, defines and tests current availabiltiy, defines effective availability and reviews some special rules. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries, Vol. 21, No. 3a.

Description: This 1981 discussion session covers Government and Pension Reports, in particular, reports from the U.S. President's Commission on Pension Policy, the National Commission on Social Security, the Canadian Lazar Report, and the Report of the Ontario Royal Commission on Pensions. This discussion also covers the implications of these reports for the pension business in the United States and Canada.

Description: A pension plan uses Actuarial Equivalence to determine a 'fair' adjustment to pension benefits for form and timing of payment. The definition of Actuarial Equivalence is set in the Plan Document which may not have been reviewed for decades. With a wave of recent pension litigation in the U.S., plan sponsors, attorneys and actuaries now pay more attention to how pension plans define Actuarial Equivalence. How does a change in mortality table or interest rate affect the ultimate benefit? What are the requirements under ERISA and pertinent regulations? Are there court cases that have examined this question before? What are the issues behind the recent lawsuits and what can a plan sponsor do now to reduce their legal exposure? What alternative strategies are available for changing or not changing the definition in the plan document?