Youth, Discount Rates and Pensions: Who Should Bear Costs?

Youth, Discount Rates and Pensions: Who Should Bear Costs?
Photo by stevepb (Pixabay)

Youth, Discount Rates and Pensions: Who Should Bear Costs?


Where should the discount rate for liabilities on a defined benefit pension plan be set?  This sounds like a boring issue that should be solved by bureaucrats or actuaries.  And yes it *is* boring, though nerds like me have a keen interest in the topic.

This Top Energy And Infrastructure Fund Is Bullish On U.S. Utilities

UtilitiesThe Electron Global Fund was up 2% for September, bringing its third-quarter return to -1.7% and its year-to-date return to 8.5%. Meanwhile, the MSCI World Utilities Index was down 7.2% for September, 1.7% for the third quarter and 3.3% year to date. The S&P 500 was down 4.8% for September, up 0.2% for the third Read More

Here’s the issue, who should bear the costs?  Should it be future generations, or the generation that is receiving the benefits?  I am guessing that most people reading this agree with me, and argue that the generation receiving benefits should bear the costs, and pre-fund their retirements.

But that has not been the case.  Rather, the Baby Boomers and prior generations have pushed costs onto future generations.  How did they do it?  Parties that looked at the incredible returns of the 80s & 90s assumed that equity markets were magic, and always threw off large returns.  These same parties were reluctant to recognize the 2000s  We’ve had a lost decade-plus, which has caused most DB plans to go into deficit.

But the assumed investment rate was high going into it: 8-10%/year.  The is the danger of mindlessly importing returns from the past, without asking the question, “Was there anything special about he past that should lead us to adjust the past returns?”  P/E multiple expansion would mean-revert.  It usually does, and longer-term measures like the Q-ratio and CAPE10 showed that valuations at the peak were severely high.  Since then, the market has treaded water, as the companies in aggregate grow into their valuations.

Financial markets cannot forever outgrow their economies.  Eventually we rely on cash flows from businesses to validate the value of the underlying businesses.  Dividends, buybacks, and mergers and acquisitions serve to distribute the value of what companies do for those who own them.

The high assumed investment rates forestalled corporations and governments from contributing to their DB plans.  Why should they?  After all, they expected to earn a ton of money off their investments.

But imagine for a moment that they had been reasonable, and said “we shouldn’t expect to earn more than long Baa-rated bonds.  That’s still a little liberal for me, but an improvement on most current reasoning.


The effect today would be to have discount rates around 4.6%.  How many firms and governments do that?  (Why do I hear crickets?)

If governments had followed a formula like “use the Long Baa bond yield for the discount rate,” they would not have been as generous with pensions.

There is still time to make some Baby Boomers pay more in taxes (even me).  It would be wise for younger people to urge the boards that run the DB pension plans of their municipalities to adopt a long Baa bond yield as their discount rate.  The underfunding will be horrifying, but if investment return exceed that, contributions and taxes should decline.

Thus I say to the young; lobby for lower discount rates, that there might be more taxation in the short-run, and less in the long-run.

By David Merkel, CFA of Aleph Blog

Updated on

Previous article WTI Crude Oil Could See 2013 Decline on Supply Glut in US and Canada
Next article The Fiscal Cliff, US Defense Budget, and Russian Navy
David J. Merkel, CFA, FSA — 2010-present, I am working on setting up my own equity asset management shop, tentatively called Aleph Investments. It is possible that I might do a joint venture with someone else if we can do more together than separately. From 2008-2010, I was the Chief Economist and Director of Research of Finacorp Securities. I did a many things for Finacorp, mainly research and analysis on a wide variety of fixed income and equity securities, and trading strategies. Until 2007, I was a senior investment analyst at Hovde Capital, responsible for analysis and valuation of investment opportunities for the FIP funds, particularly of companies in the insurance industry. I also managed the internal profit sharing and charitable endowment monies of the firm. From 2003-2007, I was a leading commentator at the investment website Back in 2003, after several years of correspondence, James Cramer invited me to write for the site, and I wrote for RealMoney on equity and bond portfolio management, macroeconomics, derivatives, quantitative strategies, insurance issues, corporate governance, etc. My specialty is looking at the interlinkages in the markets in order to understand individual markets better. I no longer contribute to RealMoney; I scaled it back because my work duties have gotten larger, and I began this blog to develop a distinct voice with a wider distribution. After three-plus year of operation, I believe I have achieved that. Prior to joining Hovde in 2003, I managed corporate bonds for Dwight Asset Management. In 1998, I joined the Mount Washington Investment Group as the Mortgage Bond and Asset Liability manager after working with Provident Mutual, AIG and Pacific Standard Life. My background as a life actuary has given me a different perspective on investing. How do you earn money without taking undue risk? How do you convey ideas about investing while showing a proper level of uncertainty on the likelihood of success? How do the various markets fit together, telling us us a broader story than any single piece? These are the themes that I will deal with in this blog. I hold bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Johns Hopkins University. In my spare time, I take care of our eight children with my wonderful wife Ruth.

No posts to display