Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
Aug 24

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
8/24/2006 6:40 AM 

Auto parts manufacturer Tenneco announced yesterday that it is "freezing" its three defined benefit pension plans (including one supplemental plan for executive officers), effective January 1, 2007. By freezing the plans, employees will accrue no more benefits under the plans; their existing benefits are preserved but they earn no new future credits. This is a similar move to the IBM change announced in January, one that was expected to kick off many copycat moves. There have been a number of them, and probably the most notable was General Motors. It's not a bad idea, and there'll probably be many more in the near future. More on that later; back to the Tenneco freeze.

It's not all a one-way street: Tenneco will be replacing the benefits that the employees lose with increased benefits in their existing defined contribution plans. No telling from if the employees get shafted, though I'm sure that someone will always run the numbers on these plan benefit swaps to show that they will. And the companies will always run them to show that they don't. It's one of those numerical exercises where you're comparing a fixed amount (the defined benefit plan give-ups) against a variable amount (the defined contribution give-back), so your assumptions in figuring the amount to be received in the give-back are critical. And whoever's running the numbers will introduce their own biases.

That's not the point here; sorry to stray. The point is that this move, as we all know, takes the investment risk off the employer and puts it onto the employee. That's not terribly new at this point; I think it's safe to say that most U.S. employees have become familiar with their 401K plans over the last 25 years, and especially in the last five (since Enron made them more conscious of what can happen to their retirement savings). And we also know that defined benefit plans, by their nature, are volatile creatures. The accounting for benefit plans has many awkward devices that are designed to reduce that volatility, while introducing lots of non-economic information into the financials. As FASB enters Stage 2 of its pension overhaul project, some of those volatility-flatteners may be headed for extinction. In the meantime, the newly-signed Pension Protection Act of 2006 will increase the funding requirements for defined benefit plans - adding another dimension of discomfort for sponsors. Expect then, that the Big Freeze to become much more common in the last quarter of 2006 as companies prepare to comply with the FASB "Phase 1" plan for moving pension and OPEB obligations directly onto the balance sheet. (Sidenote: Tenneco also replaced a couple of health care plans with one lower-cost plan).

The saying goes, "you manage what you measure." Firms will be measuring pensions and other postemployment benefits much more precisely now that the amounts will become visible to investors - and taking steps to minimize growth in the obligations. Freezing defined benefit plans is one way to get there, and there's every reason to expect more of these actions in the months ahead. Maybe the fourth quarter of 2006 is going to be the start of a new Ice Age for defined benefit plans...

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.