IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ufajxx/v67y2011i2p18-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposed GASB Rules Show Why Only Market Valuation Fully Captures Public Pension Liabilities

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew G. Biggs

Abstract

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board has released preliminary views on how public sector pension plans should value benefit liabilities. Because the GASB’s proposals ignore government’s contingent liability to pay plan benefits should assets fall short, they omit the full value of plan liabilities and contradict the GASB’s own standard of “interperiod equity.”In recent years, financial economists have charged that public sector pension accounting methods, which allow plans to discount virtually riskless pension benefits at the interest rate projected for a risky portfolio of assets, understate pension liabilities and encourage plans to take on excessive risk. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) recently proposed changes to public pension discounting rules that may be viewed as a middle ground between current actuarial methods and a market valuation approach. In fact, the GASB’s proposals violate its own standard that each generation fully fund its pension commitments and demonstrate why only a true market valuation approach can fully capture the liabilities of taxpayer-supported public pension plans. Under the GASB’s proposed changes, pensions may continue to discount asset-backed liabilities at the expected return on assets but liabilities that are not backed by assets are to be discounted at the interest rate on an index of high-quality municipal bonds. But these revisions ignore the fact that government—and thus taxpayers—has a contingent responsibility to pay benefits that are currently backed by assets should those assets fall short of the value needed to meet liabilities in full. In a sense, the government acts as an implicit put option, the value of which is large but is ignored under both current practices and the GASB’s proposed revisions. This proposal violates the GASB’s own standard of interperiod equity, whereby each generation fully funds its own accrued benefits and does not leave liabilities, contingent or otherwise, for future generations. Under the GASB’s proposed rules, a plan could be considered fully funded even if it imposes a significant contingent liability on future generations. If the value of this contingent liability is included, then full plan liabilities will equal those calculated under a standard market valuation approach, whereby the discount rate is risk adjusted to match the guaranteed nature of accrued pension benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew G. Biggs, 2011. "Proposed GASB Rules Show Why Only Market Valuation Fully Captures Public Pension Liabilities," Financial Analysts Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(2), pages 18-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ufajxx:v:67:y:2011:i:2:p:18-22
    DOI: 10.2469/faj.v67.n2.1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2469/faj.v67.n2.1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2469/faj.v67.n2.1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ufajxx:v:67:y:2011:i:2:p:18-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ufaj20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.