Cargando…
The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding
The funding policy for defined benefit pension plans covering government employees represents an important decision for governments sponsoring those plans. Many state and local government plans have become severely underfunded (e.g., New Jersey, Illinois, and Detroit), raising concerns about whether...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10034237/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11142-022-09746-5 |
_version_ | 1784911168974880768 |
---|---|
author | Anantharaman, Divya Chuk, Elizabeth |
author_facet | Anantharaman, Divya Chuk, Elizabeth |
author_sort | Anantharaman, Divya |
collection | PubMed |
description | The funding policy for defined benefit pension plans covering government employees represents an important decision for governments sponsoring those plans. Many state and local government plans have become severely underfunded (e.g., New Jersey, Illinois, and Detroit), raising concerns about whether governments are contributing enough to their pensions. Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements 67/68 (GASB 67/68) fundamentally alter the financial reporting of pension liabilities, by (i) requiring pension liabilities to be estimated using a potentially lower discount rate (increasing estimated liabilities and any funding deficits), and (ii) mandating balance sheet recognition of funding deficits/surpluses. Although GASB 67/68 only change financial reporting and acknowledge specifically that funding is outside their scope, we find, for 100 large state-administered plans, that governments increase pension contributions significantly upon applying GASB 67/68. This funding response is stronger from governments likely to face greater political consequences once pension deficits are made prominent by GASB 67/68. Benefit cuts are also more likely post GASB 67/68, but plans that increase funding are less likely to cut benefits—suggesting that these responses substitute for each other and that pension funding is more of a fiscal priority in some states than others. Overall, our findings suggest that purely accounting changes can have “real” effects on governmental pension policy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11142-022-09746-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10034237 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100342372023-03-23 The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding Anantharaman, Divya Chuk, Elizabeth Rev Account Stud Article The funding policy for defined benefit pension plans covering government employees represents an important decision for governments sponsoring those plans. Many state and local government plans have become severely underfunded (e.g., New Jersey, Illinois, and Detroit), raising concerns about whether governments are contributing enough to their pensions. Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements 67/68 (GASB 67/68) fundamentally alter the financial reporting of pension liabilities, by (i) requiring pension liabilities to be estimated using a potentially lower discount rate (increasing estimated liabilities and any funding deficits), and (ii) mandating balance sheet recognition of funding deficits/surpluses. Although GASB 67/68 only change financial reporting and acknowledge specifically that funding is outside their scope, we find, for 100 large state-administered plans, that governments increase pension contributions significantly upon applying GASB 67/68. This funding response is stronger from governments likely to face greater political consequences once pension deficits are made prominent by GASB 67/68. Benefit cuts are also more likely post GASB 67/68, but plans that increase funding are less likely to cut benefits—suggesting that these responses substitute for each other and that pension funding is more of a fiscal priority in some states than others. Overall, our findings suggest that purely accounting changes can have “real” effects on governmental pension policy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11142-022-09746-5. Springer US 2023-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10034237/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11142-022-09746-5 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Article Anantharaman, Divya Chuk, Elizabeth The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title | The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title_full | The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title_fullStr | The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title_short | The impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
title_sort | impact of governmental accounting standards on public-sector pension funding |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10034237/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11142-022-09746-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT anantharamandivya theimpactofgovernmentalaccountingstandardsonpublicsectorpensionfunding AT chukelizabeth theimpactofgovernmentalaccountingstandardsonpublicsectorpensionfunding AT anantharamandivya impactofgovernmentalaccountingstandardsonpublicsectorpensionfunding AT chukelizabeth impactofgovernmentalaccountingstandardsonpublicsectorpensionfunding |