State Retirement Legislation

Similar documents
Sustaining State Retirement Benefits: Recent State Legislation Affecting Public Retirement Plans, Ronald Snell January 2010

State Retirement Reform Legislation

10 yrs. The benefit is capped at 80% of FAS. An elected official may. 2% (first 10 yrs.); or 2.25% (second 10 yrs.); or 2.5% over 20 yrs.

Selected Approved Changes to State Public Pensions to Restore or Preserve Plan Sustainability

State Retirement Reform Legislation

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2012 STATE LEGISLATURES. August 31, 2012

Defined Benefit Plan Changes

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2010 STATE LEGISLATURES. PRELIMINARY REPORT May 3, Ronald K. Snell

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2010 STATE LEGISLATURES REVISIONS FOR POSTING WEEK OF MAY 17-21, Ronald K. Snell

NASRA ISSUE BRIEF: Cost-of-Living Adjustments

Somewhere. Cash Balance Plans. in the Middle

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2000 STATE LEGISLATURES: SECOND PRELIMINARY REPORT

Plan Comparison Guide

Legislators and Other Elected Officials Retirement Benefits

Proposals from the Public on the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) LPRO: LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND RESEARCH OFFICE

2012 Spring Conference. Retirement and OPEB Plans -What s Changing Here (Virginia) And There (Other States) May 24, 2012

Presentation to the Jacksonville Pension Reform Task Force. David Draine The Pew Charitable Trusts TITLE GOES HERE.

Comparing Retirement Program Alternatives

State Hybrid Retirement Plans in the United States

TRS UPDATE /13/12

2015 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MAJOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2010 STATE LEGISLATURES. November 17, Ronald K. Snell

NCSL Midwest States Fiscal Leaders Forum. March 10, 2017

COMPARATIVE STUDY

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2011 STATE LEGISLATURES. May 30, Ronald K. Snell

Spotlight. Significant Reforms to State Retirement Systems. Executive Summary

Retirement Plan Design Examples

Virginia Retirement System Modernization and Pension Reform Changes

State Individual Income Tax Rates for Retirement Income as of January 31, 2015 Presented by Timothy Weller

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2011 STATE LEGISLATURES. April 30, 2011 Ronald K. Snell

The table below reflects state minimum wages in effect for 2014, as well as future increases. State Wage Tied to Federal Minimum Wage *

Kansas Public Employees Retirement System

State Retirement Systems: Rhode Island Versus the Nation

State Budgets, Federal Deficit, Pensions and Jobs

NASRA Issue Brief: Employee Contributions to Public Pension Plans

Choosing Your Retirement Plan

Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) Reform Options

Retirement Plan Selection Guide for new members

SECTION 15 DEFINED CONTRIBUTION AND SECTION 16 COMBINED PLANS

2017 Pre-Retirement Webinar

Plan Overview. STRS Ohio retirement plans Defined Benefit Plan (DB) Defined Contribution Plan (DC) Combined Plan

Comparing Tier 2 Plans

Pensions and Retirement Plan Enactments in 2013 State Legislatures

RESEARCH ON GOVERNMENT PENSIONS IN RELATIONS TO SOCIAL SECURITY COVERAGE

Kentucky , ,349 55,446 95,337 91,006 2,427 1, ,349, ,306,236 5,176,360 2,867,000 1,462

STATE MINIMUM WAGES 2017 MINIMUM WAGE BY STATE

VRS Overview. Presented to the IPMA-VA HR Director s Retreat. November 16, 2012 Robert P. Schultze, Director

Analysis of PERS Cost Allocation, Benefit Modification, and System Financing Concepts January 2013

WikiLeaks Document Release

Budget Uncertainty in Medicaid. Federal Funds Information for States

Key Facts. SNAPSHOT: The Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. Overview

Selected State Policies Governing Termination or Garnishment of Public Pensions

Choosing Your Retirement Plan Optional Retirement Plan for Political Appointees Plan 1 VRS Plan 1 Membership Date: Before July 1, 2010

Federal Employees Retirement System: Summary of Recent Trends

Pennsylvania Association of Public Employee Retirement Systems, Spring Forum

Choosing Your Retirement Plan Optional Retirement Plan for Political Appointees Plan 2

State Tax Treatment of Social Security, Pension Income

Overview of HMEPS Benefit Changes

May- 01. Jun- 01. Jul- 01. Aug- 01. System was established by the General Assembly in This system was designed specifically for law

State Universities Retirement System of Illinois

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2009 STATE LEGISLATURES. December 15, Ronald K. Snell

PERS: By The Numbers

ATHENE Performance Elite Series of Fixed Index Annuities

Studies

Non-Financial Change Form

State Universities Retirement System

Recent VRS Changes and the New Pension GASB Standard. VGFOA Fall Conference October 17 th, 2012

A comparison guide to help you select the best plan for your needs

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Metrics and Measurements for State Pension Plans. November 17, 2016 Greg Mennis

State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio LEGISLATIVE

A comparison guide to help you select the best plan for your needs

State Universities Retirement System of Illinois

8, ADP,

THE PUBLIC EDUCATION EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSOURI. A chronological review of legislation and development

How Will Rhode Island s New Hybrid Pension Plan Affect Teachers?

Preserving Retirement Income Security for Public Sector Employees. By Diane Oakley, M.B.A. & Jennifer Erin Brown, M.S., J.D., LL.M.

Table 1: PERS Proposals Organized by Subject

Pension Litigation Settlement Proposal

Choosing Your Retirement Plan

Tax Recommendations and Actions in Other States. Joel Michael House Research Department June 9, 2011

Pooled Assets. Required Lifetime Benefit Payouts. Social Security, Disability and Survivor Benefits

REPORT ON THE JANUARY 1, 2012 ACTUARIAL VALUATION OF THE BELMONT CONTRIBUTORY RETIREMENT SYSTEM

RECENT PENSION LEGISLATION AND ITS IMPACT ON CALSTRS BENEFIT PROGRAMS 1 of 9

Nebraska Public Employees Retirement Systems Defined Contribution and Cash Balance Plans

Alex Brown Research Manager

State Individual Income Taxes: Personal Exemptions/Credits, 2011

Federal Employees Retirement System: Summary of Recent Trends

Kansas Court of Appeals Kansas Supreme Court District Magistrate District Court. Guide. Kansas Retirement System for Judges KPERS

PENSION. Traditional and Cash Balance Formulas for Individual Field. Grandfathered Choice Participants

Retirement Plan Design Study

Helping you plan for tomorrow, today. Hybrid Retirement Plan Handbook for Members

SERS. Spokane Employees Retirement System INFORMATION HANDBOOK

Options to Address Unfunded Pension Liability

STUDY OF THE Wisconsin Retirement System...

Status of Local Pension Funding Fiscal Year 2012: An Evaluation of Ten Local Government Employee Pension Funds in Cook County

PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT PLAN ENACTMENTS IN 2007 STATE LEGISLATURES. Ronald K. Snell October 2007

Exhibit 1. Morningstar, State of North Carolina Pension Overview (Nov. 20, 2013).

1. Monthly Accrued Benefit

KPERS Update. Presented by: Overview, Governor s Budget Proposal and Triennial Experience Study

Transcription:

State Retirement Legislation 2009-2012 July 31, 2012 R o n S n e l l N a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e o f S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e s

Overview This report is concerned with state legislation changing state retirement plans for general employees and teachers, which 44 states revised 2009-2012 some of them more than once: In 2009, 10 states. In 2010, 21 states. In 2011, 32 states. In 2012, 7 states.

Major Pensions Legislation in 2009-2012: All Topics 44 States Represented

Significant Structural Changes in 2012: Active and Enacted as of June 30 13 states represented Enacted Legislation in 2012 Significant Changes Being Considered

Increases in Employee Contributions, 2009-2011 Future Members Only (7 states) At Least Some Current Members (21 states) Enacted for Current Members and Overturned

Changes in Employee Contributions in 2012 Alabama Uniquely for state plans in recent years, members of a new retirement tier face lower required contributions than members of the closed tier. The required employee contribution for general employees and teachers will fall from 7.5% to 6%. Higher age and service requirements for normal retirement, extension of the period for calculating FAS from three years to five, and a reduction in the benefit factor from 2.1025% to 1.65% allows for the reduction.

Changes in Employee Contributions in 2012 Kansas Tier 1 members (tier closed to new members on June 30, 2009) will choose between Accepting an increased contribution rate from 4% to 5% in 2014 and 6% in 2015 in order to preserve their current multiplier of 1.85%, or Accepting a reduction in the multiplier to 1.4% for future service and keeping the 4% contribution rate. Tier 2 members will keep the current contribution rate of 6%, gain an increase in the multiplier from 1.75% to 1.85%, and lose the annual COLA provided in 2007 legislation.

Changes in Employee Contributions in 2012 New York A new Tier VI for most state and local government employees and teachers, including the New York City plans. The new tier scales contributions to salary: Wages of $45,000 or less...3% More than $45,000 to $55,000...3.5% More than $55,000 to $75,000...4.5% More than $75,000 to $100,000...5.75% More than $100,000 to $179,000...6% No contribution on earnings in excess of the governor s salary, currently $179,000 [Current levels are 3% for general employees; 3.5% for teachers.]

Changes in Employee Contributions in 2012 South Carolina Employee contributions will increase from 6.5% to 8% of salary over three years beginning on July 1, 2012 Employer contributions will increase from 10.6% of salary to 10.9% over the same period. If future increases are required to maintain the schedule of actuarial funding, they will be split between employees and employers and will maintain the 2.9 percentage point differential between them.

Changes in Employee Contributions in 2012 Virginia All local government members will contribute 5% of salary to their retirement plan (for many years in the past, this was picked up by employers). Local governments will provide an offsetting 5% salary increase that, at their discretion, can be phased in over a period as long as five years. The employee contribution requirement is for the DB plans that will close to new members Jan. 1, 2014. This is similar to 2011 legislation that affected state employees.

Higher Age and Service Requirements for Normal Retirement, for New Members, 2009-2011 4 4 28 States Represented

Higher Age and Service Requirements for Normal Retirement, for New Members in 2012 Alabama: Applicable to state and local employees, teachers, and law enforcement other than state police. New hires only as of January 1, 2013. TIER 1 PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement after 25 years or at 60 Benefits Base: highest 3 years of last 10 Multiplier: 2.0125% TIER 2 PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement at 62 (no 25-and-out) Benefits Base: highest 5 years of last 10 Multiplier: 1.65%

Higher Age and Service Requirements for Normal Retirement, for New Members in 2012 New York: Applicable to state and local employees, teachers, and law enforcement other than state police. New hires only as of April 1, 2012. TIER 5 PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement at 60 Benefits Base: highest 3 years TIER 6 PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement at 62 Benefits Base: highest 5 years Multipliers vary with length of service. Tier 6 reduces them for higher years of service. For 30 years of service, Tier 6 benefits will be about 11% below Tier 5 benefits.

Higher Age and Service Requirements for Normal Retirement, for New Members in 2012 South Carolina: Applicable to state and local employees, teachers, and police officers. New hires only as of July 1, 2012. OLD TIER PROVISIONS (except for police): Normal Retirement after 28 years of service Benefits Base: highest 3 years NEW TIER PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement at age 65 with 8 years of service or Rule of 90 (age plus years of service equal 90) Benefits Base: highest 5 years

Higher Age and Service Requirements for Normal Retirement, for New Members in 2012 Wyoming: Applicable to state and local members. New hires and certain returning employees as of August 31, 2012. OLD TIER PROVISIONS: Normal Retirement at 60 Benefits Base: high 3 Multiplier: 2.125% for the first 15 years of service and 2.25% for additional years of service NEW TIER PROVISIONS (effective August 31, 2012): Normal Retirement at 65 Benefits Base: high 5 Multiplier: 2% for all service

Reductions in Post-Retirement Benefit Increases Enacted in 2010 and 2011 18 States Represented Future hires only (6 states) At least some active employees (6) People already retired and active employees (6)

Reductions in Post-Retirement Benefit Increases Enacted in 2012 Kansas: repealed cost-of-living increases entirely except for people who retire by December 31, 2013. South Carolina: capped future cost-of-living increases at $500 per year. Virginia: Lowered cap on future cost-of-living increases for new and non-vested employees from 5% to 3%. Wyoming: Effectively prohibited future cost-of-living increases.

Some States Have Replaced DB Plans In 2010, Utah closed its DB plan for all state and local employees. As of July 1, 2011, Utah offers new employees the choice of a defined contribution plan or a hybrid plan that includes a DB plan and a mandatory 401(k). As of July 1, 2010, Michigan replaced its School Employees DB plan with a hybrid plan. Rhode Island will transfer all members of the state DB plans (except judges and public safety) to a hybrid plan in 2012.

Two States Adopted Cash Balance Plans in 2012 Very rare in the public sector. A cash balance plan Provides each member with an individual account. Employees and employers contribute to the account. The member cannot choose how the money is invested. Members' accounts are managed in one trust fund, and members are guaranteed a return on investment. If investment return makes it possible, member accounts can receive additional returns. In public plans, upon retirement, the member receives an annuity based on the account balance.

Kansas Cash Balance Plan (2012) Kansas will close DB plans and replace them with a cash-balance plan for new members as of Jan. 1, 2015 Employee Contribution: 6% Employer Credit to Account: 3% to 6% depending on years of service (4% at 5 years, 5% at 12 years, 6% at 24 years). Guaranteed Interest Credit: 5.25% annually with possible additional dividends if investment experience warrants. Vesting at 5 years. At retirement, all balances will be annuitized, except members may withdraw up to 30% of their balance in a lump sum.

Louisiana Cash Balance Plan (2012) Louisiana will close DB plans and replace them with a cash balance plan for new public employees as of July 1, 2013. Mandatory for non-hazardous state employees and higher education faculty; optional for other education employees. Employee Contribution: 8% Employer Credit to Account: 4% Interest Credit: 1% below the actuarial rate of return for system, not to fall below zero. Additional interest credits are possible if investment experience allows. Vesting: 5 years, same a current plans.

Louisiana Cash Balance Plan (2012) Louisiana cash balance plan Vested members who leave covered employment may at any time Withdraw full account balance Transfer it to another qualified retirement plan or IRA Leave it with the system and annuitize it at age 60. withdraw full account balance, At normal retirement (60/5) balances may be annuitized or members may choose a partial withdrawal and a reduced annuity. Provisions for survivors' benefits and disability benefits are based upon account balances.

Virginia Hybrid Plan (2012) Virginia will close DB plans and replace them with a hybrid plan with DB and DC components in January 2014. New members only. The total employee contribution stays at 5%, split between the DB (4%) and DC (1%) components. Employees can contribute more to the DC plan if they wish, and will get a higher employer match if they do so. Employer match can be as high as 5%. Multiplier for DB component is 1% (in the old DB plan, 1.7%). Applicable to almost all state and local government members.

Additional Proposed Legislation in 2012 Illinois Proposals (died at end of session) RETIRED MEMBERS: Choice 1: Continuation of compounded COLAs and no retiree health insurance. Choice 2: A non-compounded COLA and access to retiree health insurance ACTIVE MEMBERS: Choice 1: Compounded COLA after retirement, no future salary increases included in final average compensation, no retiree health insurance Choice 2: Non-compounded COLA after retirement, current FAS calculation, access to retiree health insurance

Additional Proposed Legislation in 2012 Ohio Proposals (0n hold for now): Higher age and service requirements for retirement; Reductions in benefit formula; Reduced COLA for current and future retirees; Increases in member contributions.

Sources This report is based on NCSL's annual reports on state pensions and retirement legislation and The Widening Gap (Pew Center on the States, 2011). NCSL resources on pensions and retirement are available here: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research.aspx?tabs=951,69,140 NCSL gratefully acknowledges the support of the Pew Center on the States for its research and publications on pensions and retirement issues. http://www.pewstates.org/

Questions & Contact Info To ask a question, please type your question in the chat box In the right hand corner of your screen. You will not be identified and only the presenters will see your question. For further information: NCSL - Ron Snell - ron.snell@ncsl.org 303-856-1534 PCS - David Draine - ddraine@pewtrusts.org 202-552-2012