My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WS Materials 09-04-2012
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Packets
>
2012
>
2012 Council Work Session Materials
>
09-04-2012
>
WS Materials 09-04-2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2021 8:17:59 AM
Creation date
11/6/2012 12:35:07 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Myth vs. Fact-Public Employees Retirement Association of MN Page 2 of 5 <br /> Public pensions hurt the state's economy. <br /> Fact:PERA actually pumps more money into the state's economy every year than it draws from <br /> taxpayers through employer contributions.In fact,benefits paid to Minnesota residents were nearly <br /> three times the contributions made to PERA by employers last year. The same is true for the <br /> Minnesota State Retirement System and the Teachers Retirement Association.To view a map and <br /> county breakdown,• <br /> Even more teeing,state and local taxes paid by PERA,MSRS and TRA retirees,and the holders <br /> of jobs created by retiree spending,exceeded public employer pension contributions by$80 <br /> million in 2007 alone. (Measuring the Impact of Minnesota's Retirement Systems,2008) <br /> Retirement benefits leave Minnesota because retirees leave the state. <br /> Fact: 91 percent of PERA retirees remain Minnesota residents after they leave public service. <br /> Of the$1.44 billion in benefits PERA paid in 2011.$1.30 billion stayed in the state.(See Where Are <br /> Our Retirees?)That's money spent at Minnesota businesses,sustaining and creating jobs across the <br /> state. And let's not forget,those retirees are also paying state and local taxes.(2011 PERA <br /> Comprehensive Financial Report) <br /> Myth: Since private industry has adopted the 401(k-type retirement plan,it must be the most cost <br /> effective way to pay for retirements. <br /> Fact: If the only concern is the initial cost,perhaps. However,one aspect of retirement plan design <br /> is rarely addressed—the relative cost of providing a given level of benefits for participants. Here, <br /> traditional pension plans like PERA have a distinct advantage over individual account type plans like <br /> 401(k)s. <br /> According to the National Institute on Retirement Security in its study A Better Bane for the Buck, <br /> pension plans can deliver the same retirement benefit for an individual at a cost that is 48% <br /> lower than a 401(k)plan. It's based on investment allocations over time,superior investment returns <br /> and longevity risk pooling. <br /> But the taxpayers would still save money simply by moving public employees to a 401(k)- <br /> type plan. <br /> Fact: Any savings would be a long time coming. Assuming a 5 percent employer and 5 percent <br /> employee contribution rate,the costs to transition to a 401(k)-type plan would be nearly$3 <br /> billion over the next decade for all three systems,and$1.1 billion for our General Plan alone.Costs <br /> increase during a transition period because once a plan is closed to new members any unfunded <br /> liabilities remaining in the existing pension plan must be paid off over a shorter time frame.(2011 <br /> Minnesota Retirement Plan Design Study) <br /> Myth. PERA has an unfunded liability of$4.3 billion that taxpayers just can't afford. <br /> Fact: While PERA's General Plan does have a$4.3 billion unfunded liability,it is not due <br /> tomorrow. In fact,that liability Is spread out over decades—the next 20 years in the case of the <br /> General Plan,27 years for the Police&Fire Plan,and 12 years for the Correctional Plan. <br /> It's like the unpaid portion of a mortgage.Few homeowners have enough cash on hand to <br /> immediately pay it all off. That's why they make monthly payments. It's the same with <br /> PERA.Regular member and employer contributions,and most of all,investment growth over time, <br /> are expected to erase that liability as the plans approach their full-funding dates.(2011 PERA <br /> Comprehensive Financial Report) <br /> And ifs not like PERA is ignoring that liabikty.Our history shows that we address problems as they <br /> occur,with a positive effect on the state's bond rating. We have addressed funding shortfalls with <br /> periodic benefit and contribution adjustments rather than letting problems get out of hand. <br /> Myth: PERA is going broke. <br /> Fact: While PERA suffered substantial investment losses during the recent recession,even during <br /> the depths of the market meltdown the Association had reserves of$14 billion.Those reserves <br /> had rebounded to$20 billion at the end of Fiscal Year 2011. <br /> http://www.mnpera.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={A4C377CF-1748-4FA4-906F... 8/23/2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.