pension project final edited
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The Illinois Public Pension Crisis
A DePaul Student Case Competition
Presenting: Jay Choi, Lauren McDermott, & Paul Kuligowski
![Page 2: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Three Step Process•Contain•Alleviate•Sustainability
![Page 3: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Part 1ContainTo contain the problem, we will: • Recognize what the problem is and where it came from• Recommendations for change
![Page 4: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
•Illinois stringent pension laws.•Misleading accounting standards.•Poor funding in the wake of financial disaster.
Three Major Factors
![Page 5: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Illinois stringent pension laws• These laws create challenges far greater then any other state.• Illinois has the strictest pension laws of any state.• Many case studies do not apply.
“Benefits may in no way be impaired or diminished.” - Section 5. Pension and Retirement
![Page 6: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Misleading accounting practices.• Current practices are not reflective of current market conditions• These have masked the current pension liability. • Illinois's financial budget shows that the pension is “only” $40 billion
under funded.• It’s actually closer to $111 billion.
![Page 7: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Poor funding in the wake of financial disaster.• Many investments went bad.• Cause the state to run a deficit.
![Page 8: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
How do we Contain the Problem?
![Page 9: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Consolidation• We recommend that the state pension funds be consolidated into one
large fund. • By Consolidating we would gain 2.58B in savings
Recommendation 1
![Page 10: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Accounting PracticesRecommendation 2
• We recommend that modifying the accounting practices in accordance with State Law and practices reflective of reality and the current economic conditions of low interest rates.
“Be open minded but not so much that your brain falls out.”- Richard Dawkins
![Page 11: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Auditing Practices• We recommend that the pension fund, once consolidated, is audited
semiannually for discrepancies in reporting and proper asset allocation
Recommendation 3
![Page 12: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Part 2AlleviateTo alleviate the problem:
• Budget Reallocationo FY2015 o Capital Outlays
• Revenue Generation Program
![Page 13: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Purpose• Allocating a percentage of the budget makes up for lack of State
contributions• Beneficiaries have restored confidence in pension security • Lawmakers gain favor with public workers and unions• Reduces pension related bankruptcy risk • Provides the new consolidated pension fund with creditability and
accountability
![Page 14: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Much will it cost annually?
$4.36B
![Page 15: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Budget Reallocation• After evaluating the liability and recognizing the drain carrying such a
liability has on the state budget• We propose reallocating 4.13% of the FY2015 Governors proposed
budget to the pension liability.
![Page 16: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Revenue Generation Program• The purpose of this is to generate consistent enough revenue to offset
the 4.13% budget reallocation that we recommended to pay off the pension liability by 2045.
![Page 17: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Viability• To elaborate our plan of reallocation, we have gone through the
Governors FY2015 proposed budget to show what a 4.13% reduction would mean. • We acknowledge that there are certain aspects of the proposal that
may not be entirely feasible.
![Page 18: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Solution to Reallocation • We would allow departments to determine where the 4.13%
reduction of their departments budget would come from.• Ex. If a department cannot cut travel expenses by 4.13%, they can cut
printing expenses by whatever would equal 4.13% of travel and reallocate that way.
* The question of how to fund the expenses and capital outlays that are being cut are answered in our revenue generation program.
![Page 19: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Impact• Below is a report of the Illinois 2015 proposed finances and a new
proposed budget showing where these reallocations will come from.
• Governors Proposed: 96,864,880,063.90• FY2015 Proposed: 92,864,880,063.90
• Difference: 4,000,000,000.00
![Page 20: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Reasoning• Carrying a pension liability increases the state’s financial instability
and harms their economic health. • There are over 675,000 people receiving pensions, a significant part
of consumption for the state.
![Page 21: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Capital Outlays• We recommend that 25% of the capital outlays budget is reallocated
to the IL state pension fund. • Difference between important infrastructure and capital projects that
are able to wait until the state finances have normalized. • The purpose of this is to provide economic risk capital to absorb
restructuring costs.
![Page 22: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Stipulations• All capital outlays projects must be evaluated based on priority and
there risk to the general public. The priority of the project and a risk assessment must be included in the request for funding. • High benefit and low dollar projects are given priority. • All requests for state funding must include an extensive cost benefit
analysis of the project and its projected impact on the community.
*We recognize that many of these infrastructure allocations are important to have a well functioning state.
![Page 23: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Impact• Using the projected Fiscal Year 2015 budget capital outlays, we have
restructured the budget to show what a 25% decrease in budget allocation would due to each of the allocations.
Yearly SavingsTotal Budget: $1,450,752,865.00 ($1.45B)
Reduction: 25% Savings: $362,688,216.25 ($362M)
![Page 24: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Budget Reallocation Recap
• 4.13% Reallocation: $4B per year • Capital Outlays Reduction: $362M
• Total: $4.36B
![Page 25: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Revenue Generation Program• Goal: Generate consistent enough revenue to offset the 4% budget
reallocation that we recommended
![Page 26: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Reasoning• We recognize that the pension liability being paid will take revenues
from other government functions.• This program will allow taxpayers to shoulder less of the burden that
the pension liability has created and will allow for an increase in the tax revenue for the state of Illinois without an increase in individual tax rates. • Inducing an influx of business into the state will increase jobs and the
economic viability of the state of Illinois.
![Page 27: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
RGP Phase 1• For the first phase of the revenue generation program, we propose
that the State of Illinois choose some of its public lands and natural resources to engage in repurchase agreements that provide them with medium term collateralized loans.
![Page 28: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Reasoning• Currently, state assets sit at $76.6 billion while state liabilities total
$213.8 billion.• Liquidating nonessential assets with allow the state to regain
solvency. • In order to fund the short-term gap without increasing taxes, we
propose to sell some of the public land and natural resources that the State of Illinois owns in repurchase agreements with limitations on how these sales can be used in the time that they are privatized.
![Page 29: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
ImpactAsset Market Value Sale Terms
Bohm Woods $94M Sell under conditions to real estate developers
4 Gas Storage Wells $250M Sell to natural gas companies in repo agreements
Weldon Springs $100M Sell interstate in medium term repo agreements
Gebhard Woods $100M Sell in medium term repo agreements
Oil Wells in Illinois Basin $200M Sell to private companies under stringent terms
![Page 30: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
RGP Phase 2Federal Grant Think Tank• We think the most effective way to improve the state and generate
revenue is to create a non-partisan, non-political think tank that would focus solely on making Illinois eligible for more federal grants as well as functional issues and operational inefficiencies within the state.
![Page 31: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
• By functional issues, we mean a type of “customer pain” for public goods. Ideally this think tank would find two things: • First, they would modernize and improve Illinois systems in order to increase
the revenue generated by them for the long term, at the lowest cost per implementation. • Second, the functional issues that are currently holding Illinois back in
education, public welfare and systematic issues for residents would be improved to encourage and make Illinois eligible for an increase in Federal Grants
![Page 32: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Main Purpose• This is the main purpose of the think tank. They would focus on
examining where our budget cuts have had the most impact and match those with available Federal grants. • Illinois would have to make operational and strategic changes to
meet eligibility criteria for many of theses grants, which would be the secondary purpose of this think tank.
![Page 33: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Minimize Resource Drain• Another purpose of their work would be to minimize the drain on
Illinois resources in order to offset the reallocation of the budget into the pension system. • The last branch of the think tank would search for operational
inefficiencies within the different state departments. This is feasible since it would fall under the category of research and development, which is tax deferrable.
![Page 34: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
ImpactYearly Cost: $1.5M
(funded through Federal Research Grants)Annual Benefit to IL After 2018: $3B
![Page 35: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
RGP Phase 3• We propose that as part of the long term revenue generation strategy
for the State of Illinois, the state legislature change Illinois business and tax policy to favor small and medium sized companies in order to induce an influx of business into the state to generate increases in tax revenue.
![Page 36: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Reasoning• By pulling business revenue into Illinois instead of simply increasing
taxes, we can come to a long-term solution for the pension liability instead of unfairly forcing taxpayers to shoulder the burden. • Creates jobs for residents, effectively decreasing the state responsibility for
public welfare• Constituencies support legislators who pass a bill supporting job growth • Long term revenue generation from an increase in tax revenue as opposed to
increase in tax rates
![Page 37: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
![Page 38: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Part 3SustainabilityTo create sustainability of the Illinois public pension:
![Page 39: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Problems of Defined Benefit Plan:• Districts, Precincts, and Unions purposely raise salary for “soon-to-be”
retired employees for the eligibility of a larger pension paid for by the State of Illinois • Average lifespan increases to 78.96• Retirement age is 62, 17 years of pension
• More than 30% of the retirees do not live IL • Taxpayer contributions increases 427% over the past 25 years
![Page 40: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Defined Contribution Plan: Breakdown
Teachers State University Judiciary General Assembly
State Employee
Average Yearly Salary
$43,591.00 $34,959.00 $117,558.00 $52,193.00 $29,063.00
5% Bi-monthly Employee Contribution
$90.81 $72.83 $244.91 $108.74 $60.55
12% Bi-Monthly IL State Vest
$217.96 $174.80 $587.79 $260.97 $145.32
Total Yearly Contribution
$7,410.47 $5,943.03 $19,984.86 $8,872.81 $4,940.71
5% “Moderate Investment”
$492,343.09 $394,848.06 $1,327,771.07 $589,499.27 $328,255.08
![Page 41: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Defined Benefit VS. Defined Contribution
Teachers State University Judiciary General Assembly
State Employee
17 yrs of D.B.P of Retirement w/COLA
$830,115.76 $665,734.14 $2,238,690.30 $993,926.09 $553,454.94
Sum of 17 yrs on D.C.P Lump Sum after 30 years 3% “Risk Adverse Inv”
$813,768.10 $652,623.69 $2,194,603.26 $974,352.47 $542,555.63
![Page 42: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Upsides of Defined Contribution Plan State of Illinois• Proper allocation of Taxpayer Dollars
![Page 43: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Upsides of Defined Contribution Plan • Employee• Tax Deferrable • Tax-Free Lump Sum• Vests are more competitive than Private Sector
![Page 44: Pension project final edited](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022042706/58b89c641a28abc06d8b45af/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Social Risks• Lower Quality of State Employees• Unhappy State Employees
Short Run: Competitive vests, Salary RaiseLong Run: Less taxpayer dollars to fund the pension
More money in IL economy