Georgia's debt could appear higher due to accounting changes to pensions

  • Follow Government

ATLANTA — The state’s balance sheet could wind up showing a bigger figure in the liabilities column under accounting changes ordered last month by a national oversight body.

That’s because the pension plans for state workers and retirees will be calculated more conservatively as a result of the change by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

“The new standards will improve the way state and local governments report their pension liabilities and expenses, resulting in a more faithful representation of the full impact of these obligations,” said GASB Chairman Robert H. Attmore.

No estimates are available from the Employees’ Retirement System of Georgia as of Friday. But Joshua Rauh of Northwestern University estimated that nationally, it could boost the figure for outstanding liabilities more than seven times.

“While this information will, in some cases, give the appearance that a government is financially weaker than it was previously, the financial reality of the government’s situation will not have changed,” the GASB observed in its explanation.

Under current standards, Georgia’s plan had in 2009 just over 85 percent of the money it will need over the next 30 years to pay expected retirees.

A comparison of all 50 states’ pensions released June 18 by the Pew Center on the States noted that Georgia is ahead of the 80 percent most financial experts describe as the minimum, prudent funding level that 34 states fall below.

Incidentally, the pension fund for legislators had 128 percent of its needed investment.

The Pew Center classified Georgia as “a solid performer at how it managed its long-term liabilities for pensions.”

However, the most recent audit of the pension shows the funding level fell the following year to just 80 percent.

Still, funding level is likely to be significantly lower under the new accounting guidelines. One reason is that the investment assets will have to be reported at their current value rather than the seven-year average Georgia uses.

Until now, states have used the averaging to smooth out losses over several years, according to Laura Quinby, research associate at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

Taxpayers may not save much in the long run, according to Chuck Freedman, the vice president of the Georgia State Retirees Association. Since 11 percent of those in the new program have opted out and the vast majority of those participating only contribute 1 percent of their paychecks, they’re not going to squirrel away enough to retire without other government benefits, he warns.

“Long term, when these people retire, the amount of retirement that they are going to draw is going to be consistently less than the (traditional) plan members to the point where they may require state support from other programs,” he said.

Comments (2) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
socks99
250
Points
socks99 07/07/12 - 04:07 pm
0
0
Credit Jones and Morris News

Credit Jones and Morris News for a look at a big potential liability.

"Under current standards, Georgia’s plan had in 2009 just over 85 percent of the money it will need over the next 30 years to pay expected retirees."

OK, but it's now 2012, is there an updated estimate? What exactly is meant by "85 percent of the money it will need over the next 30 years"?

Bottom-line: If the pension or health-care benefits exceed monies available in the plans, who pays? Does the GA or US Constitution speak directly to the payment of pensions?

Riverman1
87033
Points
Riverman1 07/08/12 - 01:23 pm
0
0
I don't think the cost of

I don't think the cost of health care for retirees is even considered in this. I've always heard the retiree health care funding will run out of money in the not too distant future. Maybe someone can clarify.

Aren't those California cities that can't pay the retirees just telling them sorry bout that?

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs