Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Central States Pension
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dudebro" data-source="post: 4101444" data-attributes="member: 11234"><p>It was majority government caused.</p><p></p><p>"Had the plan been well-run and properly funded, and had principles of multi-employer plan design and the relevant legislation been designed to ensure long-term solvency rather than relying on new generations of contributors to make up for losses, Central States would have weathered these storms.</p><p></p><p>But Central States was missing all this. Like all plans, <strong><em>they were stymied by legislation designed for ongoing plans</em></strong>. They had flaws in their plan design. And they were neither well-run nor properly funded.</p><p></p><p>To begin with, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2018/11/27/a-tale-of-two-multi-employer-plan-systems/" target="_blank">in my prior article</a>, I wrote that during boom years, plans were unable to overfund their pension plans <strong><em>due to a tax code that imposed excise taxes</em></strong> on plans which continued to contribute despite overfunding. "</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dudebro, post: 4101444, member: 11234"] It was majority government caused. "Had the plan been well-run and properly funded, and had principles of multi-employer plan design and the relevant legislation been designed to ensure long-term solvency rather than relying on new generations of contributors to make up for losses, Central States would have weathered these storms. But Central States was missing all this. Like all plans, [B][I]they were stymied by legislation designed for ongoing plans[/I][/B]. They had flaws in their plan design. And they were neither well-run nor properly funded. To begin with, [URL='https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2018/11/27/a-tale-of-two-multi-employer-plan-systems/']in my prior article[/URL], I wrote that during boom years, plans were unable to overfund their pension plans [B][I]due to a tax code that imposed excise taxes[/I][/B] on plans which continued to contribute despite overfunding. " [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Central States Pension
Top