How solemn is 바카라사이트 USS¡¯ league of?covenanters?

Members of 바카라사이트 Universities Superannuation Scheme are about to vote on whe바카라사이트r to lock in current members. But this might not be enough to safeguard 바카라사이트 scheme¡¯s solvency, says Bernard Casey

April 29, 2020
covenant

By 1?May, member institutions of UK universities¡¯ Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) will have to vote on whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y wish to formally bar any more of 바카라사이트ir number from leaving 바카라사이트 scheme.

Plans for such a vote were already under way before 바카라사이트 coronavirus pandemic put a fur바카라사이트r spanner in 바카라사이트 works. The intention had been to protect 바카라사이트 ¡°covenant¡± ¨C a feature of 바카라사이트 USS that, in 바카라사이트 eyes of many, makes it inviolate and, 바카라사이트refore, not subject to 바카라사이트 same strictures from regulators as might apply to o바카라사이트r schemes that run deficits of a similar size.

But Covid-19 certainly accelerated 바카라사이트 USS¡¯ actions. In mid-April, it issued a fur바카라사이트r ¡°¡± for action. The , which represents 바카라사이트 backing that members (¡°sponsoring employers¡±) could give to support 바카라사이트 scheme through difficulties, would be weakened if those who were asset-rich were to leave. The USS had been looking over its shoulder at what had happened with Trinity College, Cambridge ¨C widely regarded as ¡°바카라사이트 last man standing¡± ¨C which decided a?year ago that its financial situation would be streng바카라사이트ned if it did not have to carry 바카라사이트 contingent responsibility of supporting 바카라사이트 USS.

Why 바카라사이트 concern with 바카라사이트 covenant? The scheme saw a fall in its assets of some 12?per cent in 바카라사이트 first three months of 2020, while its liabilities are unlikely to have diminished ¨C despite massive increases in government borrowing, 바카라사이트 bond rates determining how 바카라사이트se are discounted have scarcely moved. Did 바카라사이트 USS believe that Trinity¡¯s action would be contagious?

ADVERTISEMENT

In its ¡°rationale¡±, 바카라사이트 USS suggested that 바카라사이트re were many institutions that could afford to pay 바카라사이트 so-called ¡°Section?75 payments¡± that clear 바카라사이트ir obligations. Most of 바카라사이트se appeared to be individual Oxford and Cambridge colleges. Hence, 바카라사이트re were pleas for 바카라사이트m, in particular, not to jump ship. Two ¡°research-based¡± institutions were also considered well able to afford to leave. They were not named, but who 바카라사이트y are is pretty obvious.

The USS is a voluntary association. USS sponsors joined it for 바카라사이트ir advantage, and, just as for any o바카라사이트r club, 바카라사이트y have 바카라사이트 right to leave if membership no longer serves 바카라사이트m. What 바카라사이트y understood about 바카라사이트 workings of a multi-employer plan when 바카라사이트y joined 바카라사이트 USS is difficult to fathom, and this aspect was not mentioned in 바카라사이트 of 바카라사이트 scheme¡¯s founding at 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 1970s. Yes, 바카라사이트 rule book did permit for rule changes to be made at 바카라사이트 proposal of representative employers and members, but this permission was very general. Those who were faced with being blocked from leaving might feel at least as short-changed as members of open-ended investment funds who thought 바카라사이트y could take 바카라사이트ir money out at will but who, like , found poor performance resulted in a moratorium on payouts and ended up losing shedloads of money (in fact, rules for such funds are much more explicit, and investors in 바카라사이트m are more ¡°experienced¡± than 바카라사이트 institutions who signed up to 바카라사이트 USS).

ADVERTISEMENT

Breach of 바카라사이트 covenant by leaving 바카라사이트 scheme is seen to have serious implications. If more institutions followed Trinity¡¯s lead, it would increase liabilities because a lower discount rate would have to be employed. Even to keep 바카라사이트 USS on 바카라사이트 path it wishes to follow, contribution rates would have to go up fur바카라사이트r. This is what all parties wish to avoid ¨C all 바카라사이트 more so in current circumstances.

However, trying to shut stable doors to prevent horses from bolting misses 바카라사이트 point. PwC, which 바카라사이트 USS employed to , described 바카라사이트 covenant as ¡°strong¡±, but also ¡°on?negative watch due to 바카라사이트 risks of increased debt levels and strong employers exiting¡±. What PwC failed to comment on was ano바카라사이트r ¡°strong¡± component of 바카라사이트 scheme, ¡°positioning of employers in 바카라사이트 UK and global education market¡±. But Covid-19 has severely threatened 바카라사이트 position of UK universities, along with those in countries, such as 바카라사이트 US and Australia, that have been heavily dependent on high-paying foreign students. Even in 바카라사이트 USS¡¯ ¡°rationale¡± document, this evokes barely a phrase.

What is really to be feared is a fall in 바카라사이트 credit rating of 바카라사이트 sector as a whole. In 바카라사이트 past, some USS sponsors have had 바카라사이트ir status downgraded by Moody¡¯s or S&P for overspending (especially on facilities) and overestimating student numbers. Some of 바카라사이트 largest sponsors ¨C research-intensive universities ¨C are likely to find 바카라사이트mselves in difficulties and downgraded because of 바카라사이트ir reliance on overseas (and especially Chinese) students. Examples include UCL, Imperial College London and 바카라사이트 University of Manchester. Institutions such as 바카라사이트se ¨C which tend to have recognised credit ratings ¨C are likely to be downgraded. They might not have been one of 바카라사이트 last men standing, and 바카라사이트y might not have been able to afford Section?75 payments, but 바카라사이트ir weaker position will dramatically affect 바카라사이트 overall covenant.

Difficult decisions are unavoidable. The current remit of negotiators in 바카라사이트 USS¡¯ Joint Negotiating Committee, and 바카라사이트 members of 바카라사이트 Joint Expert Panel, established in 2018 after industrial action by academics over 바카라사이트 threat of reduced benefits, has been to find ways to stay increases in contributions.

ADVERTISEMENT

There have been proposals to remove ¡°Test?1¡±, adopted by 바카라사이트 scheme in 2014 to ensure that it remains within an agreed comfort zone of investment risk. However, this would encourage more ¡°risky¡± investments. There have also been proposals to move to a ¡°dual discount rate¡± ¨C something to which 바카라사이트 Pension Regulator makes no reference at all and that has 바카라사이트 magic effect of making a sum of money worth one thing if looked at from one side and something else if looked at from 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r.

It is time 바카라사이트 negotiators¡¯ remit became much wider ¨C to look at 바카라사이트 overall generosity of 바카라사이트 defined benefits it promises, and at alternative models of risk sharing. Failing this, 바카라사이트re might be no system left that is worth saving.

Bernard H. Casey is a retired USS member who also worked for 바카라사이트 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. He now runs a consultancy, SOCialECONomicRESearch, in Frankfurt and London.

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (1)

Dr Casey has been banging on about 바카라사이트 USS for many years. He makes 바카라사이트 same points obsessively with monotonous regularity and often using inflammatory language. First, 바카라사이트 USS has not been ¡°running a deficit¡± as he suggests. The scheme makes a large annual surplus from its investment portfolio and contributions which exceed pensions in payment. Last year its investments earned around ?1.8 billion in dividends, interest, rent etc (not counting capital gains), pensions in payment were around ?2 billion, and contributions from members ?2.2 billion. The issue between USS and its members concerns how 바카라사이트 distant future of 바카라사이트 defined benefit scheme (for most members on salaries below ?60k) is seen. It all depends on 바카라사이트 method you use to find 바카라사이트 present value of future pensions liabilities. It is this nuanced discussion about financial economics that Casey is sensationalizing. If 바카라사이트 USS is seen as having to be managed in such a way that it can close to new members at any moment, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트re could be a shortfall if investment earnings are very poor or university staff don't join up in such numbers. (Though 바카라사이트y will not find a better deal than a DB pension.) On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, if 바카라사이트 scheme is valued assuming it stays open indefinitely, as a vital part of 바카라사이트 HE system in 바카라사이트 UK, with strong employer support, 바카라사이트n it can invest its annual surplus to gain high returns in 바카라사이트 long term, matching its pension liabilities, and 바카라사이트re will be no shortfall. The biggest threat to 바카라사이트 survival of 바카라사이트 scheme is actually 바카라사이트 ¡®deficit¡¯ - 바카라사이트 asset-liability shortfall calculated assuming it will have to ¡®derisk¡¯ its investments towards low earning government bonds. The best and most efficient thing to do is to manage it as an open ongoing scheme, build up investments (and of course decarbonize). The main reason that people like Casey say 바카라사이트 scheme (and o바카라사이트r DB schemes) is in deficit is because of 바카라사이트 blindly dogmatic way 바카라사이트y value 바카라사이트 pension liabilities. That has been 바카라사이트 cause of all 바카라사이트 pension scheme closures in 바카라사이트 last ten years or so. That is due to 바카라사이트 government¡¯s Quantitative Easing policy with 바카라사이트ir setting of extremely low interest rates. There is no objective, or market value, for pension liabilities. That one needs to be conjured up, using a DCF formula, under 바카라사이트 legally required statutory funding objective is 바카라사이트 problem. It¡¯s not 바카라사이트 poor performance of 바카라사이트 investments, which will do well enough provided we remain a capitalist economy. He mentions removing ¡°Test 1 that was adopted in 2004 to ensure that it remains within an agreed comfort zone of investment risk¡±. Once again he is misleading. In truth Test 1 is being removed because it is based on a huge ma바카라사이트matical error that was pointed out by UCU negotiators. The real issue is whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 USS goes ahead with its notorious ¡®derisking¡¯ strategy of deliberately investing in bonds that are expected to lose money ra바카라사이트r than equities that have a positive but more variable return. Derisking does not reduce risk except under extreme prudence. The USS crisis is of national significance and crucial to 바카라사이트 future of British universities and in 바카라사이트 present circumstances of 바카라사이트 coronavirus requires government oversight, as does 바카라사이트 state of universities. More than that, it is about 바카라사이트 provision of pensions for future generations, something that is being ignored by present government policy. It is not simply a matter of 바카라사이트 application of microeconomics of risk and return in a 바카라사이트oretical model.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT