| | 86-24 |
| | October 31, 1986 |
| | REFERENCE: |
| | 4213 Actuarial Assumptions |
| | 4213(c) Actuarial Assumptions. Unfunded Vested Benefits - Definition |
| | OPINION: |
| | This is in response to your request for the opinion of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) as to the proper |
| | method of determining withdrawal liability under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) in the |
| | case of a multiemployer pension plan that provides optional ancillary benefits in addition to the basic benefits. |
| | Specifically, you ask what actuarial assumptions should be used to determine the amount of unfunded vested benefits on |
| | which withdrawal liability is based, and whether the calculation of unfunded vested benefits should take into account |
| | "vested" ancillary benefits and assets "attributable" to them. |
| | The ancillary benefits in question are provided only for the employees of employers that make specified payments to the |
| | plan in addition to the contributions required of them to support the basic benefits. However, we understand that the |
| | ancillary benefits are payable from the same general fund as the basic benefits. |
| | The term "unfunded vested benefits" is defined in section 4213(c) of ERISA as the value of nonforfeitable benefits under |
| | the plan, less the value of the assets of the plan. The term "nonforfeitable benefit" is defined in section 4001(a)(8) of |
| | ERISA. Although that provision does not explicitly mention either basic or ancillary benefits, it is the PBGC's opinion that |
| | the term is intended to apply only to basic benefits. Therefore, ancillary benefits, whether "vested" or not, should not be |
| | taken into account in determining unfunded vested benefits. On the other hand, where all plan assets are in a single fund |
| | for the payment of all benefits, there is no basis for excluding any part of the assets from the determination of unfunded |
| | vested benefits. The full amount of plan assets, whether derived from contributions for basic benefits or from additional |
| | payments made for ancillary benefits, is to be subtracted from the value of nonforfeitable (basic) benefits to arrive at |
| | You indicate that the plan has been computing unfunded vested benefits for withdrawal liability purposes using the PBGC's |
| | interest assumption for terminated trusteed single-employer plans and question whether this is appropriate, since these |
| | assumptions "are not for multiemployer plans and . . . generate lower liabilities," and since the assumptions are not the |
| | same as those used for purposes of section 412 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (the Code). |
| | There is no requirement that the actuarial assumptions used to determine withdrawal liability be the same as those used for |
| | purposes of section 412 of the Code. Section 4213(b) of ERISA states merely that |
| | [i]n determining the unfunded vested benefits of a plan for purposes of determining an employer's withdrawal liability . . ., |
| | the plan actuary may . . . rely on the most recent complete actuarial valuation used for purposes of section 412 of the . . |
| | . Code . . . . |
| | (Emphasis supplied.) This is a permissive, not a mandatory, provision. Thus, the fact that the assumptions used to |
| | compute withdrawal liability are not the same as those used under section 412 of the Code does not of itself make those |
| | assumptions improper. |
| | Section 4213(a) of ERISA permits the PBGC to issue regulations prescribing actuarial assumptions to be used in |
| | calculating withdrawal liability. No such regulations have been issued. In the absence of such regulations, section 4213(a) |
| | requires simply that |
| | [w]ithdrawal liability . . . shall be determined by each plan on the basis of . . . actuarial assumptions and methods which, in |
| | the aggregate, are reasonable (taking into account the experience of the plan and reasonable expectations) and which, in |
| | combination, offer the actuary's best estimate of anticipated experience under the plan . . . . |
| | The PBGC is not in a position to advise actuaries what assumptions are appropriate in each individual case. In particular, |
| | the PBGC cannot advise you whether and, if so, how the actuarial assumptions used to determine withdrawal liability under |
| | the plan should take into account the plan's experience in receiving and making payments under its ancillary benefit |
| | provisions and expectations about its anticipated experience. |
| | If you have any further questions about this matter, you may call Deborah C. Murphy of the PBGC's Corporate Policy |
| | and Regulations Department at 202-778-8850. |
| | Edward R. Mackiewicz |
| | General Counsel |