Coronavirus Crisis Workforce Reduction Can Adversely Affect Retirement Programs

The coronavirus pandemic continues to ripple across the country and many organizations face several unprecedented, difficult decisions surrounding their workforce and the use of cash. While payroll-reducing strategies may be necessary during this time of substandard revenue, they may also present other costs or hurdles in the company’s pension, retiree medical, and retiree life insurance programs. Significantly changing employee demographics can trigger unexpected accounting, cash flow, and compliance issues that could be an unwelcome surprise given current market conditions.

State mandated stay-at-home orders not only reduce the ability for consumers to purchase, but also the need for employees to produce. For many industries, this means downsizing workforces and payroll at record levels via layoffs, furloughs, reductions in force, and salary cuts. However, in this time where management decisions are focused on the best positioning of their organization from “crisis” to “rebound” mode, it is important that pension and retirement programs are not placed on the back burner. 

Coronavirus Crisis Workforce Reduction Can Adversely Affect Retirement Programs

Identify and Prepare for Potential Consequences

A proactive analysis of an organization’s workforce reduction program, as well as the group of employees impacted, may help identify and prepare for the impact of some of these potential unintentional consequences due to coronavirus:

Curtailment Accounting Under U.S. GAAP

Curtailment accounting may be initiated when more than 5-10% of the plan’s active participants are impacted by a workforce reduction event such as layoffs or forced termination, or a reduction or elimination of future benefit accruals. The curtailment impact is an immediate recognition of a portion of unrecognized prior service costs and could also prompt an interim re-measurement at the time of the event, likely unfavorable given the current market environment. Curtailment accounting can increase the “below the line” expense for accounting for pension, retiree medical, and retiree life insurance plans under U.S. GAAP.

Settlement Accounting Under U.S. GAAP and Cash Concerns for Pension Plans Offering Lump Sums

Settlement accounting is set into motion when lump sum payouts exceed the service cost and interest cost components of net periodic pension cost during the fiscal year. This may be increasingly likely as laid off participants may access their pension benefits for their own financial security. The settlement impact is an immediate recognition of unrecognized gains and losses, and similar to curtailments, could also cause an interim re-measurement at the time of the event. 

In addition, while payroll reducing strategies may be advantageous for cutting current expenses, pension plans that offer lump sums upon termination could end up in a situation where the plan requires more cash in the future. Paying an increased number of lump sums to participants could force the pension plan to raise cash by selling equities at a time when the market is significantly depressed. Selling equity at market lows may inhibit the pension plan’s ability to recover in the long term. 

Benefit Enhancements and Plant Shutdown Liability under PBGC and ERISA

Benefit enhancements and plan shutdown liability may be triggered when either a facility closure impacts more than 15% of the plan sponsor’s active participants benefitting in any pension or defined contribution plan; or if the pension plan document provides for special shutdown benefits in any size closure. Special, enhanced shutdown benefits that can increase pension plan liability and plan costs may be required to protect employees close to retirement if defined in the plan document. In addition, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) may require special reporting and accelerated cash contributions under ERISA 4062 for some underfunded pension plans. The PBGC also may require a special report under ERISA 4043 if the number of active participants is significantly reduced for any reason.

Vesting Enhancements under IRS Partial Pension Plan Termination

A partial pension plan termination may occur when more than 10-20% of the plan’s active participants are impacted by closing a facility or division, or from any higher turnover due to economic factors. Partial pension plan termination requires the plan sponsor to grant immediate vesting eligibility or face Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disqualification in the pension plan. This is ultimately an IRS decision based on facts and circumstances and might be avoided if the reduction is structured to furlough (not typically a formal separation) rather than permanently terminate employees. 

Increased Liability and Cash Requirements for Unfunded Retiree Medical Plans

Eliminating participants who are retirement eligible can lead to a spike in retiree medical claims costs and liabilities. Unfunded retiree medical plans “pay as you go” and do not have back-up trust assets to use toward claims in the event more participants begin retiree medical plan benefits sooner than expected. Retiree medical plans with early eligibility may be responsible for benefits over a much longer period than expected at a time when rates charged by insurers may also be increasing. Together, plan sponsors may see increased claim costs in 2021, as well as higher liability and net periodic benefit costs in fiscal 2021.

IRS Compliance Concerns Related to Passing Pension Plan Non-discrimination Testing

There is a likelihood for increased difficulty in obtaining favorable non-discrimination testing (NDT) results when there is a significant change in the demographics of the plan’s active employees. For example, NDT results will be less favorable when non-highly compensated employees (NHCEs) are forced to terminate at higher rates than highly compensated employees (HCEs) and also when salaries for NHCEs are reduced at higher levels than HCEs. Alternatively, workforce reductions impacting HCEs at higher rates could improve testing results.

Violation of Union Agreements and Debt Covenants

While not tied exclusively to workforce reductions, any decision that deviates from normal practice has a potential to violate established agreements with union contracts and debt covenants. Keep in mind, relief permitted by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) may not be permitted under current arrangements.

Minimum or Variable Interest Credit Rates for Cash Balance Plans

While interest crediting rates have already been set for most cash balance plans with calendar plan years, if low interest rates persist it could mean a significant drop in the crediting rate for 2021, possibly requiring the minimum interest crediting rate to apply. In addition, plans using variable interest crediting rates may see negative returns, making non-discrimination testing more difficult.   

Seek Guidance

The bottom line is this: the coronavirus crisis continues to evolve and any workforce strategy decision should be pursued with guidance from your actuary, auditor, or legal counsel. Early analysis may help your company prepare for retirement program concerns that may arise from implementation of the selected cost-saving payroll strategy. Contact your Findley consultant to discuss any workforce reduction program you may be considering to ensure all relevant issues are addressed.

Questions? For more information, contact the Findley consultant you normally work with, or contact Debbie Sichko at debbie.sichko@findley.com, or 216.875.1930

Published April 13, 2020

Print this article

© 2020 Findley. All Rights Reserved.

Retirement Savings Opportunities for High Earning Owners and Professionals

Overview: For successful small businesses, a 401(k) plan combined with a cash balance plan can provide opportunities to:

  • Build wealth and retirement savings for the owners/ professionals with much greater contributions than through a 401(k) plan alone
  • Save on federal, state, and local taxes through higher deductible contributions
  • Protect substantial assets from creditors or legal action
  • Provide attractive retirement benefits for nonowner
  • Attract and retain talented employees
  • Enhance financial well-being and retirement readiness for all participants

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act substantially reduced corporate tax rates for C corporations, and added a complex set of rules on deductions for pass-through entities such as partnerships, LLCs, and S corporations. Fundamentally, tax reform enacted a slightly lower individual tax rate (top brackets reduced from 39.6 percent to 37 percent) for high-earning owners, which means that these plans are still tax effective, while the substantial long-term benefits remain unchanged. Business owners who are currently sponsoring or planning to set up a 401(k) plan and cash balance plan should talk with their tax advisor and actuary, to see if any changes to plan design or their business structure are desirable.

Impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

A lot has been written and said about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the tax rule changes that affect businesses. In this article, we focus on the very fundamental aspects of these changes.

C corporations now have a flat 21 percent income tax rate and pass-through entities now have a 20 percent deduction on qualified business income. This 20 percent deduction is limited or phased-out based on the type of business and business income through very complex rules. For taxpayers in the top individual income tax bracket of 37 percent, this 20 percent deduction can be viewed as a 7.4 percent (20 percent of 37 percent top individual income tax rate) rate reduction.

Thus for most high-earning owners and professionals, the evaluation of the tax effectiveness of their 401(k) and cash balance plan will involve only a change in tax rate from 39.6 percent to 37 percent. We’ve seen that this may cause subtle changes in design and contribution levels, but it does not change fundamental decisions on whether to adopt one or both plan types.

To illustrate how the combination of a 401(k) and cash balance plan can be used, let’s look at a case study of a professional firm we’ll call ABC Services.

Case Study:  ABC Services

Cash Balance  Plan Contribution Chart

ABC Services is a partnership of any type of business professionals such as accountants, doctors, or lawyers. There are three partners in the business, each owning one-third of the practice. The firm has a number of nonowner professionals we’ll call associates. The firm employs other staff as well.

The partners at ABC have these goals for their retirement program:

  • Partners – Adam and Bill (both age 55) would like to maximize their retirement savings. Carol (age 45) needs more current income and less saving for retirement. No partner wants to subsidize the retirement benefit of the other partners.
  • Associates – the associates are ages 30 to 45. Associates prefer current compensation over future retirement benefits. ABC wants to minimize retirement plan contributions to this group.
  • Staff – ABC hires relatively young staff and experiences moderate turnover among this group. ABC wants to offer a market-competitive level of retirement benefits to attract staff employees.

Tables 1A and 1B show the employer contributions provided under the 401(k) and cash balance plans established by ABC. Each participant can make salary deferral contributions to the 401(k) plan up to the IRS limits, including additional catch-up contributions for individuals age 50 and older.

Table 1A: Annual contribution amounts for ABC partners

 

Eligible Pay

Salary
Deferrals
Employer 401(k)
Contributions
Employer
Cash Balance
Contributions
Total
Employer
Contributions
Total
Retirement
Contributions
Adam $280,000 $25,000 $14,000 $140,000 $154,000 $179,000
Bill $280,000 $25,000 $14,000 $140,000 $154,000 $179,000
Carol $280,000 $19,000 $14,000   $35,000   $49,000   $68,000

*Subject to IRS limits

Table 1B: Annual employer contributions, as a percentage of eligible pay, by employment category

  Employer 401(k)
Contribution
Employer Cash Balance
Contribution
Total Employer
Contribution
Partners      
Adam 5% 50.0% 55.0%
Bill 5% 50.0% 55.0%
Carol 5% 12.5% 17.5%
Associates 0%      0%       0%
Staff 5%   2.5%    7.5%

How well does this retirement program accomplish ABC’s objectives?

  • Partners – Adam and Bill are able to receive contributions of (and defer tax on) $179,000 each year. Carol accomplishes her goal by having a meaningful, but significantly lower, contribution amount of $68,000 per year with flexibility to change her contribution amounts through the 401(k) plan.
  • Associates – ABC minimizes retirement contributions for associates by providing a separate, employee deferral only 401(k) plan for associates, and excluding the associates from the cash balance plan.
  • Staff – ABC offers a strong benefit to this group in order to attract and retain staff employees. The plan design provides employer contributions of 7.5 percent of pay for staff, plus employee 401(k) salary deferrals and  catch-up contributions if the employee is at least age 50.

What Types of Employers Should Consider a 401(k) Cash Balance Plan?

We’ve noted that any successful business can consider implementing a 401(k) and a cash balance plan. We find, however, that businesses with the following characteristics are the most likely to see the benefits of implementing these plans together:

  • The business owners are age 40–64
  • The business has had consistent cash flow and profitability
  • The future of the business looks good, with positive cash flow and profitability over the next five years
  • The ratio of nonowner employees to owner employees is relatively low
  • The business has a 401(k) plan in place and is making employer contributions currently

Also, we frequently hear these goals in discussions with owners of successful businesses:

  • We want (or need) to save more for retirement than the current IRS annual limit imposed on the 401(k) plan
  • We want to reduce our current taxes
  • We need protection of assets from creditors, or in the event of a lawsuit
  • We want to recognize and reward key staff
  • We want to attract and retain the best employees

By implementing a 401(k) plan and cash balance plan with advanced plan designs, successful businesses can meet their owners’ goals for wealth building and retirement savings and offer an attractive and cost-effective retirement program to their employees.

Looking Closer at Cash Balance and 401(k) Plans

Qualified retirement plans are divided into two categories: defined benefit (DB) plans and defined contribution (DC) plans. Cash balance plans are a typical DB design for small businesses and professional firms, while 401(k) plans are a common DC plan design.

A cash balance plan is structured to look like a DC plan with each participant having a recordkeeping account that receives employer contributions and interest credits. These interest credits are often defined and guaranteed by the plan.

Common Features

Since both 401(k) and cash balance plans are types of qualified retirement plans, they share a number of common features that are important for employers and participants:

  • Contributions are tax-deductible
  • Trust earnings are tax-deferred
  • Trust assets are protected from the claims of creditors
  • Distributions are usually immediately available after termination, retirement, death or disability
  • Lump sum distributions may be rolled over to a successor plan or another tax-advantaged plan
  • Distributions are not subject to FICA or FUTA tax

Key Differences

Table 2 highlights the key differences between 401(k) and cash balance plans:

401(k) Plans Cash Balance Plans
Contributions (based on 2019 limits) Contributions
Participants can save up to $19,000 in before tax or Roth (after tax) employee savings

Participants age 50 or older can save an extra $6,000 in catch-up contributions

The employer and employee contributions can be up to $56,000 ($62,000 including catch-up contributions)

Employer contributions (match and profit sharing) are usually discretionary
Contributions can be far greater than current 401(k) limits, depending on the owner’s/professional’s current age

The cash balance account is guaranteed
Additions to the cash balance account are based on pay credit and interest rate factors defined in the plan document

Employer contributions are required
Investments Investments
Participants usually direct the investments in their 401(k) account

The participant chooses their investment strategy and bears the investment risk
Assets are invested in a pool for all participants in the plan, usually with a conservative investment strategy

Plans are allowed to credit the actual performance of the portfolio to participants’ cash balance accounts (certain restrictions apply)

The employer sets investment strategy and often bears all the investment risk
Accounts Benefits
The participant’s account value is based on contributions and actual investment returns (or losses) The participant’s account has guarantees; the account is based on contributions, interest credits as defined by the plan, and minimum guarantees required by law

Distribution

Distribution

In-service distributions are allowable for hardship or upon reaching age 59½

Distributions are usually as a lump sum, some plans allow for installments or purchase of an annuity

Participant loans are often available through the plan


In-service distributions are allowable at or after age 62

Distributions are usually made as a lump sum, annuity options are available through the plan

Loans are usually not offered

Other Considerations

With examples showing the benefits of implementing a 401(k) plan and cash balance plan to owners and their employees, the natural question is: why not implement these plans?

Business owners considering these plans should also discuss these issues with their actuary, tax advisor, and plan consultants:

  • Higher contributions for nonowner employees will likely be required
  • There will be higher administrative costs for a second plan, including hiring an actuary to certify the minimum funding required of the cash balance plan
  • There may be PBGC premium expense for certain plans and employers; however, PBGC coverage can result in additional deductible contributions
  • There are annual required minimum contributions for the cash balance plan
  • Volatility in the investments held by the cash balance plan can lead to volatility in the required minimum contributions
  • Funding levels must be managed to avoid certain restrictions on distributions

In Summary

The combination of a 401(k) plan and a cash balance plan is often the best solution for a successful business wishing to provide substantial tax-deferred savings for key individuals. This combination of plans is easy to understand and can provide surprising flexibility along with increased contribution limits.

The case study shown in this article shows the retirement accumulation potential of implementing a 401(k) and cash balance plan. Other cost-effective plan designs are generally available; for more information, please contact your Findley consultant.

Published on June 7, 2019

© Copyright 2019 • Findley • All rights reserved

Print this article

The Practical Cash Balance Plan: Planning for the Administration of Your Plan

Are you considering or have you recently set up a cash balance plan? Does your organization have multiple owner-employees? You likely have been focused on plan designs to achieve your retirement and wealth-building objectives; it’s now time to address ongoing administration. This article describes several common administration issues and examines ways you can address these issues through planning and ongoing communication with your actuary, to further ensure the success of your plan.

Sharing the Ongoing Cost of the Plan

If your organization has multiple owner-employees and other staff, you and your fellow partners likely have a variety of business expenses that you share on a pro rata basis, a percentage ownership basis, or another basis that rationally spreads the business expenses across your partners. There are several significant decisions to address with your cash balance plan that you may want to handle differently than other business expenses:

  • Should partners agree to fund more than the minimum contributions to the plan early on to accelerate tax deductions, create contribution flexibility, and for other planning reasons?
  • How will partners share the contribution costs for non-partners participating in the cash balance plan?
  • If the cash balance plan is part of the strategy for partner succession, how does this affect the contribution and cost-sharing policies?
  • How will partners share the cost (or savings) on contributions when investment returns vary from the stated cash balance account investment return, and terminating participants leave with unvested cash balance benefits?
  • How will the partners share the administrative cost to maintain the plan?

Many ownership groups view the cash balance plan as a form of deferred compensation for themselves (i.e. ‘my money’). With this mindset, it may be appropriate for partners to share the non-partner contributions and administrative costs of the plan based on their annual contribution to the plan. However, the partner group should discuss the cash balance design, contributions, and the general expense sharing approach as a whole to ensure that partners understand the potential variations expected in sharing contributions and costs. Also, given the concerns that most partner groups have around investment volatility, we find that many plan sponsors establish a conservative investment policy to minimize the deviation of required contributions from participants’ cash balance account growth.

As you discuss your approach to sharing costs and contributions in your plan, you should consider potential future events as well. Your decision on sharing the contributions and administrative cost of the plan will establish the precedent for future event-driven decisions as your business evolves. The following are some common future events that should be considered when making your partner contribution and cost-sharing decisions:

  • Do you have any employees that you expect to become partners in the next 5-10 years?
  • Are any current partners expected to retire in the next 5-10 years? If so, are those partners expected to pay their share of the annual cost if they retire mid-year?
  • What happens if a partner leaves and the plan is overfunded or underfunded?
  • What is your expected time horizon for the plan? Is it 5-10 years, or longer?
  • When the plan eventually terminates, how will any funding shortfall or one-time expense be shared among the partners?

The bottom line: Either your entire partner group or a designated committee should discuss these general and event-driven issues with your actuary and investment advisor in order to develop a plan-oriented funding policy and investment policy. Once that is in place, you should consider developing a documented contribution and cost-sharing policy among your partners.

Addressing Plan Issues Arising from Workforce Changes

As your business evolves, you’ll likely have new employees and new partners, as well as turnover and retirements among existing employees. Any changes among your rank-and-file employee group, your highly compensated employee group, or your ownership group can trigger one or more of the following issues:

  • Nondiscrimination testing problems
  • PBGC coverage and associated premiums
  • Lump sum distribution complications, if the plan is underfunded or overfunded

The bottom line: As your workforce changes, alert your actuary to these changes as soon as possible. Ask that they review your plan for any potential issues and advise you of any options to consider. If decisions are needed, a quick review by your actuary ensures that you have maximized the time to decide your approach before any compliance deadlines.

Finishing Well – The Decision to Strategically Terminate the Plan

As your business evolves and your cash balance plan matures, your objectives for your cash balance plan may change as well. New objectives such as:

  • A desire to redesign the plan following significant growth, retirement of several partners, or a merger or acquisition;
  • Cash balance accounts and plan assets becoming significant, and the employer desires to limit risks associated with guaranteeing the interest crediting rate on larger balances; and
  • Partners wanting more control over the investment of their cash balance account, wishing to transfer their current cash balance account to an IRA or the 401(k) plan

can be trigger points to strategically terminate the current cash balance plan. It is also the time to consider whether to immediately establish a new, redesigned cash balance plan to fit the current workforce and ownership group. There are IRS regulatory and other requirements to consider, so the first steps in your decision to terminate should be discussions with your actuary and other advisors to determine if your plan is ready for a strategic termination.

In Perspective

We know that the only constant in business is change. With a well-designed cash balance plan, any issues you may face as a result of change in your business can be managed effectively. Effective management means thorough planning on your funding, investment, and cost-sharing policies, along with ongoing review and discussions with your actuary and other advisors annually and as events occur.

Questions? Contact the Findley consultant you normally work with or contact Tom Swain at tom.swain@findley.com, 615.665.5319.

Posted August 14, 2018

Print this article