Tuesday, November 21, 2017

Tin Foil Hat

If I were a paranoid person, I might be putting on my tin foil hat about now as I ponder two things “hanging” out there with PERS.  The first is a curious email I received about 10 days ago concerning Residency Recertification.  Others received a similar email, but so far as I can tell, a large swathe of others did not.  The email requested that we “recertify” our Oregon residency (or perhaps lack thereof) before December 15, 2017.  The puzzling thing about this email is that it offered no rationale, no reason, no apparent option for those whose residence has remained the same since retirement or after.  The issue at stake is the Income Tax Remedy that retired Tier 1 members get as long as they pay Oregon income taxes.  The law changed in 2013 (SB 822) requiring that Tier 1 retirees who live out of state and who retired before the end of 2011 be ineligible for and lose the Income Tax Remedy.  (Those members retiring on or after 1/1/2012 had already lost the tax remedy if they retired or lived out of state and did not pay Oregon income taxes).  SB 822 captured the rest of the out of state Tier 1 PERS retirees, regardless of when they retired.  The problem is that PERS gets tax information directly from the Oregon Department of Revenue, but the information is always a year out of date.  Thus, when the ODOR confirms to PERS that you paid Oregon income taxes, they are confirming late in one year for the previous calendar year.  PERS has always taken these DOR certifications as both retroactive and prospective, thus providing a window of two years for a residency certification.  But there are problems with this approach because some people don’t make enough while living in Oregon to be required to pay Oregon income taxes, while others file in October, which is too late for the DOR certification sent on to PERS.  So PERS has set up a mechanism where you can self-certify either via a printed form and paper mail, coming in and filling out the form in person, or doing it online via PERS’ OMS (Online Member Service) portal.  But herein lies the problem, and why my tin foil hat antennae are waving around in the wind.  First, the email was sent to what appears to be a nearly random group of people, almost all of whom have lived in Oregon during their working careers and their retirements and have consistently paid taxes in Oregon at the prescribed April 15 timeframe.  That begs the question of WHY these people (including me) had to go in and confirm what PERS already knows, that I am and continue to be an Oregon resident and, therefore, eligible for the tax remedy.  The second problem is that there doesn’t SEEM to have been any effort to communicate with people for whom PERS has no email address, nor with people who don’t have an active OMS account (many don’t; I didn’t until I got this notice).  Third, when asked, PERS doesn’t seem to have a rational reason to offer for the how and why of this email message, other than to say that it went out to a wider group (????) than they intended.  So…………..

Let this be a warning to ALL readers of this site.  Since we don’t know the real reason for this email, and we don’t know how the recipients were selected, my advice to ALL is to either go online to PERS’ OMS portal (go to the PERS web site and it will be obvious) and RECERTIFY YOUR RESIDENCY.  Failure to do so, particularly if you are an Oregon resident, might (we don’t really know the motivation here) cost you a tax remedy for all of 2018.  If you don’t have an email account (how are you reading this blog???), then get the paper certification form the PERS website (you got here; you can get there), print it out, fill it out completely, and send it to PERS.  The DEADLINE for receipt of this form is December 15, 2017.

The other gamma rays penetrating my tin foil hat these days has to do with the NON-APPEARANCE of the new Actuarial Equivalency Factors (AEF), promised by late October or early November.  These are the crucial tables that permit a member to figure out how their benefit would be affected if they retired on or after 1/1/2018.  The significance of these tables is that they take into account all the new assumptions, including the reduction in the Assumed Interest Rate from 7.5% to 7.2% and modifications to the mortality tables.  These factors apply to retirees under Money Match, Formula plus Annuity, and Full Formula with a beneficiary option (in other words, most potential retirees).  The last date to retire under the old AEFs is 11/30/17 for 12/1/17.  People eligible to retire right now are in a predicament because these tables are essential for determining how much a delay in retirement will cost them, both in future value (due to lower assumed rate) as well as the value of the lost retirement benefits from delaying (all other things being equal - longevity, pay, etc).  When I checked the PERS web site about an hour ago, the current (effective 1/1/2016) AEFs are still posted, and I cannot find a link to the NEW AEFs.  As far as I am concerned, this borders on being unethical by leaving people unmoored at one of the most important times in their lives.  A paranoid, tin foil hat-wearing person might think that the lack of these new AEF tables is a deliberate attempt to keep people in the dark so there isn’t a more massive rush to the door than I suspect will already be the case.

As a final note, I am tempted to be generous to PERS in my interpretations,  were the consequences not so severe for current, unnotified retirees eligible for the income tax subsidy, and for those on the very tippy cusp of retirement trying to figure out what to do before November 30th.  I will say that PERS Communications are not the same since David Crosley left the building and retired on June 30, 2017.  PERS has a difficult act to follow, but David’s retirement was hardly a surprise, and his replacement has been with PERS for quite a while.  To me, these two very unrelated events (or non-events) have left a very sour taste in my mouth.  But that isn’t half the taste others may feel if they get trapped by either of these nasty surprises.

23 comments:

pgornick said...

This is all very interesting. A couple of months age, a pop-up appeared on the PERS main page asking if I wanted to sign up for email delivery of PERS topics, with a checklist of PERS-related items I might be interested in. As I signed up, it also asked if I wanted to sign up for emails from other, non-PERS government agencies (the list included state, county, and local agencies).

Occasionally this pop-up will still appear, but I haven't seen it for a couple of weeks. The current PERS main page now has a link to this page to sign up for what seems to be only PERS specific emails.

However, when I go to the sign up page now and strip off the OPERS tail from the URL, it directs you here, to a FEDERAL website:

https://login.max.gov/cas/login?service=https%3A%2F%2Fadmin.govdelivery.com%2Fsession%2Fmax

Most curious...

pgornick said...

Oops, I omitted the link from the PERS main page:

http://www.oregon.gov/pers/Pages/GovDelivery.aspx

JB said...

The late posting of the AEFs is not entirely without precedent. I did a quick search of the blog and noted that the 2014 factors weren’t posted until November 19th of 2013. Of course, the motivation for that late posting may have beeen identical to that to which you allude to in your blog post here.

Jim

angelinandzaya said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stinek said...

I just emailed PERS the following: "Can you tell me when the new Actuarial Equivalency Factors tables will be released? I need to figure out how my benefit will be affected if I retire on or after 1/1/2018 vs 12/1/2017". They have been very quick about responding, so I hope to receive their answer next Monday.

mrfearless47 said...

They will be released in Monday's (Nov 27) packet for the December 1, 2017 Board meeting, which is a dollar short and a day late for anyone trying to decide between Dec 1, 2017 and sometime later. I'm going to be extremely busy next week and probably won't have time to look at the AEFs, try to make sense out of them, or help anyone trying to figure out what to do. This was one of the reasons I had hoped PERS would follow its STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE and release them in late October/early November as they've done every year since 2003. I think the current Board doesn't give a flying fig about members (to whom they are fiduciarily responsible), and don't think that the changes are "significant". As I've said here and elsewhere, the 30 basis point reduction in the assumed rate does MAKE A DIFFERENCE - maybe not much for some, but a lot for others - and these days every little bit helps.

Stinek said...

You did say it wouldn't make much difference to those choosing Option 1 or the Refund Annuity, I believe.

mrfearless47 said...

Option 1 Full Formula (No beneficiary) isn’t affected by the AEFs.

Going, going, gone! said...

It could be said, watch what those in the know do?
http://www.wweek.com/news/2017/11/24/the-man-who-knows-more-than-anybody-else-about-oregons-tax-system-is-retiring/

Stinek said...

One item on the 12/1 PERS meeting agenda:
"Adoption of Annual Benefit Limitation Rule>"
What is this about? It sounds ominous.

mrfearless47 said...

@Stinek. Tier 2 and OPSRP are governed by the IRS’ ceiling for amounts that can be contributed to pension plans tax free. Tier 1 is not affected. But each year PERS has to adjust the lmit as guidance for employers and prospective Tier 2 and OPSRP retirees. The ceiling is current about $270,000 and it must have gone up. All private pension plans are bound by this rule. The Legislature adopted this in 1995 upon creation of Tier 2.

ingridquirke said...


This is an answer I received from PERS. Question to you all...How is full formula determined? Is it because I chose option 1 and not beneficiary?

From PERS
Our records indicate that you will likely be a Full Formula calculation type at retirement. The Tier One assumed earnings rate change will

most directly affect the benefits of members whose highest retirement calculation method is either Money Match or Formula Plus Annuity. Under these methods, a Tier One or Tier Two member’s account is annuitized based on actuarial equivalency factors (AEFs). AEFs convert account balances to monthly payments based on life expectancy and assumed earnings. Changes to the AEFs used to annuitize these accounts directly affect the benefit amount paid to these members. A change to the assumed earnings rate also directly affects how quickly a Tier One member’s account balance grows prior to retirement. This may impact Money Match and Formula Plus Annuity calculations significantly, due to the fact that a member’s account balance at retirement plays a large role in these formulas.



Please note that the actuarial equivalency factor (AEF) tables used by PERS in the calculation of members’ benefits must be updated when the Board approves changes to either mortality or earnings rate assumptions. Our actuary will provide updated AEF tables for the Board to adopt at their December 2017 meeting.



The basic Full Formula benefit is based on final average salary, years of service, and a statutory factor. None of these elements are affected by a change in the assumed rate. However, if the member elects a survivorship benefit option, AEFs are applied, and a change to the assumed rate would affect those factors slightly. Unfortunately, we do not have access to the new AEF tables yet to know what the exact impact might be.

mrfearless47 said...

Full Formula is determined by the two variables and a constant described in PERS’ anwer to you. As for WHAT METHOD of retirement PERS “chooses” for you, it depends on a comparison between the different retirement methods available to you. If you were hired before 1981, there are three computations made - one for afull Formula, one for Money Match, and another for Formula plus Annuity. PERS gives you the one with the HIGHEST benefit to you. If you were hired during, or after 1981, only two calculations are compared - Full Formula or Money Match. The comparison is always made at Option 1, no beneficiary so that the comparisons are based on the same assumptions. You don’t get to choose the method, but you are always assured of getting the best result.

Hope that helps.

Unknown said...

According to the documents attached to yesterday's PERS board agenda, the proposed AEF tables were delivered to PERS staff on 10/31/17.
Quoted from Milligan memo: 'The AEFs for members other than telecommunicators were provided to PERS staff on October 31. The AEFs for telecommicators were provided to PERS staff on November 2.'

The AEF tables were not included in the packet of information attached to the agenda.

My questions:
1. Did the board approve the new AEF tables?
2. If approved, how can we view them?
3. If not approved, what were the board's instructions to Milligan and what is the timeline for reply and implementation?
Thank you.

mrfearless47 said...

They have been posted on the PERS web site since November 27. You can find the by going there, looking for the tab for Financials, clicking it, and finding the subsection entitled Actuarial Equivalency Factors. They are listed as current. I don’t know whether the Board approved them yesterday, or not, but since the tables merely follow the instructions the Board gave Milliman on July 28, there was no need for them to approve anything, and I’m mystified why the Board would even get involved.

Michelle said...

So I am a self proclaimed Lucille Ball. My retirement was effective December 1 (or so I thought). My employer has hired me as a full time temp employee for December and part time in January. Much to my surprise, today I was informed by PERS that I put 01-01-18 on my retirement application. I had two apps filled out and obviously I submitted the wrong one. What I am trying to figure out is if I have harmed myself by separating from my employer 1 month before my retirement ACTUALLY starts? I am Tier 1, P&F, with 29+ years of service. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with me.

M&S said...

Michelle,
Did you also post your dilemma and questions over in the PERS Oregon Discussion (POD)? FYI: POD is part of the Google Groups, and mrfearless47 conveniently puts a POD link near beginning of this site that you posted your Dec 8th comments above.
good luck,
M & S

Unknown said...

The advice to fill out the self declared residency form is super important. As a Tax Consultant I have seen people miss this important form. If you miss the form and PERS determines that you don't qualify to the tax remedy PERS will send you a letter that says you can appeal. I worked with a client to file four appeals. What we found out is that while PERS will let you appeal, PERS has no statutory authority to honor your appeal! Even if they agree that you were always a resident they cannot honor your appeal!!!

We tried to get some legislation in the 2017 session to fix this, but as you might guess it did not get out of committee.

I now advise every PERS retiree that I know, who lives in Oregon, to fill out the form every year and submit it. Be sure to keep a copy and a record of your submission. The best method is to take it to PERS and get a date stamped copy by them. Alternatively a certified, return receipt, letter might help you.

I have heard that you can go online and check your status, but I have not verified this. If it is true I would suggest that you print the page and put it in your records.

Stinek said...

Is there a reason PERS members don't have a say in the changes made to PERS?

mrfearless47 said...

But they do. Judges and Legislators get all the say. We peons only get our say by testifying at hearings, or through the ballot box.

Unknown said...

In a perfect world you will file your Oregon Income Tax Forms on time and Oregon Department of Revenue will inform PERS that you have filed showing you as subject to Oregon Income Taxes. There are a variety of scenarios (not filing on time, using a form that does not match the residency requirement, etc.) that will cause PERS to not see you as an Oregon Resident subject to Oregon Income Tax. Remember you get to pay taxes on your PERS retirement income to Oregon. The tax remedy is for those people who got into PERS back when PERS retirement income was not going to be taxed by Oregon. If you are not subject to Oregon Income Tax PERS does not have to give you the tax remedy. As part of some of the last court cases PERS now is trying to determine who gets the tax remedy and who does not. Filing out the self declared residency form is a way for you to tell PERS each year what your status is. They need a new signed and dated statement from you each year and the form they provide is a simple way to do it.

kristinahojholt said...

Hello would you mind sharing which blog platform you're working with? I'm going to start my own blog in the near future but I'm having a hard time selecting between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I'm looking for something completely unique. P.S My apologies for being off-topic but I had to ask!Sardine Run updates

mrfearless47 said...

Blogger, Google.