This is more reality…
2 Likes
First day on the internet?
5 Likes
Yeah I wasn’t quite skeptical but I thought you all would enjoy it nonetheless. Excuse me while I put my slide rule back in my fireproof safe…
2 Likes
Well, that’s rare and valuable.
If anyone here can verify the tale, people who knew either of those people, i might believe some of it.
The video is complete bullshit.
The only real reference to the name that I could find with a google search and a DuckDuckGo search is that YouTube video.
I saw this, but did not dig to try to understand exactly what it’s talking about or it’s implications. Anyone have the ELI5 version?
It’s a very niche pension area. Multiemployer pension actuaries can probably opine on it. As a former non-ME pension actuary, I have forgotten most of my withdrawal liability exam materials.
1 Like
As we still offer a defined benefit pension here, should I be concerned this will eff with it in some way?
This post had some good comments that were helpful in my understanding of it. My takeaway is that this is a reasonable ruling.
This only impacts multiemployer pensions, which are largely blue collar, union plans. Most people here would not be personally affected by any of this.
Feel free to invoice me for an IOU beer or some AO bucks or something. 
1 Like
I wasn’t familiar with this case, but I read the first three pages just now. I am a pension actuary and do work on some multiemployer plans, but I wouldn’t consider myself an expert…I’m certainly not an ERISA attorney 
Basically withdrawal liability is assessed on employers that withdraw from an underfunded multiemployer plan based on the unfunded vested benefits (UVB) of the plan. The UVB is of course subject to actuarial assumptions, and the discount rate is a very significant one that is often contentious, as there is a range of reasonable discount rates and they affect the liabilities so much. It looks like this decision just says the actuary can determine the liability as of a given date based on assumptions (including discount rate assumption) that were adopted after that date. I usually review and/or adjust assumptions for a valuation after that valuation date has happened (so that I can look at experience through the valuation date), so it makes sense to me that the ruling says it’s okay to set assumptions after the measurement date.
4 Likes
I suspect a former actuarial student, rather than a credentialed member of one of our guilds, but…
I see FM, P, IFM, and MAS-I passed on the lookup site.
I use math all the time when I watch sports. Like when deciding to watch the next quarter of play, I have to recalculate how I’m going to do all the things I promised to do that day.
1 Like
Current audiobook is Long Island Compromise. One of the side characters wanted to be an actuary.