Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest Turtle_01
Posted

How do you calculate the experience (gain) or loss for an immediate gain funding method if both the Expected Unfunded Accrued Liability and the Actual Unfunded Accrued Liability are negative?

For example:

EUAL = -500

AUAL = -250

Do you limit either or both UAL's to zero?

Posted

Which way makes your balance equation work?

Posted

Limiting the UAL to zero or not is a component of the funding method. You must continue the same methodology unless you apply for approval. What was used in the past?

"What's in the big salad?"

"Big lettuce, big carrots, tomatoes like volleyballs."

Guest Turtle_01
Posted

If I set my EUAL = 0, but allow my UAL to be negative, then my equation of balance is balanced.

Guest Turtle_01
Posted

It appears as though in the past the UAL was set equal to zero whenever the assets exceeded the liabilities.

It looks like the equation of balance doesn't work in that situation though.

Guest Turtle_01
Posted

That's correct. The prior valuation produced an ERISA FFC, so I fully amortized all prior bases.

Keeping with the original example, the method I am currently using to calculate my (gain)/loss is:

Credit Balance = 100

EUAL = 0

AUAL = -250

(Gain) = -250+100; adding the 100 b/c of the effect of ERISA FFC on the FSA credit balance.

This gives me an experience (gain) of (150) and sets my equation of balance at:

-250 = -150 - 100

Is this correct?

Posted

You already said that the prior methodology limited the UAL to 0, so you have to keep that. So your expected and actual UAL are both 0, thus no gain or loss.

True, you do now have a balance equation that is "out of balance", but that is okay in this situation. What to watch for is the time in the future when you do have an UAL > 0. At that time you will have to set the experience gain/loss base to an amount that balances.

"What's in the big salad?"

"Big lettuce, big carrots, tomatoes like volleyballs."

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Revenue Ruling 81-213 is the usual source of prohibiting a negative UAL. However, it does not prohibit a negative expected UAL. Hence, refer to Blinky's comment about the definition in the funding method.

I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use