Skip to main content
diversification.com
← Back to A Definitions

Amortized planning gap

What Is Amortized Planning Gap?

The Amortized Planning Gap refers to the difference between a long-term financial obligation, such as pension liabilities, and the assets available to meet that obligation, which is then systematically paid down over a defined period. This concept is particularly relevant in public finance and actuarial science, where governments and public entities manage significant future commitments like retirement benefits for their employees. Essentially, it represents an unfunded liability that a plan sponsor commits to addressing through a structured repayment schedule, much like a loan.

When a pension plan or other long-term benefit program has insufficient assets to cover its promised future benefits, an actuarial accrued liability arises. The Amortized Planning Gap is the shortfall that needs to be funded, and the amortization process outlines how this gap will be closed over time through regular contributions. Understanding the Amortized Planning Gap is crucial for assessing the financial health and sustainability of public sector benefit plans, influencing financial planning and budgetary decisions.

History and Origin

The concept of amortizing unfunded liabilities in public sector pensions gained significant prominence with the development of accounting standards designed to enhance transparency in governmental financial reporting. Prior to these standards, many public entities primarily reported pension expenses on a pay-as-you-go basis, often obscuring the true long-term costs and accumulated shortfalls.

A major catalyst for more systematic accounting of pension and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) was the work of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). In particular, GASB Statements No. 25, 27, and later, 45, introduced requirements for public employers to measure and report their actuarial accrued liabilities and the extent to which these liabilities were funded. These pronouncements mandated the systematic measurement and recognition of benefit costs over employees' service lives and provided parameters for amortizing any unfunded liability. For instance, GASB Statement No. 45, issued in 2004, required entities to measure annual OPEB costs, including a component for the amortization of the total unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities over a period not exceeding thirty years.4 This framework formalized the process by which an "Amortized Planning Gap" would be identified and scheduled for repayment.

Key Takeaways

  • The Amortized Planning Gap represents an unfunded financial obligation, typically in pension or other post-employment benefit plans, that is scheduled for systematic repayment.
  • It is a critical component of actuarial science and governmental accounting, reflecting the long-term solvency of public entities' benefit commitments.
  • Amortization policies dictate the period and structure of payments to eliminate this gap, similar to paying down debt.
  • The size and amortization period of the Amortized Planning Gap directly impact current and future budgetary demands on public funds.
  • Effective management of the Amortized Planning Gap is essential for maintaining intergenerational equity and financial stability.

Formula and Calculation

The calculation of the Amortized Planning Gap involves determining the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) and then establishing a repayment schedule. The UAAL itself is the difference between the actuarial accrued liability (AAL) and the actuarial value of assets (AVA).

The AAL represents the present value of benefits earned by plan participants up to the valuation date. The AVA is the smoothed value of assets held by the plan.

UAAL=AAL−AVA\text{UAAL} = \text{AAL} - \text{AVA}

Once the UAAL is determined, the amortization payment, which contributes to closing the Amortized Planning Gap, can be calculated using various methods, such as level dollar or level percentage of payroll. These methods spread the UAAL over a chosen amortization period, usually a fixed number of years (e.g., 15, 20, or 30 years).

For a level dollar amortization payment, similar to a mortgage, the annual payment ($P$) can be calculated using the present value annuity formula:

P=UAAL×i1−(1+i)−nP = \frac{\text{UAAL} \times i}{1 - (1 + i)^{-n}}

Where:

  • $P$ = Annual amortization payment
  • $\text{UAAL}$ = Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability
  • $i$ = Assumed annual discount rate (or interest rate)
  • $n$ = Amortization period in years

For a level percentage of payroll method, an assumed payroll growth rate is also factored in, leading to payments that increase in dollar terms over time but remain a consistent percentage of the projected payroll.

Interpreting the Amortized Planning Gap

Interpreting the Amortized Planning Gap involves understanding its implications for an organization's financial health and future obligations. A large Amortized Planning Gap signifies a substantial shortfall in funding for promised benefits, indicating that significant future resources will be required to cover past obligations. The chosen amortization period also provides critical insight: a shorter period indicates a more aggressive funding strategy with higher immediate costs, while a longer period spreads the burden over more years, resulting in lower annual payments but potentially higher total interest costs.

Stakeholders, including policymakers, employees, and taxpayers, often review the Amortized Planning Gap in conjunction with the plan's funding ratio, which measures assets against liabilities. A widening gap or an overly long amortization period can signal financial strain or an unsustainable funding policy, potentially requiring adjustments to actuarial assumptions or contribution rates. Actuarial valuations typically provide detailed reports on this gap and the progress being made in closing it.

Hypothetical Example

Consider a hypothetical municipal defined benefit plan that performs its annual actuarial valuation. As of the valuation date, the plan's actuarial accrued liability (AAL) is $500 million, representing the present value of all benefits earned by current and past employees. However, the actuarial value of assets (AVA) held in the pension trust is only $400 million.

This results in an unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) of:
$500 million (AAL) - $400 million (AVA) = $100 million.

This $100 million is the Amortized Planning Gap. To address this shortfall, the municipality decides to amortize this gap over a 20-year period using a level dollar amortization method, with an assumed discount rate of 7% per year.

Using the formula:

P=$100,000,000×0.071−(1+0.07)−20P = \frac{\$100,000,000 \times 0.07}{1 - (1 + 0.07)^{-20}} P≈$9,439,271P \approx \$9,439,271

This means the municipality would need to contribute approximately $9.44 million annually, in addition to the plan's normal cost for currently accruing benefits, to systematically close this $100 million Amortized Planning Gap over the next 20 years.

Practical Applications

The Amortized Planning Gap is a fundamental concept in the financial management of public sector entities, particularly concerning their long-term employee benefits. Its practical applications span several key areas:

  • Budgetary Planning: Governments use the Amortized Planning Gap and its associated amortization payments to project future financial commitments. These payments directly influence annual budgets, competing with other essential public services for funding.
  • Pension Fund Management: For public pension plan administrators, the Amortized Planning Gap guides funding policies. It helps determine the required employer contributions to achieve full funding over a specified period, ensuring the long-term solvency of the plan. According to the Reason Foundation, most pension plans amortize unfunded liabilities to avoid fluctuations in annual funding requirements, spreading payments over time.3
  • Credit Ratings and Fiscal Health Assessment: Rating agencies and financial analysts evaluate a government's Amortized Planning Gap as a key indicator of its fiscal health. A large and persistently growing gap can signal financial weakness, potentially leading to lower credit ratings and increased borrowing costs.
  • Policy Debates and Reforms: The size and management of the Amortized Planning Gap often drive public policy debates around pension reform, changes to benefit structures, or adjustments to contribution strategies for state and local governments.
  • Intergenerational Equity: By systematically amortizing these liabilities, governments aim to distribute the cost of earned benefits fairly across current and future generations of taxpayers, rather than deferring the full burden to the future.

Limitations and Criticisms

While the concept of an Amortized Planning Gap provides a structured approach to managing long-term liabilities, it is subject to several limitations and criticisms, particularly in the context of public pension funding.

One major criticism revolves around the actuarial assumptions used to calculate the actuarial accrued liability and the subsequent amortization payments. Critics argue that public pension plans often use overly optimistic assumptions, particularly regarding expected rates of return on investments. This can lead to an underestimation of the true unfunded liability and, consequently, smaller amortization payments than what might be truly necessary.2 When these optimistic assumptions are not met, the Amortized Planning Gap can grow larger than anticipated, despite payments being made, pushing the funding problem further into the future.

Another limitation stems from the flexibility in choosing the amortization period. Longer amortization periods reduce annual payments, which can be politically appealing, but they also increase the total interest paid over the life of the liability and delay achieving full funding. This can mask a growing problem, as a plan might appear to be making its required contributions while still seeing its overall unfunded liabilities grow or remain stagnant. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has highlighted broader challenges facing the nation's retirement system, including issues related to funding and sustainability that can impact the effective management of such gaps.1 Additionally, the choice between "open" and "closed" amortization periods can affect the long-term viability, with open periods potentially allowing perpetual unfunded liabilities if not managed carefully.

Amortized Planning Gap vs. Net Pension Liability

The Amortized Planning Gap is closely related to, but distinct from, the Net Pension Liability (NPL). Both terms are used in the context of pension funding for governmental entities, but they serve different purposes and are derived from different accounting and actuarial frameworks.

The Amortized Planning Gap primarily refers to the unfunded actuarial accrued liability that a pension plan aims to pay down systematically over a defined period. It is a concept rooted in actuarial science and funding policy, reflecting the shortfall between the benefits earned to date (actuarial accrued liability) and the assets accumulated, with a plan in place to amortize this difference. Its calculation is influenced by the funding method chosen by the plan, including the asset valuation method and actuarial assumptions specific to funding.

In contrast, the Net Pension Liability is an accounting measure required for financial reporting under Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68. The NPL represents the difference between the total pension liability (TPL) and the pension plan's fiduciary net position (FNP). The TPL is the present value of projected benefit payments to employees based on their past service, discounted using a specific discount rate that reflects the long-term expected rate of return on investments for adequately funded plans or a high-quality municipal bond rate for underfunded plans. The FNP is the market value of assets available to pay benefits. The NPL is a balance sheet liability, providing a snapshot of the unfunded status for accounting purposes, whereas the Amortized Planning Gap informs the ongoing funding strategy.

The key distinction lies in their purpose and underlying methodologies: the Amortized Planning Gap guides funding decisions and strategy, aiming to eliminate a shortfall over time, while the Net Pension Liability is an accounting figure designed to provide transparency on the balance sheet regarding the present value of pension obligations.

FAQs

What causes an Amortized Planning Gap to arise?

An Amortized Planning Gap typically arises when the assets held by a pension plan or other long-term benefit program are less than the accrued liabilities (benefits earned by participants to date). This shortfall can be caused by various factors, including investment returns lower than assumed, changes in actuarial assumptions (e.g., increased life expectancies), benefit enhancements, or insufficient employer contributions in prior periods.

How is the amortization period chosen for the Amortized Planning Gap?

The amortization period, which is the timeframe over which the unfunded liability will be paid, is often chosen based on regulatory requirements (e.g., maximum 30 years under GASB guidelines for certain liabilities), policy objectives (e.g., desiring a shorter period for faster funding), and the financial capacity of the entity responsible for funding the gap. It is a critical decision in financial planning, balancing the burden on current taxpayers with the goal of long-term solvency.

Can the Amortized Planning Gap change over time?

Yes, the Amortized Planning Gap is dynamic and can change annually. It is recalculated in each actuarial valuation. Changes can occur due to differences between actual and assumed investment returns (actuarial gains or losses), changes in demographic assumptions (e.g., mortality rates), changes in benefits, or the effect of previous amortization payments. Each new component of the unfunded liability may also be amortized over its own base, or multiple bases may be combined and amortized together.

What happens if an Amortized Planning Gap is not adequately addressed?

If an Amortized Planning Gap is not adequately addressed through consistent and sufficient contributions, the unfunded liability can grow. This could lead to a deterioration of the plan's funding ratio, potentially jeopardizing the long-term ability to pay promised benefits. In severe cases, it could require drastic measures such as significant increases in taxpayer contributions, reductions in benefits, or, in extreme scenarios, municipal financial distress.