Not exact matches
Such risks, uncertainties and other factors include, without limitation: (1) the effect
of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including financial market conditions, fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates, levels
of end market demand in construction and in both the commercial and defense segments
of the aerospace industry, levels
of air travel, financial condition
of commercial airlines, the impact
of weather conditions and natural disasters and the financial condition
of our customers and suppliers; (2) challenges in the development, production, delivery, support, performance and realization
of the anticipated benefits
of advanced technologies and new products and services; (3) the scope, nature, impact or timing
of acquisition and divestiture or restructuring activity, including the pending acquisition
of Rockwell Collins, including among other things integration
of acquired businesses into United Technologies» existing businesses and realization
of synergies and opportunities for growth and innovation; (4) future timing and levels
of indebtedness, including indebtedness expected to be incurred by United Technologies in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition, and capital spending and research and development spending, including in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition; (5) future availability
of credit and factors that may affect such availability, including credit market conditions and our capital structure; (6) the timing and scope
of future repurchases
of United Technologies» common stock, which may be suspended at any time due to various factors, including market conditions and the level
of other investing activities and uses
of cash, including in connection with the proposed acquisition
of Rockwell; (7) delays and disruption in delivery
of materials and services from suppliers; (8) company and customer - directed cost reduction efforts and restructuring costs and savings and other consequences thereof; (9) new business and investment opportunities; (10) our ability to realize the intended benefits
of organizational changes; (11) the anticipated benefits
of diversification and balance
of operations across product lines, regions and industries; (12) the outcome
of legal proceedings, investigations and other contingencies; (13)
pension plan assumptions and future contributions; (14) the impact
of the negotiation
of collective bargaining agreements and labor disputes; (15) the effect
of changes in political conditions in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate, including the effect
of changes in U.S. trade policies or the U.K.'s pending withdrawal from the EU, on general market conditions, global trade policies and currency exchange rates in the near term and beyond; (16) the effect
of changes in tax (including U.S. tax reform enacted on December 22, 2017, which is commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
of 2017), environmental, regulatory (including among other things import / export) and other laws and regulations in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate; (17) the ability
of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins to receive the required regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition
of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits
of the merger) and to satisfy the other conditions to the closing
of the pending acquisition on a timely basis or at all; (18) the occurrence
of events that may give rise to a right
of one or both
of United Technologies or Rockwell Collins to terminate the merger agreement, including in circumstances that might require Rockwell Collins to pay a termination fee
of $ 695 million to United Technologies or $ 50 million
of expense reimbursement; (19) negative effects
of the announcement or the completion
of the merger on the market price
of United Technologies» and / or Rockwell Collins» common stock and / or on their respective financial performance; (20) risks related to Rockwell Collins and United Technologies being restricted in their operation
of their businesses while the merger agreement is in effect; (21) risks relating to the value
of the United Technologies» shares to be issued in connection with the pending Rockwell acquisition, significant merger costs and / or unknown liabilities; (22) risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and / or other provisions that may be triggered by the Rockwell merger agreement; (23) risks associated with merger - related litigation or appraisal proceedings; and (24) the ability
of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins, or the combined company, to retain and hire key personnel.
Better yet, look for management with shady reputations and who constantly tweak the rate
of depreciation or
pension plan assumptions to manage reported results.
Number - crunching a
pension plan payout election or number - crunching a 401 (k) «payout sustainability» amount are calculations that need to be tailored to the needs
of the individual and their comfort level regarding the
assumptions used in analyzing the decision options so we won't explore those calculations here.
The median public
pension plan's investments returned about 1 % in 2016, far below the median
assumption of 7.5 %.
«I believe the real devil here is in your
assumptions, because the
plan's true costs are as yet unknown and depend heavily on the performance
of the State's
pension fund.»
Despite the widely held belief that
pensions entice teachers to stay on the job, we find that states base the financial health
of their
plans on the opposite
assumption.
The opacity argument may explain part
of Oregon's extreme situation, but it doesn't explain results like the one in St. Louis, or what we see in state
pension plan assumptions around vesting periods.
Regardless
of whether I use the
pension plan assumptions or the actual turnover rate, the lines show that half
of all new teachers will not reach ten years
of service and will not qualify for a retirement benefit.
Actuarial Miscalculations and Demographic Changes:
Pension plan valuations depend on
assumptions about a host
of factors like how much employees will earn, how long they'll stay, how long they'll live in retirement, etc..
Using the
pension plan's own interest
assumptions (often 8 percent), in half
of states teachers need to stay in a single system for at least 24 years to simply break even on their contributions plus interest.
In our recent paper «Friends without Benefits,» we used
pension plan assumptions for all 50 states and the District
of Columbia to estimate that more than half
of all teachers won't qualify for even a minimal
pension.
Based on our calculations from state
pension plan assumptions, the median state assumes that only 23 percent
of teachers will stay for at least 24 years.
But in a new article for Education Next, Chad Aldeman and Kelly Robson
of Bellwether Education Partners find that despite the widely held belief that
pensions entice teachers to stay on the job, states base the financial health
of their
pension plans on the opposite
assumption: they rely on high rates
of teacher turnover in order to balance the books.
- Early - Career Teachers: Using the
pension plan's
assumptions for retention, the average first - year teacher in 2009 had less than a 50 - 50 chance
of making it to 2020.
I calculated the assumed real rates
of return
of state teacher
pension plans by subtracting their inflation
assumption from their investment return
assumption.
While states and cities are spending a lot
of money on back - end incentives like this, their own
pension plans don't think it's worth altering their
assumptions to account for them.
Even under current
assumptions, there's no disputing that teacher
pension plans are expensive, and the majority
of today's teachers are not receiving the benefits
of those contributions.
When the Society
of Actuaries updated their mortality
assumptions, commonly used by
pension plans to estimate future payments, they anticipated that
pensions could expect up to a 7 or 8 percent increase in liabilities.
In our recent paper, «Friends Without Benefits: How States Systematically Shortchange Teachers» Retirement and Threaten Their Retirement Security,» we used
pension -
plan assumptions for all 50 states and the District
of Columbia to estimate that, in the median state, more than half
of all teachers won't qualify for even a minimal
pension.
According to Chicago Teacher
Pension Fund (CTPF) plan assumptions, over half (57 percent) of new Chicago teachers will leave before the 10 - year service requirement, meaning less than half of new teachers will qualify for a pension benefit
Pension Fund (CTPF)
plan assumptions, over half (57 percent)
of new Chicago teachers will leave before the 10 - year service requirement, meaning less than half
of new teachers will qualify for a
pension benefit
pension benefit at all.
Any Canadian eligible for the Canada
Pension Plan (about 95 %
of us are) can start to receive it when they turn 60, even though the government bases their rules on the
assumption you will take it when you turn 65.
I marveled at the degree
of flexibility that
pension actuaries had in setting investment
assumptions (and future earnings
assumptions), and the degree to which funding was back - end loaded to many
plan sponsors.
A new report from the C.D. Howe Institute warns the new, expanded version
of the Canada
Pension Plan is designed on investment return
assumptions that could jeopardize future payments.
Continuing under the
assumption that you have a defined benefit
pension plan that will pay you $ 50,000 per year until you pass away I would say that your
pension plan is more similar to a life annuity rather than a GIC since a GIC comes to term whereas an annuity pays until death, but if you are trying to put a value on the holding
of your
pension plan I would say that yes, it is fair to count it as a million dollar GIC at 5 %.
After 10 - 11 years, the variable is useless, so if I were put in charge
of setting stock market earnings
assumptions for a
pension plan, I would do it as a step function, 6 % for the next 10 years, and 9.5 % per year thereafter... or in place
of 9.5 % whatever your estimate is for what the market should return normally.
Conversely, if the underlying mortality
assumption is too high, the actuary may underestimate life expectancies
of the
pension -
plan members and hence the long - term obligations
of the
pension fund.
Before Simon's share purchase disclosure last year, Macerich said it bought the share
of five U.S. shopping malls it didn't already own from a subsidiary
of the Ontario Teachers»
Pension Plan Board for $ 1.89 billion, including the
assumption of debt.