The Ca decision does not stand for the proposition that
pension deficits take priority.
Not exact matches
In the case of the Royal Mail, the government
took over the corporation's
pension plan and covered off the
deficit in funding.
They won't mind that government
deficits have ballooned to 12 % of GDP (or 18 % of GDP in the United Kingdom, if unfunded
pension liabilities are
taken into account).
The government would
take on responsibility for Royal Mail's # 7bn
pension deficit to make the remaining institution a more attractive business proposition.
As part of the deal to allow a minority private sector stakeholder, the government has said it will
take over the Royal Mail's
pension fund
deficit.
Is it wise as part of addressing the
pension funding crisis to
take the existing inadequate assets and use them to rescue the Government's current
deficit, making the problem worse in the longer term?
Second, school budgets are going to be flat (or falling) for the foreseeable future — and looming
deficits in retirement and
pension funds almost certainly mean that the
take - home pay of practicing teachers will see no real - dollar growth and could well decline.
If they refuse, presumably, in the end, the DfE will have no option but to
take on the
deficit otherwise the
pension scheme would, presumably, be required to transfer the
deficit to the other members affecting all schools paying into the scheme.
A long - running squabble over a
pension deficit has seriously delayed a major multi-academy trust from
taking over a failing school.
LTM Depreciation & Amortisation, Free Cash Flow & Net Cash Interest Paid are
taken from the Cash Flow Statement, while Net Debt &
Pension Deficit is
taken from the latest Balance Sheet.
«Whilst the PPF is an important and valuable support, UK final - salary
pension schemes have an enormous
deficit blackhole, which raises the inevitable question, «how many more big hits can the PPF
take?
Had there been evidence placed before the Court that the restructuring could not occur if priority was granted, the Court would have found a conflict and the
pension deficit would not have
taken priority.