	PBGC Guarantees Pension Benefits for Millions and is Funded by Premiums and Assets of Terminated Plans

PBGC plays a critical role in protecting the pension benefits of private  sector workers—it is responsible for administering current or future  pension benefit payments to just over 1.3 million plan participants. PBGC’s budget can be confusing,  especially in the short-term, as apparent federal budget gains may be offset  by long-term liabilities that are not reported to on-budget accounts. PBGC administers current or future pension benefit  payments to a growing number of plan participants, from just under one- half million in fiscal year 2000 to 1.3 million in fiscal year 2007. PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are  financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of  defined benefit plans, investment income of assets from pension plans  trusteed by PBGC ($4.8 billion in investment income from $68.4 billion in  assets for its combined programs in 2007) and recoveries from the  companies formerly responsible for the plans. PBGC’s Budget Only Partly Flows through the Federal Government

The treatment of PBGC in the federal budget is complicated by the use of  two accounts—an on–budget revolving fund and a non-budgetary trust  fund. Generally, the  proportion of benefit payments that is reimbursed from the trust fund  depends on the aggregate funding level of the plans that PBGC has taken  over and is adjusted periodically. PBGC has seen recent improvements to its  net financial position and recent legislative changes have raised premiums,  changed certain plan funding rules and limited PBGC guarantees. However, the legislation has only been recently implemented and it did not  completely address a number of the risks that PBGC faces going forward. Further, PBGC has recently implemented a new investment policy which  adds significant variability and risk to the assets it manages. GAO has generally focused its work on the  single-employer pension insurance program with respect to PBGC’s  overall financial challenges. Underfunding among large plans (as reuired by ERISA section 4010)
In 2003, GAO designated PBGC’s single-employer program as high-risk, or  as a program that needs urgent Congressional attention and agency action. As part of our monitoring of PBGC as  a high-risk agency we have highlighted additional challenges faced by the  single-employer program. GAO recently reported on a newly developing financial challenge facing  PBGC due to the recent change to its investment policy. Improvements Needed to PBGC’s Governance, Oversight and Management

Improvements are needed to PBGC’s governance structure, to oversight of  the corporation, and to its strategic approach to program management. PBGC’s three member board of directors is limited in its ability to provide  policy direction and oversight. Finally, we found that PBGC lacks a strategic approach to its  acquisition and human capital management needs. In addition, PBGC may  also be exposed to challenges as the board, board members’  representatives, and the director will likely change with the upcoming  presidential transition in January 2009, limiting the board’s institutional  knowledge of the corporation. Specifically, Congress has asked GAO to conduct assessments of policy,  management, and the financial condition of PBGC. Three-quarters of PBGC’s  budget was spent on contracts and nearly two-thirds of its personnel are  contractors, as shown in figure 6. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation: Statutory Limitation on  Administrative Expenses Does Not Provide Meaningful Control.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) insures the retirement future of nearly 44 million people in more than 30,000 private-sector defined benefit pension plans. In July 2003, GAO designated PBGC's single-employer pension insurance program--its largest insurance program--as "high risk," including it on GAO's list of major programs that need urgent attention and transformation. The program remains on the list today with a projected financial deficit of just over $13 billion, as of September 2007. Because Congress exercises oversight of PBGC, GAO was asked to testify today on 1) the critical role PBGC plays in protecting the pension benefits of workers and how PBGC is funded, 2) the financial challenges facing PBGC, and 3) the PBGC's governance, oversight and management challenges. To address these objectives, we are relying on our reports from the last several years that, as part of our designation of PBGC's single-employer program as high-risk, explored the financial and management challenges facing the agency. GAO has made a number of recommendations and matters for Congressional consideration in these past reports. PBGC generally agreed with these past recommendations and is implementing many of them. No new recommendations are being made as part of this testimony.

What GAO Found

PBGC administers the current or future pension benefits for a growing number of participants of plans that have been taken over by the agency--from 500,000 in fiscal year 2000 to 1.3 million participants in fiscal year 2007. PBGC is financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit (DB) plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for those trusteed plans; PBGC receives no funds from general revenues. The treatment of PBGC in the federal budget is complicated by the use of two accounts--an on-budget revolving fund and a non-budgetary trust fund. Ultimately this budget treatment can be confusing--especially in the short-term--as on-budget gains may be offset by long-term liabilities that are not reported to on-budget accounts. PBGC's single-employer program faces financial challenges from a history of weak plan funding rules that left it susceptible to claims from sponsors of large, severely underfunded pension plans. PBGC had seen recent improvements to its net financial position due to generally better economic conditions and from statutory changes that raised premiums and took measures designed to strengthen plan funding and PBGC guarantees. However, certain improvements have only just begun phasing-in and the changes did not completely address a number of the risks that PBGC faces going forward. Further, PBGC just began implementing a new investment policy that, while offering the potential for higher returns, also adds significant variability and risk to the assets it manages. Also, changing economic conditions could further expose PBGC to future claims. Improvements are needed to PBGC's governance structure and to its strategic approach to program management. PBGC's three member board of directors is limited in its ability to provide policy direction and oversight. PBGC may also be exposed to challenges as the board, its representatives, and the director will likely change with the upcoming presidential transition in January. In addition, PBGC lacks a strategic approach to its acquisition and human capital management needs. Three-quarters of PBGC's administrative budget is spent on contractors, yet PBGC's strategic planning generally does not recognize contracting as a major aspect of PBGC activities.