Back to Article:

New all-Canadian pension mortality tables, improvement scales released

Add a comment

Have your say on this topic! Comments that are thought to be disrespectful or offensive may be removed by our Benefits Canada admins. Thanks!

* These fields are required.
Field required
Field required
Field required

Cliff McKay:

Media reports (Globe&Mail 10 May) state that recent investment returns have been so good, that many defined benefit pensions are now so well funded, that they are shifting investments from high-rate-but-relatively-riskier to low-return-but-safer options. Yet, after two years of outstanding investment returns, the plan of which I am a member cites (both years!) obligatory changes in actuarial assumptions as the reason that plan is still mired in its unfunded liability problem. This discrepancy leaves me wondering why so many plans seem to be solving their unfunded liability problems while others are not. Don’t “changed actuarial assumptions” apply to all pension funds?
Thanks for the assistance you can provide me in trying to understand this discrepancy.

Monday, May 26 at 7:09 pm | Reply

Join us on Twitter