Assigned to FIN                                                                                                            FOR COMMITTEE

 

 


 

ARIZONA STATE SENATE

Phoenix, Arizona

 

FACT SHEET FOR H.B. 2004

 

ASRS actuarial computation method

 

Purpose

 

Changes the methodology for determining Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS) contribution rates from the projected unit credit (PUC) method to the entry age normal (EAN) method beginning in the FY 2004 - 2005 biennium.  In addition, the legislation changes the funding period to a rolling 20-year period.

 

Background

 

During the 2000 legislative session the ASRS Actuarial Computation Method Study Committee was established (Laws 2000, Chapter 341).  This committee was charged with examining and comparing actuarial computation methods that may be appropriate for ASRS, including the EAN cost method and the PUC method.  This legislation is a result of the discussions and study of the ASRS Actuarial Computation Method Study Committee.

 

Different assumptions regarding employee tenure result in different contribution rates being calculated under the PUC versus the EAN method.  In theory, contribution rates are low at the beginning of a person’s career and then increase over time with the PUC method. In contrast, contribution rates under the EAN method are level over a person’s career.  However, even though ASRS uses the PUC method, contribution rates have been decreasing, rather than increasing.  This is the result of better than expected investment performance, which has created a surplus that is then used to reduce the contribution rate paid by employers and employees.  In addition, the continued entrance of younger people into the workforce participating in ASRS also has a downward effect on the contribution rate.

 

According to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), when the PUC method is used, the contribution rate calculation does not include an assumption regarding employee tenure or length of service.  Instead, the PUC method calculates the required contribution based only on actual length of service.  The result is a contribution rate that will increase over time as length of service increases.  In contrast, the EAN cost method assumes that the employee will be with the employer for a length of time.  Thus, the EAN method includes anticipated future service in the calculation of the required contribution.  The result is a contribution rate that is stable over the employee’s career, rather than one that increases with years of service. 

 

The ASRS contribution rate increases when anticipated future service is included in the calculation of the contribution rate, because the ASRS average age/service mix is relatively low.  For example, in order for the contribution rate to decrease when changing from PUC to EAN the average would need to be age 55 with 20 years of service.  However, the current ASRS average is age 43 with 8 years of service.  

 

The FY 2002-2003 funding period is 15 years, however, the system is currently transitioning to a rolling 30-year period by annually adding an additional year. H.B. 2004 changes the funding period to a rolling 20-year period

 

Provisions

 

1.      Changes the ASRS computation funding method from the PUC to the EAN cost method.

 

2.      Requires the Board to begin phasing in the use of the EAN cost method over a ten-year period of time beginning with the June 30, 2002 valuation of ASRS and for the employer contributions payable beginning on July 1, 2003.

 

3.      Changes the amortization-funding period from a rolling thirty-year period to a rolling twenty-year period.

 

4.      Makes technical and conforming changes.

 

House Action

 

RGO            1/9/01                   DPA         6-1-1-2

APPROPS   2/27/01                 DPA         11-2-1-2

3rd Read       3/12/01                                  47-2-11-0

 

 

Prepared by Senate Staff

April 2, 2001