Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retirement Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heated testimony on HB581, bill to create a defined-contribution plan for new state hires
Summary
House Bill 581 would create a new defined-contribution retirement group for future state hires; the committee heard broad, sharply divided testimony and requested further actuarial and drafting work.
House Bill 581 would establish a new retirement classification (a defined-contribution group for new state employees) and set a 7% employee contribution and a 5% employer contribution for those new hires. Sponsor Representative Dan Maguire framed the measure as a step toward avoiding future unfunded pension obligations by moving new hires into a savings-style plan.
NHRS Deputy Counsel Mark Kavanaugh and NHRS staff provided a technical briefing and cautioned the committee about several administrative and actuarial issues. NHRS said it was neutral on the policy choice but highlighted consequences of creating a closed cohort (a group that will not grow) and technical questions about how the unfunded accrued actuarial liability (UAAL) would be allocated. NHRS presented an initial worksheet of projected employer contributions (higher in early years for the employer under the DC proposal because the employer share rises from the existing normal cost to the 5% DC employer contribution) and noted that closed groups can drive different investment and amortization policies.
Witnesses opposed to HB581 included State Employees Association leadership, retired firefighters’ representatives and other union speakers who argued the DC approach shifts investment, longevity and inflation risk to employees, reduces the recruiting value of guaranteed retirement benefits, and could increase long-term taxpayer cost. Supporters including Americans for Prosperity and some private-sector witnesses argued DC plans reflect modern labor mobility and portability preferred by many younger workers.
NHRS and other witnesses identified operational areas that require clarification, including the mechanics for charging employer UAAL allocations, treatment of retiree health benefits, whether accidental disability/death benefits would be included, and whether the DC plan assets would be commingled with other pools. The committee did not vote on HB581 and sent the retirement-related bills (including HB581 and HB637) to the pension subcommittee for further study and actuarial analysis.
Ending: The committee closed the public hearing and referred HB581 to the pension subcommittee with requests for more precise actuarial and administrative drafting language and fiscal estimates.
