Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Reuters: Money: Secondary stock offerings rise amid slow IPO market

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Secondary stock offerings rise amid slow IPO market
Apr 11th 2012, 14:48

By Olivia Oran

Wed Apr 11, 2012 10:48am EDT

(Reuters) - Secondary stock offerings by U.S. companies grabbed most of the equity capital markets activity in the first quarter, spurred by a sluggish market for IPOs and private equity investors who want to sell down their stakes in newly public companies.

U.S. follow-on offerings raised $41.9 billion in the first quarter, or 82 percent of equity capital markets activity from 62.3 percent a year earlier, according to Thomson Reuters data.

IPOs, in contrast, fell to 11.3 percent of overall activity in the first quarter from 20.6 percent.

"There's a lot of money on the sidelines and the number of IPOs coming to market is not up to the demand side of the curve," said David Menlow, president of research firm IPOFinancial. "People want to deploy their money and want to be involved in something â€" that's what is fueling these offerings."

More follow-on offerings signal that investors are comfortable enough with stock market volatility that they're willing to place bets on equities, provided the companies have some track record in the market, bankers say.

That suggests secondary offerings may continue to outpace IPOs in the weeks ahead.

Many of the offerings come from companies with significant stakes still held by private equity firms. Some of these firms were taken private in leveraged buyouts from 2004 to 2007 and may be too large to allow private equity backers to sell significant chunks at once.

Instead, firms are choosing to sell down small portions of their investment in a portfolio company's IPO to test the waters, and then return to the public markets soon after to decrease their stakes further if the stock price remains high.

"It's often hard to do an IPO with a large component of selling shareholders because potential investors don't want to see that," said Stephen Older, a New York-based corporate attorney with McDermott Will & Emery who specializes in public offerings. "So, later on private equity backers will sell down their stakes" in secondary offerings.

Notable follow-on offerings from private equity-backed companies came from quick-service restaurant franchisor Dunkin' Brands Group Inc, TV data company Nielsen Holdings N.V. and discount retailer Dollar General Corp.

Firms where private equity investors hold a substantial stake and are expected to pursue large follow-on offerings later this year include pipeline company Kinder Morgan Inc and hospital operator HCA Holdings Inc, say bankers.

The follow-on offerings also play an important role for private equity-backed companies: allowing legacy sponsors to cash out and be replaced by new public investors.

"There's going to be a bit of a marketing effort that goes on to get more investors paying attention to the stock and broadening that investor base," said Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida who focuses on IPO market research.

Some companies have also pursued follow-on offerings just several months after their IPOs. This move is unusual for newly public companies, which typically must adhere to a 180 day lock-up period before insiders can sell shares.

Last week, cloud computing company Guidewire Software filed for a $225 million secondary offering only two months after its IPO.

During the first quarter, luxury retailer Michael Kors Holdings Ltd launched a more than $1 billion follow-on offer three months after its successful IPO. Social gaming company Zynga Inc also held a $515.6 million secondary offering less than four months after its public market debut.

(Reporting By Olivia Oran; Editing by Alwyn Scott; Editing by Michael Perry)

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Money: Exclusive: Hedge fund Tyrus moves to Monaco: source

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Exclusive: Hedge fund Tyrus moves to Monaco: source
Apr 11th 2012, 15:13

LONDON | Wed Apr 11, 2012 10:55am EDT

LONDON (Reuters) - Tyrus Capital, one of London's best-known M&A hedge fund firms, has moved the bulk of its operations to Monaco, one of the first managers to relocate to the principality in response to forthcoming European Union regulation and UK tax rates.

The firm, which runs approximately $2.7 billion and which was founded by Tony Chedraoui in 2009, moved most of its staff to Monaco around the start of April, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters.

"I think it's driven by the EU regulation that's just coming through, which they see an onerous and unnecessary," the source said.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Money: IRS tax auditing lags for ultra-wealthy: report

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
IRS tax auditing lags for ultra-wealthy: report
Apr 11th 2012, 14:50

The National Debt Clock, which displays the current United States gross national debt and each American family's share, hangs on a wall next to an office for the Internal Revenue Service near Times Square in New York May 16, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Chip East

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Money: Insurers rethink coverage after weather disaster payouts

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Insurers rethink coverage after weather disaster payouts
Apr 11th 2012, 12:46

John Shipman tosses a boot from the remains of his mother's home during the cleanup effort in Forney, Texas, April 4, 2012. REUTERS/Tim Sharp

John Shipman tosses a boot from the remains of his mother's home during the cleanup effort in Forney, Texas, April 4, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Tim Sharp

By Matt Stroud

PITTSBURGH | Wed Apr 11, 2012 8:46am EDT

PITTSBURGH (Reuters) - As weather disasters strike with more frequency, homeowners first get hit with the destruction or total loss of property. Many are then hit with the unexpected loss of homeowners insurance policies as insurance companies re-evaluate their financial liabilities.

After a tornado ripped through Springfield, Massachusetts, last year, R. Paula Lazzari's home was badly damaged. The retired teacher found broken windows, missing siding and a damaged roof. Her insurer offered to fund repairs for one broken window and some of the siding. It took nine months -- and mediation services from an independent adjuster and the Massachusetts Division of Insurance -- to get her bills paid, according to the parties involved.

In this era of unpredictable weather patterns, Lazzari's case is not unique. Insurance companies are raising rates, cutting coverage, balking at some payouts and generally shifting more expense and liability to homeowners, according to reports from the industry and its critics.

"Insurance companies have significantly and methodically decreased their financial responsibility for weather catastrophes like hurricanes, tornados and floods in recent years," the Consumer Federation of America said in a statement after studying industry data.

The industry concedes that it is trying to avoid getting trounced by those same punishing weather patterns.

"Last year (2011) was an extraordinary year for natural disasters," said Michael Barry of the Insurance Information Institute (III), an industry trade group. "Insurers have taken a step back to assess whether or not they can absorb severe losses."

STATES LEFT IN THE COLD

Some insurance companies have pulled out of weather-challenged states -- meaning they will not write new homeowners policies and may not renew contracts with current policyholders.

In the wake of Hurricane Irene last summer, for example, Allstate informed some 45,000 North Carolina policyholders that it would not renew contracts that were not bundled with auto insurance.

After a spate of tornadoes last April caused $11 billion of property damage in Alabama, Alfa Mutual Group announced it would not renew 73,000 Alabama property insurance policies.

"The increased frequency and severity of storms over the last decade have highlighted the need for Alfa to review its overall property portfolio," Alfa President Jerry Newby said in a statement.

Florida, where insurers have been dropping coverage since Hurricane Andrew in 1992, is a good example of where this can lead. With an annual average of $1,460 per home, homeowners' premiums there are second-highest in the country (Texas, at $1,511 is first), according to the most recent data available, a 2010 report from the Insurance Information Institute.

"Florida's off the charts when it comes to pricing," said Mike McCartin, an Ashton, Maryland, independent insurance agent.

The state has stepped in to cover some 1.5 million properties via its publicly funded Citizens Property and Insurance Corporation as insurers drop more and more homes.

"You simply have major private insurers that are unwilling to write policies in Florida," said Robin Westcott, the state's insurance consumer advocate.

"It's just a tough market to be in," said Phil Supple, a spokesman for State Farm, which was once Florida's largest property insurer. It stopped writing new homeowners' policies there in 2007.

CHERRY-PICKING OF CUSTOMERS

Even though companies are not abandoning states at will, many opt to drop coverage on individual homes or customers that may seem prone to file claims. Insurers generally work on three-year contracts with homeowners, Barry said. At the end of those contracts, insurers can decide to raise rates or not renew.

When frozen pipes caused flooding in Phil Berger's Ijamsville, Maryland, home last year, he got a $6,000 check from Allstate for the damages -- and a policy review. Berger said an Allstate contractor told him to make $100,000 in repairs to his home at his expense or he would lose his coverage. He refused, and instead found a less expensive policy with a company that required only one smaller repair before covering the home.

"You just need to be on your toes at all times," Berger said.

Allstate declined to comment on Berger's case, but sent an email response to general questions about the company's nonrenewal policies.

"Allstate responsibly manages its risk by opting to not renew policies as warranted," company representative Kevin Smith wrote. "These actions are carefully considered, and help ensure Allstate's continued ability to provide a wide variety of insurance products to consumers at a competitive rate, while remaining financially strong in every community we serve."

PAYING MORE FOR LESS

Even homeowners that renew every year may find new limits buried in their policies. The Consumer Federation report said insurance companies have "sharply hollowed out the catastrophe coverage offered to consumers" by raising deductibles, capping replacement costs, and -- significant for folks in the path of tornadoes and hurricanes -- removing coverage for wind damage if another non-covered event (usually a flood) also occurs.

Industry groups say this misstates the facts.

"The …(CFA) could not be more wrong," said Dr. Robert P. Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute. "Cities such as Tuscaloosa, Birmingham and others are being rebuilt today because of private insurance companies paying losses -- not from ‘hollowed out coverage' policies." Insurers have paid "literally billions" of dollars to "hundreds of thousands of claimants" affected by natural disasters, he said.

Hartwig also defended the practice by some insurance companies of leaving certain states or regions.

"If you tell an insurance company that they can't raise rates despite nine hurricanes in two years, obviously insurers are going to have to reduce exposure," he said.

But homeowners' insurance premiums have been rising sharply. They have increased an average 6.33 percent annually between 2002 and 2009, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC). This year, insurers have asked for rate increases of 18 percent or more in 11 states, according to the Consumer Federation.

Robert Hunter, the author of the consumer report, has questioned whether limit-laden policies are worth the rising costs. But mortgage lenders require homeowners insurance, and anyone who has observed a devastating house fire or storm is unlikely to be willing to go without coverage.

COMPARISON SHOPPING

So how can consumers, who have little choice but to keep their coverage, do as Berger suggests and keep on their toes?

Hunter tells homeowners to shop carefully. "Go on your state's insurance policy website and look for houses similar to yours to compare prices," he said.

The NAIC provides a map to all state insurance offices on its website, www.naic.org/state_web_map.htm), and provides information about consumer insurance complaints.

Hunter also recommends checking comparison websites such as insuranceproviders.com (www.insuranceproviders.com) or insweb.com (www.insweb.com) for companies with favorable consumer reviews for in your state.

Another step is to get a professional agent to help, said Jim Donelon, Louisiana's insurance commissioner and president-elect of the NAIC.

"I recommend you talk to as many people as you can. Get an independent agent -- someone who's not attached to a specific company -- and get in touch with captive agents but know that captive agents can only represent their company."

The agents can check to make sure no important coverage -- like wind -- has been carved out of the policy.

Compare what the agents offer with what you can find online, said Randy Moses, assistant director with the South Dakota Insurance Department.

Even after getting coverage, consumers may find they need extra help. Lazzari needed both an independent broker and a public adjuster to resolve her case. Her insurer, Norfolk Dedham Insurance, not only initially refused to pay for most of her home repairs, but also planned to drop her as a customer, she said. Francis T. Hegarty Jr., president and CEO of Norfolk & Dedham Group, confirmed her version of events, but said it was not unusual for claims such as Lazzari's to take time to resolve.

Lazzari contacted an independent broker who worked with Norfolk Dedham to successfully complete her home repairs. But the broker said switching insurers would increase her payments 185 percent. That's when Lazzari contacted the Massachusetts Division of Insurance to find a public adjuster, who eventually persuaded Norfolk Dedham to keep her on its rolls.

"We were eventually able to work things out with Ms. Lazzari," said Francis T. Hegarty Jr., president and CEO of Norfolk & Dedham Group. "In these kinds of cases with independent adjusters, the claims tend to get strung out and tend to take longer to resolve than they would otherwise. But cases like case are pretty common and, all in all, we're pleased with how things turned out with her."

(This story corrected title of Randy Moses)

(Editing by Linda Stern and Maureen Bavdek)

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Money: Funding options wane as debt crisis intensifies

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Funding options wane as debt crisis intensifies
Apr 11th 2012, 13:11

By Kirsten Donovan

LONDON | Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:11am EDT

LONDON (Reuters) - The latest escalation of the euro zone debt crisis, with Spain now taking centre stage, is closing funding markets for banks again on concerns over exposure to the large amount of sovereign debt now being hoarded by some institutions.

Spanish and Italian bond yields have risen sharply over the last week as the effects of the European Central Bank's three-year liquidity operation wear off and worries about Spain's ability to meet its budget targets and fund itself grow.

That means banks that used the ECB's cash to buy bonds issued by their own governments may be looking at losses if they need to sell that paper to repay debt.

"If you parked the ECB cash in government bonds then you're losing money if you need to sell them to repay your own bondholders," said Rabobank rate strategist Lyn Graham-Taylor.

"That has to worry banks. Effectively sovereigns and banks in Spain and Italy have become ever more closely tied together through the (ECB's three-year tenders)."

Spanish banks' holdings of government bonds rose by almost 70 billion euros from the end of November to the end of February, while Italian banks' holdings have risen almost 55 billion euros, according to ECB data.

Fears over individual bank exposure to the euro zone debt crisis was behind a shut-down in funding markets in the second half of last year, and traders said the pick-up in unsecured interbank lending that had been seen since January had partially reversed. Lenders were again becoming pickier who they give cash to, they added.

Doors to longer-term funding markets have also quietly closed again, not only to banks in Spain and Italy but also to some corporate issuers in the two countries.

"We shouldn't put the weakness at the door of illiquidity or the Easter break, but more at Spain's door," said Societe Generale credit analyst Suki Mann.

"The speed at which the market has unwound, propagated by higher peripheral bond yields, is illustrative of how important it is that we contain Spain. To this end, decisive action somewhere needs to be taken."

On Tuesday, Bank of Spain Governor Miguel Angel Fernandez Ordonez said Spanish banks, already hurting from a property crash, could need more capital if the economy continues to deteriorate and they face a new wave of loan defaults.

Reflecting those concerns, the cost of insuring against a default by Spanish bank Santander - seen as one of the country's strongest - has risen around 25 basis points in April, according to 5-year credit default swap prices from Markit. For BBVA it is around 70 basis points higher.

Another risk as sovereign bond yields rise is that margins in the repurchase (repo) market, where banks use government bonds as collateral to access cash, may rise, making it a less effective way of funding.

Clearing House LCH.Clearnet cut its margin rate on Spanish bonds just three weeks ago, citing the fall in the yields seen since the beginning of the year, but it has not adjusted Italian margins since raising them in January.

"(A margin rise) would undeniably have an impact but probably but less so than similar hikes have done in the past," said ICAP strategist Chris Clark.

"The market will be more prepared for it this time around and also there seems to be less active positioning in repo markets these days."

Also, banks holding Spanish and Italian government bonds aren't as reliant on the repo market for funding since the ECB's massive three-year liquidity injections, Clark added.

With money market curves virtually flat, banks are tending to only enter into repo trades overnight as there is no premium for lending longer-term.

For example, the overnight rate for Spanish general collateral repo was last seen at 0.33 percent, according to ICAP, with the three-month rate at 0.35 percent.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Money: The Cleggite solution to rising UK utility prices: Kemp

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
The Cleggite solution to rising UK utility prices: Kemp
Apr 11th 2012, 12:35

By John Kemp

LONDON | Wed Apr 11, 2012 8:03am EDT

LONDON (Reuters) - Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg promised on Wednesday energy suppliers will have to inform customers at least once a year of the cheapest power and gas tariffs available in a bid to stimulate competition and push down prices.

It is another indication of the chaotic state of Britain's energy policy. Both government and energy suppliers are desperately trying to shift blame for rising utility bills, which have added to the financial strain on millions of households, and caused the government to miss its target of eliminating fuel poverty by a wide margin.

The result is an increasingly bizarre and contradictory set of interventions which do little to alleviate fuel poverty, improve efficiency or cut carbon emissions.

The government's climate strategy depends on guaranteeing returns for the big six energy suppliers to encourage investment, so ministers cannot do anything which would jeopardize revenues, including forcing big price cuts.

NUDGES AND SWITCHING

"Seven out of ten customers are on the wrong tariff for their needs, so are paying too much.

The deputy prime minister pointed out that Britain's big six energy suppliers offer over a confusing array of more than 120 tariffs, ensuring most customers are unaware of the best rate and stick with the devil they know. Inertia meant three-quarters of customers stayed with the same tariff in 2010.

So the government has agreed with the big six that customers will be contacted once a year (twice in the case of vulnerable households receiving subsidized tariffs) to notify them of the best tariff for their needs with the same supplier.

The government and energy markets regulator, Ofgem, have already pressed for suppliers to simplify their range of tariffs to improve comparability. In future, energy bills may be bar-coded to facilitate price comparisons using a smartphone and faster, simpler switching between suppliers.

Will any of this reduce the amount spent on heating, lighting and power by the average household? Not much if at all.

In 2009, the average household in England spent 1,340 pounds on gas and electricity, according to the comprehensive annual survey published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change ("Annual Report on Fuel Poverty Statistics 2011"). Since then prices have continued to rise. Most households will save far less than 8 percent on their combined fuel bills by switching.

However, Britain's current administration is attracted by the work on behavioral economics and "nudge" theories popularized by Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler in the United States ("Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Human Happiness" 2008).

In the energy sector, the government believes that complex bills and apathy have prevented large numbers of customers from switching suppliers, causing them to be significantly overcharged. Ofgem has diagnosed lack of competition among the big six as central to the problem in Britain's energy market.

More information prominently displayed could give the right nudge to boost switching, intensify competition, and drive down gas and power bills.

Except that it probably won't work. Soaring bills have little to do with the opaque arrangements in Britain's retail power and gas market.

COMPLEXITY AND RETURNS

Complaints about confusing products, lack of switching and customer dissatisfaction in energy are precisely the same as those which regulators and consumers have expressed for years about Britain's banks and mobile phone companies. Advocates of reform have moaned for years the average Briton is far more likely to get divorced than separate from their bank.

Complex tariff structures are no accident. Banks, phone companies and power and gas suppliers provide an essentially undifferentiated product. The most profitable form of competition limits discounts and special deals to new customers, while exploiting the inertia of the mass of existing customers by continuing charge them more (or in the case of banks offer lower rates of interest).

The result is the constant introduction of new products to secure marginal customers, while terms on old products become gradually less favorable. With their 120 tariffs, electricity and gas companies have only followed a well-worn path used by banks, phone companies, insurers and pension providers.

Government and regulators have not been able to tackle the apparent market "failure" in those other industries; there is no reason to expect they will be any more successful in power and gas.

Even if the government's strategy were successful, there is no reason to expect it would cut average bills. At the moment, inertia by the great mass of customers pays for discounts available to aggressive switchers. But if everyone becomes a switcher, the cross-subsidy would disappear.

WHERE ARE EXCESS PROFITS?

Prices could improve for everyone if greater switching enforced more competition and eliminated excess profits among the big six. But the government and Ofgem have failed to point out precisely how much those excess returns are or who is earning them.

If there are concerns about the way the market is functioning, it is not simply about excess profits in the retail market.

The major concerns are (1) the opportunities for integrated suppliers with generation/production, wholesale trading and retail distribution to exploit their market power to the detriment of customers via inappropriate transfer pricing; and (2) uniform investment strategies by the big six suppliers which have minimized risks for their investors but maximized fuel price risks for customers by concentrating excessively on gas-fired generation.

Encouraging more switching by households will not solve either of these problems.

CONTRADICTORY APPROACHES

Bills have been rising sharply because of a combination of rising natural gas prices in Europe (where gas prices remain strongly linked to oil) as well as government programs to incentivize more investment in green power and the associated transmission infrastructure.

In the case of rising energy costs, officials have privately welcomed increasing prices as providing an incentive for more conservation and efficiency (for example energy efficient lighting and better insulation) even as they publicly worried about the impact on household budgets. Rising prices are essential if the country is to meet its ambitious decarburization targets.

Bills have also risen because the government wants to encourage investment in alternatives like wind, solar, tidal and eventually nuclear, while building out the necessary transmission infrastructure. The response has been a mix of feed-in-tariffs, higher grid charges, and a minimum carbon price, all of which directly raise the cost of power and gas bills.

The industry insists higher prices and guaranteed returns are necessary to make all this possible. Because the government has opted to make customers pay for improvements through bills, rather than provide subsidies from the taxpayer, they show up directly in higher household prices.

The costs may or may not be worth it. The government insists prices would otherwise rise even more because of rising global energy prices, though the shale gas revolution may challenge that assumption.

What is certain is that prices are primarily rising because of a private consensus between the big six and the government, while each side publicly blames the other to deflect public anger, but not too much.

The result is a strange sort of kabuki theatre. Ministers fulminate (quietly) against firms for overcharging, but promise only half-hearted remedies which are not expected to cut revenues or bring costs down, while the companies point to all the extra costs the government is making them shoulder and threaten to provide detailed bill breakdowns that show just how much all those extra green measures are contributing to prices.

The deputy prime minister's initiative is nice, but the average customer should not expect to see any significant bill reduction, and it will be swamped by all the other initiatives that will push bills higher in the next few years.

(John Kemp is a Reuters market analyst. The views expressed are his own)

(Editing by Keiron Henderson)

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Reuters: Money: How to get the most from Social Security

Reuters: Money
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
How to get the most from Social Security
Apr 10th 2012, 18:02

By Mark Miller

CHICAGO | Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:02pm EDT

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The trustees of Social Security will release their annual report on the program's health sometime in the next few weeks, and the news will not be good.

The 2012 briefing is expected to show further deterioration in Social Security's financial outlook, due to the higher-than-expected 2.9 percent cost-of-living adjustment awarded this year and a decline in the taxable wage base available to the program. The report is the official gauge of the program's health - signed by three Cabinet members, the Social Security commissioner and two independent Congressional appointees.

Social Security is not in imminent danger of running out of money, but it faces a financial crunch a bit further out - around 2035. That is when Social Security's Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted due to the drawdown of benefits by the baby boom generation. At that point, the program would have sufficient tax revenue to pay only about 76 percent of promised benefits.

Steve Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration (SSA), is one of the nation's top experts on retirement data. Since he is like a walking encyclopedia on Social Security's workings and features, Reuters talked with him ahead of the trustee report's release to find out how beneficiaries can get the most out of the current Social Security program:

Q: You've been at the Social Security Administration nearly 39 years. We hear a lot of talk now in Washington that the aging baby boomer population is the big problem facing Social Security. Is that a surprise, or is it impossible to surprise an actuary?

A: It's not a surprise at all. People say it's about the growing number of older people living longer, but it's all just about birth rates. Our birth rates dropped after 1965 when the baby boom ended, to the lowest-ever single year of births experienced in this country's history - 1.74 births per woman, on average, in 1976. It dropped very quickly over a short period of time and stabilized at 2.

Q: So Social Security's main long-term challenge is the change in ratio of workers to retirees?

A: Imagine that in an earlier generation each of us had three children. So when we get old and retire, we each have three kids in the work force contributing toward taking care of us - chipping in to buy us a house or pay our rent, or paying in to Social Security. But back in that 1965-to-1976 period, we shifted to having only two children. If only two kids are sharing that burden, that's got to be either half again more they will put on the table, or one-third less that we're going to get - it's just straight-up arithmetic. Or we have to find a way to extend the time period over which we can work.

Q: With traditional pensions declining, Social Security is the only game in town for many people in terms of a guaranteed income source for retirement. Is there a way for people to "buy" more Social Security than they could otherwise get?

A: There's one way to do this that is discussed extensively. Social Security uses a formula called the primary insurance amount, or PIA. If you wait to start receiving Social Security until your Full Retirement Age (FRA), you get 100 of your PIA. If you take it at 62, when you first become eligible, you get only 75 percent. But if you wait until age 70, you get 132 percent of the PIA.

From 75 percent to 132 percent at 70 - that is close to a doubling of the monthly retirement income that you can have for the rest of your life. What's key on this is that Social Security is one of the few providers of a true inflation-indexed life annuity. So if people who do have some savings would use those assets to push back the date that they file for Social Security benefits, they can, in effect - easily and at a very good rate of return - "buy" a CPI-indexed life annuity.

Q: And you get the benefit of all the COLAs along the way.

A: Exactly. If you do wait until age 70 - or whenever you start receiving benefits, you don't miss out on any of those COLAs that started at age 62. They add up and they are right there when you start getting your benefits.

Q: You're 63 now, but you won't be receiving Social Security yourself, correct?

A: Right. Federal workers first came into Social Security after the 1983 reforms. Workers who were hired after that point all are in Social Security; people like me had the option to join, but I stayed in the civil service retirement system. If I get Social Security at all, it would be from the work I did before joining Social Security. I'll be enrolling in Medicare, but Social Security won't be significant for me. And even though we are in an office where we make projections 75 years into the future, I don't have any plans for retirement at all. As long as I'm healthy and having fun doing my job, I want to stay here.

(The author is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

(Editing by Heather Struck, Beth Pinsker Gladstone and Matthew Lewis)

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

 
Great HTML Templates from easytemplates.com.