SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: mishedlo who wrote (10081)8/1/2004 10:33:33 PM
From: Alias Shrugged  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116555
 
>>>I want to see GM's current pension underfunding.
How and where do I see that?>>>

<<<Why should there be ANY extension. Why shouldn't pension plans be fully funded every quarter of every year?>>>>

<<<<Perhaps many of you were not aware of this tax gimmick. If a company "assumes" the return from a pension plan is going to be 10% (and lets say plan funding was needed at 8% to meet obligations) that company gets to report shareholder increased EARNINGS of 2% of the amount even if the plan only returned 6% and there was an actual pension liability. Please read that again, and as assinine as it sounds, companies are indeed reporting increased "earnings" off of underfunded pension plan liabilities! Clearly this tax law needs to be totally changed.>>>>>

<<<The whole thing is totally disgusting. No make that sickening.>>>

Mish Man-

You seem awful agitated - have you stopped taking your meds? -ggg-

GM's pension number will be in the Pension Footnote in their Annual Report. Look in here:

gm.com

Their plan doesn't look too bad; they dumped $18 billion into the Plan during 2003. At 12/31/03, they had $87.3 billion of benefit obligations (using a 6.0% discount rate) and $86.2 billion of assets; they are short $1.1 billion.

Mike



To: mishedlo who wrote (10081)8/2/2004 8:46:28 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116555
 
as i recall, a big part of the issue at GM is the medical liability. also, i think their assumed pension-fund returns are something like 9% (compared to 6% at Berkshire), which lowers their required contributions.