#defenduss: so now we know.

Thanks, as always to Mike Otsuka, we have some insight into how the USS Trustees arrived at their valuation. Really briefly, they seem to have chosen a methodology appropriate for valuing a defined-benefit fund for closure, as opposed to one that will run on, and bish bosh, it becomes absolutely necessary to demand immediate closure.

If your plan is to close the fund, then it starts to look like an individual DC account just before retirement, and selling up the equities is obviously sensible. Selling them and buying government bonds hugely reduces the returns you might expect, and therefore, bang, you have your crisis.

I think the emphasis is now shifting from “fight the valuation” to “sack the board”. Here’s the message for them.

Meanwhile, the petition is handed in at Glasgow University in front of Adam Smith’s statue.

And here’s a new group for useful documents.

2 Comments on "#defenduss: so now we know."

  1. «a methodology appropriate for valuing a defined-benefit fund for closure»

    That is perfectly suitable if the decisin to close one of the last defined-benefit funds has already been taken as a metter of principle by whoever funds the UK university system.

    Let’s guess: the matter of principle is to replace it with individual savings accounts that pay a lot more fees to the financial industry and involve no pooling of risk. Who could want that? 🙂


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.