The California State Teachers’ Retirement System
(CalSTRS) has launched a search for a firm to serve as the
general consultant to the Investment Committee.
The general consultant works directly for the Investment
Committee and serves as a source of investment advice.
Among other duties, CalSTRS says the successful firm will
be expected to provide the following:
Oversee and advise on the total CalSTRS investment
portfolio, policies and activity.
Conduct asset/liability studies.
Present and evaluate semi-annual reviews of
investment performance.
Conduct special project consulting for the
investments staff, not to exceed 20 percent of the
contract.
Advise on CalSTRS defined contribution portfolios
in the future.
Requests for proposals are being sought through a
competitive process due to the pending expiration of the
existing contract. Pension Consulting Alliance currently
holds the General Investment Consultant contract and may
rebid. The new contract will run for three years with an
option of two, one-year extensions.
The final filing date for proposals is October 22, 2009.
CalSTRS says that a copy of the request for proposals is
available online at
www.calstrs.com/rfp
.
The Investment Committee of the Teachers’ Retirement
Board will interview the top three firms and announce a
selection at its November 6 meeting.
The California State Teachers’ Retirement System, with a
$126.9 billion portfolio, is the second largest public
pension fund in the United States. It administers
retirement, disability and survivor benefits for
California’s 833,000 public school educators and their
families from the state’s 1,400 school districts, county
offices of education and community college districts.
October 5, 2009 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - Officials from
Treasury and the IRS have indicated that the IRS is planning
to issue guidance on a number of issues involving Code
Section 457 deferred compensation plans, CCH
reports.
According to CCH, Cheryl Press, a senior attorney with
the IRS Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt and Government
Entities), noted that the IRS has not issued major guidance
under Code Section 457 since it released final regulations
in 2003.
She expects guidance on ineligible plans under Code
Section 457(f); the definition of a governmental plan under
Code Section 414(d); excess benefit plans under Code
Section 415(d); and welfare benefit plans excluded from
Code Section 457, such as bona fide sick and vacation
leave, severance, and death benefit plans.
Press said that in the meantime, the IRS is issuing
private letter rulings and responses to congressional
inquiries on hardship issues, grandfathered plans, and
other concerns. Press and Bill Bortz, Treasury associate
benefits tax counsel, spoke at an American Law
Institute-American Bar Association (ALI-ABA) conference on
deferred compensation plans of tax-exempt and governmental
employers.
Prior Guidance
Bortz noted that the 2003 regulations focused on
eligible Code Section 457(b) plans and provided less
guidance on the exceptions to Code Section 457 and
ineligible 457(f) plans. CCH said he further noted that
various legislative changes that have yet to be addressed
under Code Section 457, include the enactment of Code
Section 409A deferred compensation requirements; new rules
expanding eligible rollovers to nonspouse beneficiaries;
and rollovers of payments under Code Section 402(l) for
retiree medical benefits.
Notice 2007-62 requested comments on a number of
Code Section 457 issues that need guidance (see
Guidance Coming, Comments Requested on §
457: IRS
). Bortz said comments focused particularly on severance
pay plans and whether the definition should incorporate
elements of the 409A definition (benefits limited to
twice final compensation; benefits conditioned on
involuntary termination).
Covenants not to compete
According to CCH, Bortz expressed concern about 457
plans deferring benefits using covenants not to compete and
rolling risks of forfeiture. While the issues involve
specific facts and circumstances, Bortz said he does not
think these clauses work. Press said she has never seen a
good noncompete clause. A big problem is that employers do
not monitor the actions of their former employees, so there
is no enforcement, she stated.
Corrections and audits
Press said, the government also is exploring relief for
457 plans maintained by agencies and instrumentalities that
believed they were government employers (which must
maintain funded plans) but turned out to be private exempt
organizations. Correction of 457 plans is less of an issue
for actual government employers, who have 180 days to
correct their plans retroactively after notice from the
IRS, she stated, according to CCH.
She also expressed some concern about the treatment of
amounts deferred until retirement as severance pay,
ineligible plans under Code Section 457(f), and employees
entitled to "buckets of benefits" with a default
allocation to a 457(f) plan. While the IRS is less
concerned about government plans, it will audit them if
there is an interaction between Code Sections 403(b) and
457.
Hardship distributions
The IRS is receiving a number of inquiries, such as
letters from Congress, concerning 457 plan participants who
have been denied a hardship distribution, Press stated. She
said that plan administrators are very conservative since
hardship distributions are an optional plan provision. The
IRS changed the rules to allow distributions for
circumstances affecting dependents, and the IRS intended
for this to add flexibility, but administrators saw it as a
tightening of the rules. So the IRS has instructed plan
administrators to "loosen up a little bit," she
said.
The IRS "wants to see good practices and
procedures," a trail of information documenting the
reason for the hardship distribution, Press told the
conference, emphasizing that the IRS looks for
certification and back-up information, according to the
news report.