Nova Scotia releases new pension funding framework, effective April 1, 2020
On February 26, 2020, the Nova Scotia Government released its regulations establishing a new defined benefit pension funding framework for the province. The amendments to the Pension Benefits Regulations (“PBR”) complete consultations held over the last year and have been highly anticipated since the government first solicited input in 2017. The amendments come into effect April 1, 2020.
Highlights from the new funding framework include:
- Reduced solvency funding obligations – The amended regulations will only require special payments into a defined benefit plan to increase the plan’s funded ratio to 85%, as measured on a solvency basis. This is a reduction from the previous required solvency ratio of 100%. The formula for calculating a solvency deficiency (the liability amount) has been modified accordingly.
- Enhanced going concern funding obligations – In parallel with the lower solvency funding threshold, the PBR amendments have enhanced funding requirements on a going concern basis. Defined benefit plans will be required to add an extra percentage margin, called a provision for adverse deviations (“PfAD”), to its going concern funding requirements. The PfAD is not a fixed number; for non-solvency exempt plans it can vary between 5% and 22%, depending on the proportion of the plan’s fixed income assets in specified investment categories, as reported in the plan’s financial statements. The maximum amortization period for going concern unfunded liabilities has also been reduced from 15 to 10 years. This was Option 2 in the consultations and is comparable to the approach in Ontario.
- Reserve accounts – Contributions in relation to a solvency deficiency or a going-concern PfAD may be deposited into a separate reserve account within the plan. An employer may withdraw any surplus from the reserve account upon plan windup, subject to the Superintendent’s consent and other prescribed conditions.
- Contribution holidays – The PBR will further restrict contribution holidays, prohibiting those that reduce the funded ratio below 105% on either a going concern or solvency basis.
- Actuarial valuation reports – Certain solvency-exempt plans under s. 19(6) of the PBR will no longer be required to file annual valuation reports when there is a solvency deficiency. Another change is that any reserve accounts established for a defined benefit plan must be accounted for in the valuation report, separate from the remainder of the pension fund.
Also included are regulations regarding other changes to the Pension Benefits Act (“PBA”) introduced in 2019’s Bill 109. These changes are also effective April 1, 2020:
- Letters of credit – The limit on the use of letters of credit (formerly 15%) for solvency deficiency funding was removed and no new explicit restrictions on their use have been added. The new regulations deem existing letters of credit to continue in respect of a solvency deficiency calculated under the new formula.
- Annuity purchase – Administrators will be allowed to discharge liability for annuity buyouts of a defined benefit plan that is not wound up. The new regulations detail the requirements to take advantage of the discharge.
Further changes, also effective April 1, 2020, include:
- Individual Pension Plan (“IPP”) exemption – Individual pension plans for members who are “connected”, as that term is defined in the Income Tax Act, will be exempt from specified PBA and PBR provisions, including certain provisions regarding membership, vesting and standard of care.
- Federal investment rules – The PBR will harmonize its investment restrictions with those of other jurisdictions by incorporating the rules under the federal Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985 (“PBSR”), including any future amendments to the PBSR.
The amendments provide new options and obligations for employers and plan sponsors as they look to maintain the long-term sustainability of their defined benefit plans. Our Pensions and Employee Benefits Group would be pleased to discuss this new framework with you and assist with enhanced obligations or any plan document modifications required to take advantage of the changes.
This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions and Benefits group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
Canada’s Anti-Spam Law (“CASL”) is a federal law in force since July 1, 2014, aimed at eliminating unsolicited and malicious electronic communications and requires organizations to comply with specific consent, disclosure and unsubscribe requirements when…
Read MoreJennifer Taylor Introduction Kirby Elson had been fishing in Newfoundland and Labrador for about 50 years when the policy on Preserving the Independence of the Inshore Fleet in Canada’s Atlantic Fisheries (“PIIFCAF”) was introduced in…
Read MoreRick Dunlop, David Randell, Christine Pound, Sadira Jan and Kevin Landry The federal government’s introduction of the Cannabis Act, the first step in the legalization of marijuana (or cannabis), has understandably triggered a wide range of reactions in the Canadian business…
Read MoreMark Tector and Annie Gray On April 26, 2017, the Government of Nova Scotia announced that amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which were passed in May of 2016, will officially come into force as of June…
Read MoreOn May 2, 2017, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal issued a significant decision in Tibbetts v. Murphy, 2017 NSCA 35, on the proper interpretation of s. 113A of the Insurance Act. Specifically the issue was whether…
Read MoreJoe Thorne and Amanda Whitehead A fundamental principle of our legal system is that all parties to a dispute should be given the opportunity to be heard. However, the law recognizes that some circumstances warrant speedy judicial…
Read MoreDamages for pain and suffering are capped for Nova Scotians who are injured in motor vehicle accidents if their injuries are considered “minor.” The cap was amended for accidents occurring on or after April 28,…
Read MoreGrant Machum & Sean Kelly A recent decision from the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Ly v. British Columbia (Interior Health Authority) 2017 BCSC 42, provides helpful clarification of the law on termination of probationary employees on the basis…
Read MorePerlene Morrison and Hilary Newman The Supreme Court of Canada recently declined to hear an appeal from the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Campbell v Bruce (County), 2016 ONCA 371. The Court of Appeal confirmed the lower court finding…
Read MoreRick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…
Read More