Main parts of the pension system in the United States of America
• Social insurance:
- Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Income (Social Security) system administered
by the Federal Government.
- Supplemental Security Income social assistance program administered by the
Federal Government.
• Employer-based pensions:
- Defined benefit pension plans,
- Defined contribution pension plans.
Provided by various types of employers
- Federal Government,
- State and local governments,
- Non-profit organizations, including schools, universities, and churches,
- Private employers,
- Self-employed individuals.
• Tax-privileged individual pensions/savings:
- Individual Retirement Accounts,
- Roth Individual Retirement Accounts,
- Deferred annuities.
• Non-tax-privileged individual pensions/savings:
- Home equity,
- Stock investments/other business ownership,
- After-tax savings,
- Family and community support, including non-profit organizations.
• Support for medical care for the elderly:
- Medicare (social insurance)
o Part A: hospital care,
o Part B: physician care,
o Part C: private Health Maintenance Organizations supplementing
Medicare,
o Part D: prescription drugs coverage.
Social Security
• Acute crisis of Social Security as of the late 1970s/early 1980s. Addressed by the
Greenspan Commission. As of the 1989 report of the Trustees of the system, Social
Security had both short-term cash surplus and long-term actuarial surplus. Yet in 1994,
long-term financing of the system deteriorated to the level of 2% of taxable payroll, and a
special Advisory Committee was formed in 1995 to recommend a reform. In 1996, it
produced three conflicting recommendations and no action resulted.
The 2012 Trustees Report is at:
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/2012/index.html
Summary:
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
General outline of reforms proposed for Social Security:
- Private accounts: Redirect a portion of payroll tax to private accounts while
reducing benefits accordingly.
- Government investment: Redirect Trust Fund investments to stocks.
- Reduce and/or tax benefits, increase payroll taxes: limit inflation-indexing of
benefits, increase taxation of benefits, remove upper limit on wages subject to
payroll tax.
General outline of Social Security key features:
- Financed by payroll tax: 10.60% for retirement benefits and 1.80% for disability
benefits (both split equally between employer and employee, paid in full by selfemployed), on wages between $0 and $110,100 in 2012 (maximum amount
subject to tax is increased annually based on a national index of wages). There is
also a payroll tax of 2.90% funding of Medicare Part A, and there is no limit on
income subject to that tax.
- Benefits derived by a formula based on the history of wages. Primary-insuranceamount: The PIA is equal to the sum of 90 percent of Average Indexed Monthly
Earnings (AIME, average of worker’s wages over best 35 years of wages,
adjusted from their past level by the national wage index) up to the first bend
point, plus 32 percent of AIME above the first bend point up to the second bend
point, plus 15 percent of AIME in excess of the second bend point. Automatic
benefit increases based on inflation are also applied. Bend points are adjusted
annually. Not indexing them is one of the pieces in proposed reforms. There is
also a separate formula for maximum family benefit. Spousal benefit: half of
primary benefit. There is also a small death benefit, and survivor benefits.
- System administered by the Federal Government: Social Security Administration,
Board of Trustees (Secretaries of Labor, Treasury, Health & Human Services,
Social Security Commissioner, and two more currently vacant).
Additional current issues in the U.S. pension system
• Private pensions crisis 2000-2002
- Decline of the stock market resulted in funding problems for many private defined
benefit plans, and in substantial decline of balances of many defined contribution plans
and individuals accounts.
- Accounting fraud discoveries (Enron, Worldcom) hurt confidence in employee stock
ownership plans and contributed to stock market prolonged decline.
• Subprime mortgage crisis and inflation threat
- Low interest rates and easy money policy of 2002 resulted in a real estate boom and
subsequent real estate bust, with emergence of a new subprime adjustable mortgage
market and its collapse in 2007-2008.
- Easy money policy of 2002 contributed to substantial decline in the value of the U.S.
dollar and corresponding boom in the price of oil and commodities.
• Retirement of Baby Boomers
- Baby Boomers, i.e., generation born following World War II, have just started retiring
(1945 + 62 = 2007). This will cause great pressures on the entire U.S. economic system,
as this generation is active politically and generally unwilling to make sacrifices.
- On the other hand, this generation finds purpose in their work, so they are far more
likely to continue working through late years in their lives than previous generations. But
advanced age will make it more difficult to perform physical labor, and continued
employment may result in greater need for medical care and prescription drugs.
• Responses to crises
- Pension Protection Act of 2006 was a response to the crisis of 2002. By the time the
legislation was passed, that crisis was over.
- Introduction of Medicare Part D in 2005 meant to help retirees deal with high cost of
prescription drugs.
- The percentage of civilian non-institutionalized Americans age 55 or older who were in
the labor force declined from 34.6% in 1975 to 29.4% in 1993. However, since 1993, the
labor-force participation rate has steadily increased, reaching 38.0% in 2006, and 40% in
2009. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor. Furthermore, the 2007
Retirement Confidence Survey finds also that workers anticipate retiring at later ages.
Labor participation rate for those aged 55 and over with a graduate or professional degree
is nearly 2/3 and climbing.
- Baby Boomers have clearly decided to solve the retirement crisis by working longer.
There is a political impasse in addressing social insurance: there has been no substantial
change to the Social Security system since 1983, marking a very long period of stability,
and over that period, Normal Retirement Age (NRA) for Social Security is gradually
being raised, to 67. Early retirement age remains unchanged at 62, but benefit reduction
for early retirement is counted from new NRA backward, so benefits for retirement at 62
are effectively being gradually cut.
Employer-based pensions: Defined benefit pension plans
- Offered by single employer (subject to ERISA), or many employers together in a
multiemployer plan (subject to Taft-Hartley Act). Must be held in a separate trust,
funded in a manner subject to report to the Department of Labor by plan actuary.
Main applicable laws: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of
1974 and Pension Protection Act of 2006.
- Acceptable actuarial cost methods under ERISA (same list extends to other plans
not subject to ERISA) include entry age, entry age with frozen initial liability,
attained age, attained age with frozen initial liability, projected unit credit, and a
specified aggregate cost method. Both public and private sector employers had
traditionally used the entry age normal actuarial costing method. The reason for
the shift in the private sector is that in 1985 Financial Accounting Statements
Board (FASB) issued rules requiring sponsors to account for accruing pension
liabilities by a uniform method, which was the projected unit credit actuarial cost
method. Technically, FASB mandated the projected unit credit method only for
reporting purposes, and firms could continue to use any of the six actuarial
methods authorized under ERISA for funding. Sponsors, however, appear to have
either interpreted the FASB standard as an endorsement of the projected unit
credit for funding as well as reporting or simply found it more convenient to use
the same method for funding and reporting. As a result, a major shift occurred
from entry age normal to projected unit credit for funding purposes.
- The 2006 Pension Protection Act switches to Traditional Unit Credit.
- A Taft-Hartley multiemployer pension plan is characterized by provisions
allowing individual employees to gain credits toward pension benefits from work
with multiple employers, as long as each employer has a collective bargaining
agreement requiring plan contributions. Often, many employers in the same
industry in a geographic area contribute toward the same multiemployer plan.
Thus, individual workers moving from job to job continue to earn credits toward
future pension benefits. These plans are typically plans negotiated by multiple
employers with one union.
- But for pension plans provided by states and cities, defined benefit plans are not
subject to ERISA, and under Government Accounting Statements Board (GASB).
- Employees of Federal Government:
o The Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) originated in 1920 and has
provided retirement, disability and survivor benefits for most civilian
employees in the US Federal government, until the creation of a new
Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in 1987.
o Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). FERS is a three-tiered
system that consists of a defined benefit plan, Social Security, and the
Thrift Savings Plan. The Thrift Savings Plan is a defined contribution
plan.
Pension Protection Act of 2006
- Establishes new minimum funding standards for single-employer and multiemployer
defined benefit pension plans.
- Contributions are based on plan’s Funding Target. The minimum required
contribution is the sum of the Target Normal Cost (value of benefits expected to
accrue during the year) plus an amortization of any funding shortfall.
- Economic assumptions are given, not assigned by the actuary.
- Funding Target is 100% of benefits accrued as of year beginning,
- Interest rates to value liabilities: Three segment rates – Less than 5 years, between 5
and 20 years, and 20+ years. Rates provided by the Department of Treasury,
published once a month. Based on investment grade corporate bonds (AAA, AA, A
only), averaged over 24 months. Alternatively, plan can use full yield cure without
averaging. Any election of valuation rates cannot be changed, unless special approval
from the Department of Treasury is received.
- Mortality table will be provided by the Department of Treasury.
- Plan defined to be At-Risk (80% or less funding if treated as not at risk last year, 70%
or less if treated as at-risk last year) require higher funding, not applicable to plans
with 500 or fewer participants.
- Assets can be reported at market value or average over 24 months, but the average
must be between 90% and 110% of market.
Cash balance plans
A cash balance plan is a type of defined benefit plan that resembles a defined
contribution plan. May also be called a hybrid plan. A cash balance plan looks like a
defined contribution plan because the employee’s benefit is expressed as a hypothetical
account balance instead of a monthly benefit. Each employee’s "account" receives an
annual contribution credit, which is usually a percentage of compensation, and an interest
credit based on a guaranteed rate or some recognized index, e.g. 30 year Treasury. This
interest credit rate must be specified in the plan document. At retirement, the employee’s
benefit is equal to the hypothetical account balance, which represents the sum of all
contribution and interest credits. Although the plan is required to offer the employee the
option of using the account balance to purchase an annuity benefit, employees generally
will take the cash balance and roll it over into an individual retirement account (unlike
many traditional defined benefit plans which do not offer lump sum payments at
retirement).
Public sector pension plans: states and cities
• In fiscal year 2008, which for most states ended on June 30, 2008, states’ pension plans
had $2.8 trillion in long-term liabilities, with more than $2.3 trillion socked away to
cover those costs.
• In 2000, slightly more than half the states had fully funded pension systems. By 2006,
that number had shrunk to six states. By 2008, only four-Florida, New York, Washington
and Wisconsin-could make that claim.
• While only 19 states had funding levels below the 80 percent mark in fiscal year 2006,
21 states were funded below that level in 2008.
• In eight states-Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Oklahoma,
Rhode Island and West Virginia-more than one-third of the total liability was unfunded.
• Two states had less than 60 percent of the necessary assets on hand to meet their longterm pension obligations: Illinois and Kansas.
Federal Employees system at the end of 2007 had $790.1 billion in assets, and liabilities
for pensions, post-retirement health insurance benefits, and life insurance benefits, of
$1,668.4 billion, with a funded ratio of 47.36%.
Pension Protection Act of 2006
• Requires underfunded pension plans to pay higher premiums to Pension Benefits
Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) and extends the requirement of providing extra funding to
the pension systems of companies that terminate their pension plans.
• Requires companies to more accurately analyze their pension plans' obligations, closes
loopholes that previously allowed some companies to underfund their plans by skipping
payments, and raises the cap on the amount employers are allowed to invest in their own
plans. This will allow employers to deduct more money using the pension tax shield in
times of high profits.
• The standard mortality rates under PPA are determined separately for periods prior to
and after benefit commencement. Prior to benefit commencement, rates are based on the
RP 2000 non-annuitant table projected 15 years beyond the valuation year, but for 2008
valuations, that’s a 23 year projection. For periods after benefit commencement, rates are
drawn from the RP 2000 annuitant table, projected seven years beyond the valuation
year.
• Requires actuaries to use three-segment yield curve for valuation of liabilities. The first
segment rate is simply the average of the first ten data points from the yield curve
(maturities 0.5 through 5.0), the second segment rate is the average of the next thirty data
points (5.5 through 20.0), and the third segment is the average of the next eighty data
points (20.5 through 60.0).
• Assets must be valued at market, or averaged over 24 months, but average must be
between 90% and 110% of market value.
• Minimum funding is the target normal cost plus amortization, with target normal cost
based on unit credit cost method (but projected unit credit for tax purposes). Unit credit
method for normal cost valuation, but projected unit credit for tax-deductible
contribution.
• Change in the target funding ratio from 90% to 100% with a 7 year amortization for funding shortfalls. Multiemployer pension plans have 15 year amortization.
• Other elements, for defined contribution plans:
- Statutory authority for employers to automatically enroll workers in defined
contribution plans.
- Greater disclosure to workers about performance of their pensions.
- Removal of the conflict of interest fiduciary liability from giving self-interested
investment advice for retirement accounts.
- Workers gain greater control over how their accounts are invested
- Extension of the 2001 tax law’s contribution limits for IRAs and 401(k)s.
Trends in defined benefit plans
• General decline in the role of DB plans. Even Federal Government adopted a DC plan.
• No new DB plans created. DB plans turned into DC or cash balance.
• The private sector’s shift in actuarial methods reduced pension expense (and thereby
contributions) during the 1980s and 1990s when the baby boom generation were young
workers (age 20 to 50) and shifted pension expense (and contributions) for this very large
cohort to later in their careers. Now that the baby boomers are approaching retirement,
funding requirements will be higher than they would have been under the entry age
normal cost method. The public sector, in contrast, faces a steady contribution rate. But,
the public sector is much more heavily underfunded: Federal Government the most, then
Illinois, then California, then other states.
Many moving parts, each affecting all other ones
• Analyzing data from the longitudinal Health and Retirement Study (HRS), Friedberg
and Webb conclude that defined contribution plans lead to an increase in the retirement
age of nearly 2 years, on average, compared with defined benefit plans. Moreover, the
authors suggest that their findings may explain the recent increase in employment rates
among people in their 60s, following decades of declines. They expect this trend to
continue, as more workers with defined contribution plans reach retirement age and
defined benefit plans become largely a thing of the past.
Defined contribution plans
Private sector
• Profit sharing plans (no profit -> no contribution). Contributions are discretionary,
meaning you can raise, lower, or eliminate contributions as your profits dictate from year
to year. Profit sharing plans can be integrated with Social Security, an advantage, which
can provide business owners and key employees with additional benefits.
• Money purchase plans: required to contribute the same percentage of employees'
salaries each year. For added flexibility, offering both a profit sharing and money
purchase pension plan gives you the ability to boost contributions when you want.
• 401(k) plans: salary reduction paid into an employee account. Matching by employer
not required, but very common. New types: Individual 401(k), Roth 401(k).
• SEP IRA: provides the benefits of a company-sponsored retirement program without
the administrative expense, government reporting requirements, and complexity
associated with many other types of retirement plans. These plans were specifically
designed for:
- Self-employed individuals
- Sole proprietors
- Independent contractors
- Partnerships
- Small corporations, including S corporations.
• SIMPLE IRA: replacement for SEP IRA, similar characteristics.
• Employee stock ownership plans.
Non-profit organizations:
• 403(b) defined contribution plans, tax-deferred annuity.
State and cities as employers:
• 457 defined contribution plans.
Federal Government:
• Federal Thrift Savings Plan, about $230 billion in assets.
Contribution limits vary, but generally $15,500 limit in 2008, increased by $5000 for
those 50 and older. Some workers may have multiple accounts and make contributions in
all:
• A professor at a state university, which is not subject to Social Security system, and has
a consulting practice in addition to main employment could contribute to:
- Pension provided in place of Social Security by employer,
- Pay Social Security tax on consulting income and earn benefits,
- 403(b) account because of working for a non-profit employer,
- 457 account because of working for a state employer,
- Individual 401(k) for consulting income,
- SIMPLE IRA for consulting income.
Individual accounts and individual retirement provision:
- Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA), created in 1974, had low maximum
contribution limit for some time, set at $2000 in 1980s, increased in 2000’s. Tax
deductible only for low income workers.
- Roth IRAs: taxable income contributions, but withdrawals not taxable.
- Annuities issued by insurance companies.
- Purchase of assets, held without selling to avoid paying capital gains tax.
- Home ownership: widespread use of home equity lines of credit (interest on home
mortgage is generally tax deductible) and availability (but little use) of reverse
mortgages.
- Phased retirement and continued employment.
- Family help.
- Social assistance (recall existence of Supplemental Security Income)
As of early 2008 over 25% of qualified retirement plans assets were held in Individual
Retirement Accounts.
The effect of the Credit Crisis
Funding status of plans of S&P 500 companies
Date
High Quality Corporate
S&P 500 Index
Bond Yield
December 31, 2007
6.40%
1,468.36
June 30, 2008
6.97%
1,280.00
December 31, 2008
6.34%
903.25
June 30, 2009
6.79%
919.32
December 31, 2009
5.98%
1115.10
January 31, 2010
5.90%
1073.87
-200
was
almost
entirely
to theBenefit
transfer
of liabilities by General
Funded
Ratio
- Asset due
/ Projected
Obligation
Motors to the VEBA being administered by the UAW as part of
140%
GM’s
reorganization.
MONTHLY FUNDED STATUS AND SURPLUS/DEFICIT
-250
Surplus / Deficit And Pension Funded Ratio
-300
130%
-350
100
c
Ja -07
n
Fe -08
b
M -0 8
ar
Ap -08
r
M -0 8
ay
Ju -08
nJu 08
A u l -0 8
g
S e -0 8
p
O -0 8
c
No t-08
v
De -08
c
J a -0 8
nFe 09
b
M -0 9
ar
A p -0 9
r
M -0 9
ay
J u -0 9
nJu 0 9
A u l -0 9
g
S e -0 9
p
O -0 9
ct
No -09
v
De -09
c
Ja - 0 9
nFe 10
b
M -10
ar
-1
0
For
120%their 2009 fiscal years, PBO funded ratios ranged from a low of
45%
to a high of 162%. For the group, funded status increased to an
110%
average of 81.7% from the prior year’s 79.4% and was significantly
Based
on a more recent Milliman study:
100%
below
the 130% high-water mark reached at the end of 1999.
De
50
70%
Funded
60%
140%
$ Billions
RATIO - ASSETS / PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION
Ratio - Asset / Projected Benefit Obligation
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
-250
2006
2007
2008
-3002009, the plans recovered $112 billion in market value, $
During
-350
billion
more than the expected return on the assets of the plans,
which had an average expected rate of return of 8.1%. Over the
five years, the pensionFunded
fundsStatus
have averagedFunding
a 5.0%
annual rate
Ratio
return. Since the end of 1999, the plans have earned, on averag
annual investment return of only 4.3%.
The average actual investment return on pension assets for
companies’ 2009 fiscal years was 14.1% (17.2% for calenda
Fiscal
year fiscal years), which was above the expected rate of ret
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2
of 8.1%, partially reversing the historic 2008 losses.
2009
De
c
Ja -07
n
Fe -08
b
M -0 8
ar
Ap -0 8
r
M -0 8
ay
Ju -08
nJu 0 8
Au l-08
g
S e -0 8
p
O -0 8
c
No t-08
v
De -08
c
Ja -08
n
Fe -09
b
M -0 9
ar
Ap -0 9
r
M -0 9
ay
Ju -0 9
nJu 09
Au l-09
g
Se -09
p
O -0 9
c
No t-09
v
De -09
c
Ja -0 9
nFe 10
b
M -10
ar
-1
130%
120%
The
favorable investment returns during 2009 were almost entirely
110%
offset by the increase in liabilities generated by the decrease in
100%
discount rates used to measure pension plan liability. This resulted
in 90%
a small improvement in funded status during 2009. Only six out
of80%
the 89 companies with calendar-year fiscal years reported their
PBO funded status in a surplus position at the end of 2009. This is
70%
compared to four in a surplus position at the end of 2008, while 51
60%
reported
a surplus in 2007. These numbers are similar to those seven
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
1999
2005
2006 2007
2008 2009
years ago when eight companies reported a surplus at the end of
Expected 9.4% 9.4%
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDED STATUS - 2009 VERSUS 2008
Year
150 2000 2001
100
Expected 9.4% 9.4%
50
Return
$ Billions
% of Companies
Investment Return on Plan Assets
Fiscal
200
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDED STATUS - 2009 VERSUS 2008
Distribution
of Funded Status - 2009 vs 2007
10%
2
9.2% 8.5% 8.4% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% 8.1%
8
0
-150
-200
Calendar year fiscal years only
-250
75-90%
90-105%
105-120%
-300
INVESTMENT
RETURN ON PLAN ASSETS
2000
2001 2002 2003 2004
Investment
Return on Plan Assets
More than 120%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
200
60%
Percentage of Companies in 2009
Percentage of Companies in 2008
Expected Return
150
50%
% of Companies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
-50
Actual
4.3% (6.3%) (8.7%) 19.3% 12.4% 11.3% 12.9% 9.9% (18.9%) 1
-100
Return
20%
60-75%
8
INVESTMENT RETURN ON PLAN ASSETS
30%
Less than 60%
9.2% 8.5% 8.4% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% 8.1%
Return
During
2009, the plans recovered $112 billion in market value,
billion more than the expected return on the assets of the plans,
Actual 4.3% (6.3%) (8.7%) 19.3% 12.4% 11.3% 12.9% 9.9% (18.9%) 1
which
had an average expected rate of return of 8.1%. Over the
Return
five years, the pension funds have averaged a 5.0% annual rate
return. Since the end of 1999, the plans have earned, on averag
annual investment return of only 4.3%.
The favorable investment returns during 2009 were almost entirely
Distribution
of Funded
Statusgenerated
- 2009 vsby2007
offset
by the increase
in liabilities
the decrease in
Calendar year fiscal years only
discount rates used to measure pension plan liability. This resulted
in a70%small improvement in funded status during 2009. Only six out
of the
89 companies with calendar-year fiscal years reported their
60%
PBO funded status in a surplus position at the end of 2009. This is
50%
compared
to four in a surplus position at the end of 2008, while 51
reported
a surplus in 2007. These numbers are similar to those seven
40%
years ago when eight companies reported a surplus at the end of
0%
70%
Funding Ratio
The -100
average actual investment return on pension assets for
companies’
2009 fiscal years was 14.1% (17.2% for calendar
-150
year fiscal years), which was above the expected rate of retu
-200
of 8.1%, partially reversing the historic 2008 losses.
90%
FUNDED
80%
Funded Status
0
-50
Actual Return
100
40%
50
2
$ Billions
Milliman 2010 Pension Funding Study
John W. Ehrhardt, FSA, EA , Paul C. Morgan, CIMA
30%
20%
Apr
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
10%
-250
0%
-300
Less than 60%
60-75%
75-90%
90-105%
Percentage of Companies in 2009
Milliman 2010 Pension Funding Study
John W. Ehrhardt, FSA, EA , Paul C. Morgan, CIMA
105-120%
More than 120%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Expected Return
Percentage of Companies in 2008
2
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Actual Return
Apr
006
2007
2008
During 2009, the plans recovered $112 billion in market value, $41
billion more than the expected return on the assets of the plans,
which had an average expected rate of return of 8.1%. Over the past
five years, the pension funds have averaged a 5.0% annual rate of
return. Since the end of 1999, the plans have earned, on average, an
annual investment return of only 4.3%.
2009
were almost entirely
the decrease in
ability. This resulted
2009. Only six out
ears reported their
end of 2009. This is
d of 2008, while 51
similar to those seven
rplus at the end of
Fiscal
Year 2000 2001
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
2009
Expected 9.4% 9.4%
Return
9.2% 8.5% 8.4% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% 8.1%
8.1%
Actual 4.3% (6.3%) (8.7%) 19.3% 12.4% 11.3% 12.9% 9.9% (18.9%) 14.1%
Return
US 2008
2007
INVESTMENT RETURN ON PLAN ASSETS
Investment Return on Plan Assets
200
150
100
$ Billions
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-300
105-120%
More than 120%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Expected Return
e of Companies in 2008
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Actual Return
April 2010
2
The Largest Retirement Plans: P&I 1,000
Largest pension plans, ranked by total assets, in U.S. millions, as of
Sept. 30, 2009.
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
Sponsor
Federal Retirement Thrift
California Public Employees
California State Teachers
New York State Common
Florida State Board
Assets
$234,404
$198,765
$130,461
$125,692
$114,663