, 12 tweets, 8 min read Read on Twitter
@Sam_Marsh101 Here's an explanation of #USS's actions which I affirm & w/ which I think you might not take issue: #USS execs have given up on the hope of being able to issue a 2017 or 2018 valuation that tPR will deem acceptable. 1/
@Sam_Marsh101 But they remain strongly inclined to issue a valuation that tPR at least declares they're unlikely to take action against, even though they don't deem it acceptable. They're unwilling to go beyond that limit & enter into confrontation & dispute w/ tPR. 2/
@Sam_Marsh101 The just-submitted Rule 76 valuation, w/ its contribution rises encoded, stays within these limits. See this passage from the 11 Dec tPR letter👇. 3/
@Sam_Marsh101 Had #USS followed @Derek_Benstead's advice to issue the 2017 JEP 29.2% valuation w/ no triggers, they would at that point have entered into confrontation & dispute w/ tPR. Hence, their submission of the Rule 76 2017 valuation instead. 4/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead In an attempt to continue to avoid entering into confrontation & dispute w/ tPR, #USS issued a 2018 valuation, since it was less difficult to get below 30% w/o encountering tPR resistance via 2018 rather than 2017 assumptions. 5/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead #USS realises that even a 2018 valuation w/ contributions below 30% would encounter strong tPR resistance, given their assessment of the covenant as merely 'tending to strong'. 6/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead They believe that only a 2018 valuation of < 30% w/ fairly onerous triggers of substantial contingent contributions might get tPR to the point where they declare they're unlikely to take action. 7/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead The #USS execs also realise that employers would strong resist fairly onerous triggers of substantial contingent contributions. 8/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead So, in agreement w/ you & Derek, I think the #USS execs tried to manipulate employers into signing on to such triggers via bait & switch plus extortion of the 2017 backstop. 9/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead In so doing, they went too far & employers are now strongly pushing back, which explains the delay in #USS's issuing of their trigger contribution paper & their pushing the onus onto employers to devise the triggers. 10/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead Politically speaking, this is the ground on which things are being fought: devising triggers to accompany a contribution level slightly less than 30% that neither tPR nor employers will too strongly resist. 11/
@Sam_Marsh101 @Derek_Benstead The above account, w/ which I suspect, Sam, you're largely in agreement, also explains why one would need to try to take the fairly extreme measures I mention in this blog 👇 in order to shift the ground to a No Detriment valuation. 12/12
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Michael Otsuka
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!