H—l7A

16. All aspects of the recent experience of this section of the Fund were examined and from the experience suitable factors were deduced for valuing the Fund. The results of the valuation are as follows : Present value of — £ Existing pensions .. .. .. 1,325,503 Prospective pensions .. .. .. .. 8,412,282 Existing widows' and orphans' allowances .. 363,523 Prospective death benefits .. .. .. 1,752,050 Prospective refunds on withdrawal .. .. 776,630 Total benefits .. .. .. £12,629,988 Future contributions —- £ £ Employees .. .. .. 2,201,112 Employers .. .. .. 2,211,731 „ ; 4,412,843 Future State subsidies .. .. .. .. 1,076,734 Total .. .. .. '.. £5,489,577 , 17. The combined valuations disclose the following position for the Fund as a whole : Valuation Balance-sheet £ £ - Present value of benefits — Funds at 31st December, 1947 .. 9,586,611 Main Fund .. .. .. 3,578,302 Present value of— Local Authorities'Section .. 12,629,988 Future contributions—(i) Main Fund .. .. 681,405 (ii) Local Authorities'Section .. 4,412,843 Future State subsidies—(i) Main Fund .. .. 162,526 (ii) Local Authorities Section .. 1,076,734 Deficiency .. .. .. 288,171 £16,208,290 £16,208,290 The valuation of the Fund made as at 31st December, 1942, disclosed a surplus of £558,801. The whole of this amount, plus the deficiency of £288,171 shown above, less £31,100 transferred to the Investment Fluctuation Account —i.e., a net amount of £815,872 —has been absorbed in passing from a 3|-per-cent. to a 3-J-per-cent. valuation basis and in enlarging benefits to contributors. 18. It is inferred from section- 73 (2) of the National Provident Fund Act, 1926, that if a valuation of the Fund discloses a deficiency the Actuary is to report what additional sums are required by way of State subsidy during the five- years following the valuation to prevent the position of the Fund deteriorating still further. As stated in paragraph 14, in the absence of exact information it was assumed in valuing the Fund that all existing contributing employees would ultimately come under the 1947 Standard Scheme. There is, however, little doubt that many of them will prefer to remain under the old conditions, so that valuing them all as if the 1947 Standard Scheme applies has overstated the liability of . the Fund. It is impossible to place a precise value on this overstatement, but it appears likely to be of the order of the deficiency disclosed by the valuation. I have to report, therefore, that the deficiency does not call for additional subsidies. S. Beckingsale, F. 1. A.,. Government Actuary. The National Provident Fund Board, Wellington. 2—H 17a

5