N001928
Thursday, January 17, 2002 10:18 AM
The following is a couple of suggestions for the
Special Master to correct the mistake in the ACT about
deducting the collateral amount such as life
insurance:
Currently, in calculating the economic loss, it is
assumed that each person would have worked a number of
years equal to the average expected work life across
the nation for males and females of the same age as
the victim.
In order to be fair and reflecting the true practice,
a pension amount should be calculated for the victim
after the expected work life to 100-year-old, that is
38 years if it is expected for a male to work to
62-years-old. Because in reality, after people
retire, they would get private pension from the
company that they work for. The reason to pick
100-year-old is that the insurance company uses the
number to calculate the premium that they charged the
people who bought the life policies.
A pension amount should be calculated in the
compensation fund because the ACT requires deducting
the life insurance, which is different from a court
ruling.
Victims 401k and IRAs should not be deducted because
those accounts are like bank savings accounts, which
are only pre-tax and the spouse wont have access to
until years later. To get penalized for saving is not
fair! If someone spent the savings buying the big
houses right before 9/11, the compensation fund says
that they would not have to be deducted. What is the
logic there?
Individual Comment