Pension funding gaps: do mandated external governance mechanisms matter?

IF 2.8 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Managerial Auditing Journal Pub Date : 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1108/maj-05-2023-3912
Trevor England
{"title":"Pension funding gaps: do mandated external governance mechanisms matter?","authors":"Trevor England","doi":"10.1108/maj-05-2023-3912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine whether and how the experience of specialized external governance mechanisms mandated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 – the actuary and auditor – affect pension plan funding.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study uses data from annual pension plan regulatory reports (Form 5500), Form 10-K filings, Form DEF 14A filings (company proxy statements) and publicly available data sources. The hand-collected data include information related to the pension plan’s actuary and auditor and various pension plan data disclosed in the company’s financial statement footnotes.\n\n\nFindings\nThe author finds that more experienced actuaries and auditors are associated with better funded pension plans, especially when the company has higher financial risk or lower board independence. Additional analyses indicate that companies with more experienced actuaries and pension plan auditors are more likely to make higher annual pension plan contributions and hold fewer Level 3 fair value assets.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe dearth of pension plan governance research generally focuses on whether and how internal governance mechanisms affect pension plan funding. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first empirical study of the relationship between external pension plan governance mechanisms and pension plan funding.\n","PeriodicalId":47823,"journal":{"name":"Managerial Auditing Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managerial Auditing Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-05-2023-3912","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine whether and how the experience of specialized external governance mechanisms mandated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 – the actuary and auditor – affect pension plan funding. Design/methodology/approach This study uses data from annual pension plan regulatory reports (Form 5500), Form 10-K filings, Form DEF 14A filings (company proxy statements) and publicly available data sources. The hand-collected data include information related to the pension plan’s actuary and auditor and various pension plan data disclosed in the company’s financial statement footnotes. Findings The author finds that more experienced actuaries and auditors are associated with better funded pension plans, especially when the company has higher financial risk or lower board independence. Additional analyses indicate that companies with more experienced actuaries and pension plan auditors are more likely to make higher annual pension plan contributions and hold fewer Level 3 fair value assets. Originality/value The dearth of pension plan governance research generally focuses on whether and how internal governance mechanisms affect pension plan funding. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first empirical study of the relationship between external pension plan governance mechanisms and pension plan funding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
养老金资金缺口:授权外部治理机制重要吗?
目的本研究旨在探讨《1974 年雇员退休收入保障法》规定的专门外部治理机制--精算师和审计师的经验是否以及如何影响养老金计划的资金。作者发现,经验丰富的精算师和审计师与资金充足的养老金计划相关,尤其是在公司财务风险较高或董事会独立性较低的情况下。其他分析表明,精算师和养老金计划审计师经验更丰富的公司更有可能提高养老金计划的年度缴费额,并持有更少的第三级公允价值资产。据作者所知,这是第一项关于外部养老金计划治理机制与养老金计划资金之间关系的实证研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
13.80%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The key areas addressed are: ■Audit and Assurance (financial and non-financial) ■Financial and Managerial Reporting ■Governance, controls, risks and ethics ■Organizational issues including firm cultures, performance and development In addition, the evaluation of changes occurring in the auditing profession, as well as the broader fields of accounting and assurance, are also explored. Debates concerning organizational performance and professional competence are also covered.
期刊最新文献
How hours allocated to year-round auditing procedures affect audit quality Ambiguity in international financial reporting standards (IFRS) and its impact on judgments of auditors Product market competition and audit fees: new evidence The impact of remote auditing on audit quality: the moderating role of technology readiness CEO inside debt and industry specialist auditor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1