Taxation and Policyholder Behavior: The Case of Guaranteed Minimum Accumulation Benefits

Jennifer Alonso-García, M. Sherris, Samuel Thirurajah, Jonathan Ziveyi
{"title":"Taxation and Policyholder Behavior: The Case of Guaranteed Minimum Accumulation Benefits","authors":"Jennifer Alonso-García, M. Sherris, Samuel Thirurajah, Jonathan Ziveyi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3629101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers variable annuity contracts embedded with guaranteed minimum accumulation benefit (GMAB) riders when policyholder's proceeds are taxed. These contracts promise the return of the premium paid by the policyholder, or a higher stepped up value, at the end of the investment period. A partial differential valuation framework, which exploits the numerical method of lines, is used to determine fair fees that render the policyholder and insurer profits neutral. Two taxation regimes are considered; one where capital gains are allowed to offset losses and a second where gains do not offset losses, reflecting stylized institutional arrangements in Australia and the US respectively. Most insurance providers highlight the tax-deferred feature of a variable annuity. We show that the regime under which the insurance provider is taxed significantly impacts supply and demand prices. If losses are allowed to offset gains then this enhances the market, narrowing the gap between fees, and even producing higher demand than supply fees. On the other hand, when losses are not allowed to offset gains, then the demand-supply gap increases. When charging the demand price, we show that insurance companies would be profitable on average. Low (high) Sharpe ratios are not as profitable as policyholders are more likely to stay long (surrender).","PeriodicalId":23435,"journal":{"name":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3629101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This paper considers variable annuity contracts embedded with guaranteed minimum accumulation benefit (GMAB) riders when policyholder's proceeds are taxed. These contracts promise the return of the premium paid by the policyholder, or a higher stepped up value, at the end of the investment period. A partial differential valuation framework, which exploits the numerical method of lines, is used to determine fair fees that render the policyholder and insurer profits neutral. Two taxation regimes are considered; one where capital gains are allowed to offset losses and a second where gains do not offset losses, reflecting stylized institutional arrangements in Australia and the US respectively. Most insurance providers highlight the tax-deferred feature of a variable annuity. We show that the regime under which the insurance provider is taxed significantly impacts supply and demand prices. If losses are allowed to offset gains then this enhances the market, narrowing the gap between fees, and even producing higher demand than supply fees. On the other hand, when losses are not allowed to offset gains, then the demand-supply gap increases. When charging the demand price, we show that insurance companies would be profitable on average. Low (high) Sharpe ratios are not as profitable as policyholders are more likely to stay long (surrender).
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
税收与投保人行为:以最低累积保障为例
本文研究了投保人的收益被征税时,嵌入保证最低累积收益(GMAB)附加条款的可变年金合同。这些合约承诺在投资期结束时返还投保人支付的保费,或更高的增值。利用线的数值方法的偏微分估值框架被用来确定使投保人和保险公司利润中立的公平费用。考虑了两种税收制度;一种是允许资本收益抵消损失,另一种是收益不抵消损失,分别反映了澳大利亚和美国的程式化制度安排。大多数保险公司都强调可变年金的延税特性。我们表明,保险提供商征税的制度显著影响供需价格。如果允许亏损抵消收益,那么这将增强市场,缩小费用之间的差距,甚至产生高于供应费用的需求。另一方面,如果不允许损失抵消收益,那么供需缺口就会扩大。当收取需求价格时,我们表明保险公司平均会盈利。低(高)夏普比率并没有那么有利可图,因为保单持有人更有可能长期持有(退保)。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women in Accounting: A Historical Review of Obstacles and Drivers on a Patriarchal and Classist Path A Practical Guide to Weak Instruments Nature of Anti-Competitive Agreement Law in India: A Brief Review The Effect of Investor Credit Supply on Housing Prices Emerging Market & Mobile Technology Usage: Evaluating intention to use Mobile Banking in India
×
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