Defined benefit (DB) pension freezes in large healthy firms such as Verizon and IBM, as well as terminations of plans in the struggling steel and airline industries, highlight the fact that these traditional pensions cannot be viewed as risk-free promises from the employee's perspective. Indeed, the current turmoil in financial markets and difficult economic outlook for many firms suggest that many more pension plans could be frozen soon. In this preliminary paper we develop an empirical dynamic programming framework to investigate household saving decisions in a model economy with freezeprone DB pensions. The model incorporates important sources of uncertainty facing households, including asset returns, employment, income, and mortality, as well as pension freezes. Applying a compensating variation measure of welfare, we find that pension freezes reduce welfare by a maximum of about $6,000 for individuals with a high school degree and about $2,000 for individuals with a college degree. We close by highlighting a few important issues that are missing from our preliminary analysis, including a labor supply decision and the effects of market-clearing conditions in the labor market. We hope to address these issues in future work.
{"title":"Pension Freezes and Household Saving over the Life Cycle","authors":"David A. Love, Paul A. Smith","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1290761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1290761","url":null,"abstract":"Defined benefit (DB) pension freezes in large healthy firms such as Verizon and IBM, as well as terminations of plans in the struggling steel and airline industries, highlight the fact that these traditional pensions cannot be viewed as risk-free promises from the employee's perspective. Indeed, the current turmoil in financial markets and difficult economic outlook for many firms suggest that many more pension plans could be frozen soon. In this preliminary paper we develop an empirical dynamic programming framework to investigate household saving decisions in a model economy with freezeprone DB pensions. The model incorporates important sources of uncertainty facing households, including asset returns, employment, income, and mortality, as well as pension freezes. Applying a compensating variation measure of welfare, we find that pension freezes reduce welfare by a maximum of about $6,000 for individuals with a high school degree and about $2,000 for individuals with a college degree. We close by highlighting a few important issues that are missing from our preliminary analysis, including a labor supply decision and the effects of market-clearing conditions in the labor market. We hope to address these issues in future work.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115513280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A pension plan is a promise by an employer to provide benefits to employees upon their retirement. Contractual pension fund commitments are a liability of the employer and must be disclosed in the firm's financial statements. A pension fund is established on behalf of employees and is managed by a trustee, who collects cash from the firm, manages the assets owned by the fund, and makes disbursement to retired employees. The firm is able to expense pension fund contributions for tax purposes. The fund pays no taxes on its earning. However, beneficiaries must pay personal taxes upon receiving retirement payments from the fund. Hence pension funds are tax-favoured form of employee compensation because taxes are deferred until retirement. Pension funds hold their assets in the form of marketable securities: money market accounts, bonds and stocks. Direct investment in real estate (with the possible exception of undeveloped land) is not advisable because most real estate investments are priced such that the investor must be in a relatively high tax bracket in order to receive a positive after-tax return. Pension funds are in a zero tax bracket.
{"title":"Pension Fund Strategy: DB versus DC","authors":"Bushan K. Jomadar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1326544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1326544","url":null,"abstract":"A pension plan is a promise by an employer to provide benefits to employees upon their retirement. Contractual pension fund commitments are a liability of the employer and must be disclosed in the firm's financial statements. A pension fund is established on behalf of employees and is managed by a trustee, who collects cash from the firm, manages the assets owned by the fund, and makes disbursement to retired employees. The firm is able to expense pension fund contributions for tax purposes. The fund pays no taxes on its earning. However, beneficiaries must pay personal taxes upon receiving retirement payments from the fund. Hence pension funds are tax-favoured form of employee compensation because taxes are deferred until retirement. Pension funds hold their assets in the form of marketable securities: money market accounts, bonds and stocks. Direct investment in real estate (with the possible exception of undeveloped land) is not advisable because most real estate investments are priced such that the investor must be in a relatively high tax bracket in order to receive a positive after-tax return. Pension funds are in a zero tax bracket.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133161169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mauritius belongs to a select group of developing countries where contractual savings-savings with insurance companies and pension funds-exceed 40 percent of GDP and represent a major potential force in the local financial system. Pension funds account for 75 percent of contractual savings. Contractual savings institutions invest in government securities, housing loans, corporate securities, real estate and bank deposits. They currently hold 35 percent of government securities and also account for 36 percent of total outstanding housing loans.Given their strong demand for long-duration assets, they can stimulate the issue of long-term government bonds (both inflation-linked and zero-coupon) and the development of corporate debentures, mortgage bonds, and mortgage-backed securities.Mauritius has a balanced and well-managed multipillar pension system. In addition to several public components, such as the Basic Retirement Pension, the National Pensions Fund (NPF), the National Savings Fund, and the Civil Service Pension Scheme, there are over 1,000 funded occupational pension schemes that play an increasingly important part in the whole system. The funded schemes are divided into two main groups-those insured and/or administered by insurance companies, and those that are self-administered and are registered with the Registrar of Associations. Coverage of the funded schemes is estimated at about 10 percent of the labor force. Together with the unfunded civil service scheme, occupational pension schemes cover about 100,000 employees or 20 percent of the labor force. All types of pension funds, including the public ones, report low operating costs. This reflects the absence of marketing and selling costs and, in the case of large private pension funds, the assumption of some costs by sponsoring employers. The investment performance of the self-administered funds was less than fully satisfactory in the late 1990s, reflecting poor returns on the local and foreign equity markets. Funds insured or administered by insurance companies as well the NPF performed better during this period because of their heavier allocations in government securities and housing loans. However, over a longer period, the private pension funds probably outperformed the NPF. The regulatory framework, though fragmented, is not unreasonable. It has many important provisions, such as observance of internationally acceptable accounting and actuarial standards and minimum vesting and portability rules, and it does not impose prescribed limits on investments. However, consolidation and modernization of the regulatory framework is required, while supervision, which is currently nonexistent, needs to be developed and to be proactive.
{"title":"The Role of Occupational Pension Funds in Mauritius","authors":"Dimitri Vittas","doi":"10.1596/1813-9450-3033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3033","url":null,"abstract":"Mauritius belongs to a select group of developing countries where contractual savings-savings with insurance companies and pension funds-exceed 40 percent of GDP and represent a major potential force in the local financial system. Pension funds account for 75 percent of contractual savings. Contractual savings institutions invest in government securities, housing loans, corporate securities, real estate and bank deposits. They currently hold 35 percent of government securities and also account for 36 percent of total outstanding housing loans.Given their strong demand for long-duration assets, they can stimulate the issue of long-term government bonds (both inflation-linked and zero-coupon) and the development of corporate debentures, mortgage bonds, and mortgage-backed securities.Mauritius has a balanced and well-managed multipillar pension system. In addition to several public components, such as the Basic Retirement Pension, the National Pensions Fund (NPF), the National Savings Fund, and the Civil Service Pension Scheme, there are over 1,000 funded occupational pension schemes that play an increasingly important part in the whole system. The funded schemes are divided into two main groups-those insured and/or administered by insurance companies, and those that are self-administered and are registered with the Registrar of Associations. Coverage of the funded schemes is estimated at about 10 percent of the labor force. Together with the unfunded civil service scheme, occupational pension schemes cover about 100,000 employees or 20 percent of the labor force. All types of pension funds, including the public ones, report low operating costs. This reflects the absence of marketing and selling costs and, in the case of large private pension funds, the assumption of some costs by sponsoring employers. The investment performance of the self-administered funds was less than fully satisfactory in the late 1990s, reflecting poor returns on the local and foreign equity markets. Funds insured or administered by insurance companies as well the NPF performed better during this period because of their heavier allocations in government securities and housing loans. However, over a longer period, the private pension funds probably outperformed the NPF. The regulatory framework, though fragmented, is not unreasonable. It has many important provisions, such as observance of internationally acceptable accounting and actuarial standards and minimum vesting and portability rules, and it does not impose prescribed limits on investments. However, consolidation and modernization of the regulatory framework is required, while supervision, which is currently nonexistent, needs to be developed and to be proactive.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2003-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130155333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Proposals have been suggested recently that would attempt to transfer part or all of the investment risk inherent in defined contribution plans from the employee to another entity. Although the party initially exposed to said risk varies among the proposals, the likely targets would be the employer, a government agency (perhaps the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) and/or a private insurance company. While the cost of the guarantees and/or financial uncertainty inherent in such an arrangement may be borne by the employer at least initially, it is unlikely that, in the long-term, such a shift in risk-bearing would not somehow alter the provisions of the existing defined contribution plans. It is obviously impossible to model the financial consequences of such proposals until additional detail is provided; however, a highly stylized example of one method of achieving this objective can be readily simulated.
{"title":"Retirement Security and Defined Contribution Pension Plans: The Role of Company Stock in 401(k) Plans","authors":"Jack L. VanDerhei","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1259375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1259375","url":null,"abstract":"Proposals have been suggested recently that would attempt to transfer part or all of the investment risk inherent in defined contribution plans from the employee to another entity. Although the party initially exposed to said risk varies among the proposals, the likely targets would be the employer, a government agency (perhaps the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) and/or a private insurance company. While the cost of the guarantees and/or financial uncertainty inherent in such an arrangement may be borne by the employer at least initially, it is unlikely that, in the long-term, such a shift in risk-bearing would not somehow alter the provisions of the existing defined contribution plans. It is obviously impossible to model the financial consequences of such proposals until additional detail is provided; however, a highly stylized example of one method of achieving this objective can be readily simulated.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115376363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A wide variety of tax regimes for (occupational) private pension saving are in place around the world. Generally, pension saving is taxed at a relatively low rate, although the revenue loss due to tax facilities for pension savings and/or pension tax expenditures may differ across countries. A strong fiscal stimulus to build up pension capital will support funding. However, these tax facilities may become an expensive business for governments. This paper investigates the ex ante budgetary effects of a cash-flow tax regime for pension savings by full present-value calculations. The fiscal subsidy on pension savings in several (European) countries is often associated with the application of the cash-flow treatment of pensions under the personal income tax: pension contributions are tax exempt, capital income of pension funds is tax-exempt, and pension benefits are taxed, but usually the elderly aged 65 years and over are taxed at a relatively low rate. This form can be described as EET, with E denoting an exemption or relief from tax and T denoting a point at which tax is payable. Indeed, tax treatment of pension saving can have other forms as well. We consider a specified form of a comprehensive income tax system (TTE) as an appropriate benchmark. Using the TTE-benchmark, the ex ante budgetary cost of the current tax treatment of pension saving in countries can be quantified. We employ an empirical analysis for the Netherlands, because this country belongs, with its three pension pillars and its sound funding, to the leading group of countries in Europe with a solid pension system. Our calculations, using Income Panel Data from Statistics Netherlands for the years 1990-2003, show that current taxation on a cash-flow basis means on balance a major loss to the Treasury (compared to the benchmark). For the year 2003 we estimate a fiscal subsidy associated with the current Dutch tax rule of 1.2 to 1.5 percent of GDP, depending on the assumed rate of return on pension capital.
{"title":"Budgetary Costs of Tax Facilities for Pension Savings: An Empirical Analysis","authors":"K. Caminada, K. Goudswaard","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1434884","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1434884","url":null,"abstract":"A wide variety of tax regimes for (occupational) private pension saving are in place around the world. Generally, pension saving is taxed at a relatively low rate, although the revenue loss due to tax facilities for pension savings and/or pension tax expenditures may differ across countries. A strong fiscal stimulus to build up pension capital will support funding. However, these tax facilities may become an expensive business for governments. This paper investigates the ex ante budgetary effects of a cash-flow tax regime for pension savings by full present-value calculations. The fiscal subsidy on pension savings in several (European) countries is often associated with the application of the cash-flow treatment of pensions under the personal income tax: pension contributions are tax exempt, capital income of pension funds is tax-exempt, and pension benefits are taxed, but usually the elderly aged 65 years and over are taxed at a relatively low rate. This form can be described as EET, with E denoting an exemption or relief from tax and T denoting a point at which tax is payable. Indeed, tax treatment of pension saving can have other forms as well. We consider a specified form of a comprehensive income tax system (TTE) as an appropriate benchmark. Using the TTE-benchmark, the ex ante budgetary cost of the current tax treatment of pension saving in countries can be quantified. We employ an empirical analysis for the Netherlands, because this country belongs, with its three pension pillars and its sound funding, to the leading group of countries in Europe with a solid pension system. Our calculations, using Income Panel Data from Statistics Netherlands for the years 1990-2003, show that current taxation on a cash-flow basis means on balance a major loss to the Treasury (compared to the benchmark). For the year 2003 we estimate a fiscal subsidy associated with the current Dutch tax rule of 1.2 to 1.5 percent of GDP, depending on the assumed rate of return on pension capital.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128163571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent financial market and plan termination experiences have exposed the shortcomings of existing funding, disclosure, and premium rules governing private single-employer defined benefit pension plans in the United States. These rules were designed to provide predictability for plan sponsors and administrators, by insulating pension plans from the realities of economic and financial market fluctuations. Unfortunately current practice often overlooks key financial principles that arguably should inform a responsible set of pension rules and the insurance system backing the plans. We outline the key characteristics of pension plans needed to beneficially guide rule-making and offer examples drawn from proposed funding and premium rules.
{"title":"Regulating Single Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plans: A Modern Approach","authors":"M. Warshawsky","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.830025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.830025","url":null,"abstract":"Recent financial market and plan termination experiences have exposed the shortcomings of existing funding, disclosure, and premium rules governing private single-employer defined benefit pension plans in the United States. These rules were designed to provide predictability for plan sponsors and administrators, by insulating pension plans from the realities of economic and financial market fluctuations. Unfortunately current practice often overlooks key financial principles that arguably should inform a responsible set of pension rules and the insurance system backing the plans. We outline the key characteristics of pension plans needed to beneficially guide rule-making and offer examples drawn from proposed funding and premium rules.","PeriodicalId":351776,"journal":{"name":"SSPRI: Employment-Based Pensions (Topic)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115030529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：