Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T09:55:42.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Redistribution in collective pension arrangements without a sponsor guarantee: Hidden versus explicit risk transactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2020

Lu Yi
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Barbara Sanders
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
Jean-François Bégin*
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. Email: jbegin@sfu.ca

Abstract

In collective pension arrangements without a sponsor guarantee, assets and liabilities are commingled, and members' benefits are adjusted to reflect emerging plan experience. Stakeholders pay attention to the fairness of the intergenerational transactions arising from the inclusion of certain design elements; however, implicit intergenerational transactions exist even in pure collective defined contribution (CDC) arrangements without any such explicit stabilization mechanisms. In this study, we find that the implicit risk transactions are uneven: significant value transfers among cohorts can result from joining a pure CDC plan. We then compare these to the additional value transfers arising from explicit stabilization mechanisms.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aitken, WH (1996) A Problem-Solving Approach to Pension Funding and Valuation. Winsted, CT, USA: ACTEX Publications.Google Scholar
Alberta Reg 154/2014 (2014) Employment pension plans regulations.Google Scholar
Allen, F and Gale, D (1997) Financial markets, intermediaries, and intertemporal smoothing. Journal of Political Economy 105, 523546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetsma, RM and Bovenberg, LA (2009) Pensions and intergenerational risk-sharing in general equilibrium. Economica 76, 364386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetsma, RM, Romp, WE and Vos, SJ (2012) Voluntary participation and intergenerational risk sharing in a funded pension system. European Economic Review 56, 13101324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bikker, JA (2017) Is there an optimal pension fund size? A scale-economy analysis of administrative costs. Journal of Risk and Insurance 84, 739769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bikker, JA and De Dreu, J (2009) Operating costs of pension funds: the impact of scale, governance, and plan design. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance 8, 6389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommestein, HJ, Kortleve, N, and Yermo, J (2009) Evaluating the design of private pension plans: Costs and benefits of risk-sharing. Working paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boes, M-J and Siegmann, A (2018) Intergenerational risk sharing under loss averse preferences. Journal of Banking & Finance 92, 269279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollerslev, T (1986) Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 31, 307327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovenberg, L, Koijen, R, Nijman, T and Teulings, C (2007) Saving and investing over the life cycle and the role of collective pension funds. De Economist 155, 347415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovenberg, AL, Mehlkopf, R and Nijman, T (2016) The promise of defined ambition plans: Lessons for the United States. In Mitchell, O and Shea, R (eds), Reimagining Pensions: The Next 40 Years. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, pp. 215246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broeders, D (2010) Valuation of contingent pension liabilities and guarantees under sponsor default risk. Journal of Risk and Insurance 77, 911934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CIA (2015a) Determination of best estimate discount rates for going concern funding valuations. Tech. rep., Canadian Institute of Actuaries (CIA).Google Scholar
CIA (2015b) Report of the task force on target benefit plans. Tech. rep., Canadian Institute of Actuaries (CIA).Google Scholar
Cui, J, De Jong, F and Ponds, E (2011) Intergenerational risk sharing within funded pension schemes. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance 10, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, I and Pomorski, L (2011) Is bigger better? Size and performance in pension plan management. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engle, RF and Granger, CW (1987) Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55, 251276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar, M, Rastegari, J and Stentoft, L (2019) Affine multivariate GARCH models. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Gollier, C (2008) Intergenerational risk-sharing and risk-taking of a pension fund. Journal of Public Economics 92, 14631485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, RH and Varian, HR (1988) Intergenerational risk sharing. Journal of Public Economics 37, 185202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, JR and Harvey, CR (2018) The equity risk premium in 2018. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heston, SL and Nandi, S (2000) A closed-form GARCH option valuation model. Review of Financial Studies 13, 585625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoevenaars, RP and Ponds, EH (2008) Valuation of intergenerational transfers in funded collective pension schemes. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 42, 578593.Google Scholar
Kocken, T (2006) Curious contracts (Ph.D. thesis), Vrije University Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kortleve, N (2013) The defined ambition pension plan: A Dutch interpretation. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lekniūtė, Z, Beetsma, R and Ponds, E (2016) A value-based assessment of alternative US state pension plans. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance 17, 141.Google Scholar
Lütkepohl, H (2005) New introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, C-MG (2018) Selecting discount rates for assessing funded status of target benefit plans. Tech. rep. Canadian Institute of Actuaries (CIA).Google Scholar
Munnell, AH and Sass, SA (2013) New Brunswick's new shared risk pension plan. Tech. rep., Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.Google Scholar
Ponds, EH (2003) Pension funds and value-based generational accounting. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance 2, 295325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, B (2016) Analysis of target benefit plan design options. Tech. rep., Society of Actuaries.Google Scholar
Sharpe, WF (1976) Corporate pension funding policy. Journal of Financial Economics 3, 183193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shiller, RJ (1999) Social security and institutions for intergenerational, intragenerational, and international risk-sharing. In Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S, Lu, Y and Sanders, B (2018) Optimal investment strategies and intergenerational risk sharing for target benefit pension plans. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 80, 114.Google Scholar
Weil, P (2008) Overlapping generations: the first jubilee. Journal of Economic Perspectives 22, 115134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesbroom, K and Reay, T (2005) Hybrid pension plans: UK and international experience. Tech. rep., Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Westerhout, E (2011) Intergenerational risk sharing in time-consistent funded pension schemes. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar