scholarly journals The pensions dashboard: an actuarial perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Lowe ◽  
G. Bradley ◽  
A. Nicholson ◽  
R. Inglis ◽  
A. Balaam ◽  
...  

Abstract The pensions dashboard has been talked about across the industry for a long time. With the proposed implementation date of 2019 (although it has been questioned by some whether this is achievable or not), it is time to consider the actuarial aspects behind providing individuals with details of their pension benefits. This paper outlines the perspective of the IFoA’s Future Pensions Landscape working party. The paper considers the objectives of the dashboard and the functionality that may be required to deliver on those. It also highlights the difficulties of the necessary consistency between different types of benefits and the need for alignment with other pensions communications. Lastly, it considers what is needed to enhance the dashboard to enable members to understand what their benefits might look like at retirement and the opportunities the dashboard delivers for further modelling and financial planning. Objectives and functionality Much has been made about the difficulty (or otherwise) of delivering on the promise of a pensions dashboard, but ultimately that will depend on what it aims to provide for the individual. The working party has considered the short and longer-term opportunities with a dashboard and what functionality these may require. It is clear that a balance between functionality and deliverability must be struck to ensure that something meaningful is delivered within a reasonable timeframe (2). Different types of benefits The working party has considered the features of occupational and personal pensions, defined benefit (DB) schemes (5.21), defined contribution (DC) schemes (5.25) and the state pension (3). We believe that it is essential to deliver key information around each of them in a way that is consistent but takes account of the differences between them, including the need to: use scheme/benefit-specific pension commencement dates (4); display accrued and prospective benefits at retirement in real terms (5.6, 5.20); display dependants’ benefits when a part of the scheme rules (5.12); display details of benefits in payment or already in drawdown (5.4); ensure that deferred DBs are revalued to a recent date (5.22); be clear about the level of pension increases payable using inflation linking as a default (5.17); and outline any options on a benefit such as tax-free pension commencement lump sum (5.8). Having included the above, the dashboard must then consider how to allow for consistency of projection of benefits to the scheme/benefit-specific pension commencement dates. For DBs, this can be achieved relatively easily in real terms by allowing merely for future accrual based on the current position and benefit structure. For DC benefits, this needs a standardised approach. After consideration of multiple options (5.25), we have recommended a simplified projection approach using a risk-based allowance for real investment growth depending on the assets held (or a risk categorisation) (5.50). This would enable the dashboard to carry out consistent projections across DC pots. In an ideal world, we recommend that benefit statements use projections aligned to this approach, too. In order to build confidence in any dashboard (and in pensions in general), consistency between benefit statements and scheme provision of information is key (8). This includes the need for dates and speed of information provision, the type of information provided and assumptions and projection approaches to be standardised. We have also considered other hybrid benefit structures that exist. Many or all of these can revert to using the approach outlined for DB, DC, or a combination of the two along with the expertise of a provider to achieve the aims of consistent dashboard provision (6). We have also tried to allow for some of the legacy or complex issues within the UK pensions landscape that we consider relevant to the provision of a usable dashboard, such as the need to include Guaranteed Annuity Rates, and the need to explain the various risks and uncertainties with both DB and DC provision (7). Future opportunities for supporting financial planning The working party has considered the longer-term opportunities to use the dashboard to assist individuals with planning for their retirement. We recommend that the dashboard infrastructure be set up with this in mind from the beginning, even if the deployment of this type of support is a long way away (9) or even provided through third parties (10). The working party looks forward to the Department for Work and Pensions feasibility study on the dashboard (which is due for publication) and welcomes the chance to influence the shape of what has the potential to be a huge engagement opportunity for the pensions industry.

Author(s):  
Áine Ní Léime ◽  
Wendy Loretto

This chapter documents international policy developments and provides a gender critique of retirement, employment and pension policies in Australia, Ireland, Germany, Portugal, Sweden, the UK, and the US. It assesses the degree to which the individual country's extended working life policies have adopted the agenda (increasing pension age and introducing flexible working) set out by the OECD and the EU. Policies include raising state pension age, changes in the duration of pension contribution requirements, the move from defined benefits to defined contribution pensions, policies on caring for vulnerable members of the population, policies enabling flexible working and anti-age discrimination measures. An expanded framework is used to assess the degree to which gender and other intersecting issues such as health, caring, class, type of occupation and/or membership of minority communities have (or have not) been taken into account in designing and implementing policies extending working life.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgenia Gorina ◽  
Trang Hoang

Abstract Over the past decade, many states have reformed their retirement systems by reducing benefit generosity, tightening retirement provisions, introducing non-defined-benefit (DB) plan options and even replacing DB plans with defined-contribution plans. Many of these reforms have affected post-employment benefits that public workers will receive when they retire. Have these reforms also affected the attractiveness of public sector employment? To answer this question, we use state-level data from 2002 to 2015 and examine the relationship between state pension reforms and public employee turnover following the reforms. We find that employee responsiveness to the reforms was tangible and that it differed by reform type and worker education. These results are important because the design of public retirement benefits will continue to influence the ability of the public sector to recruit and retain high-quality workforce.


2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 624-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Eason ◽  
P. Barker ◽  
G. Foroughi ◽  
J. Harsant ◽  
D. Hunter ◽  
...  

AbstractThe UK has seen a significant transition from Defined Benefit (“DB”) to Defined Contribution (“DC”) for occupational pension saving. The planned automatic enrolment program starting in 2012 is expected to increase the use of DC. The main features of DC are that investment risk falls onto the individual during the pre-retirement phase and that there are no guarantees as to investment returns or the level of pension. In July 2012, Steve Webb, the Pensions Minister, challenged industry to think hard about meeting the need for more certainty about pension savings in DC plans and to consider providing an affordable ‘Money Safe’ guarantee where the member would get back at least the nominal value of their contributions (individual, employer and tax relief). This paper explores whether this is viable for the mass market.


2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 547-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.M.C. Meredith ◽  
N.P. Horsfall ◽  
J.M. Harrison ◽  
K. Kneller ◽  
J.M. Knight ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTThis Working Party has considered the pensions implications of a prolonged period of low inflation. Experience in the United States of America suggests weaker correlation between equity and bond returns and greater overall volatility of returns. Without a further significant increase in the valuation of equities relative to their underlying economic activity, the cost of pensions will rise, possibly as much as doubling within the next 15 years. It follows that for defined contribution schemes and personal pensions, current contribution levels are likely to produce disappointing and generally inadequate results. Similarly, the costs of defined benefit promises will increase. Future defined benefit provision is also vulnerable to the mismatch of mainly equity assets with mainly fixed liabilities and is therefore difficult to control. Many practical issues of scheme design still reflect past inflation and need to be addressed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 100 (548) ◽  
pp. 193-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Stubbs ◽  
Jacob Adetunji

Since April 2015 there has been no legal requirement in the UK to purchase an annuity with pension savings [1] while for those who reach state pension age on or after 6th April 2016 the UK Government changed the state pension deferral arrangements [2]. The latter refers to an arrangement whereby a pensioner can receive an enhanced state pension by deferring its uptake for an arbitrary number of years. These two changes raise certain questions for prospective pensioners which are worthy of some mathematical consideration.An annuity is a guaranteed income for life in exchange for a certain sum of money: the pension pot. An alternative to the annuity since April 2015 is a ‘draw down scheme’ in which the pension pot can be used almost like an ordinary bank account and money periodically withdrawn. These two choices arise from ‘defined contribution’ pension arrangements. By contrast ‘defined benefit’ work-based (company) pensions allow no such choice and are not considered further here apart from the special case of the UK state pension. With an annuity a further option to consider, and one which predates the 2015 changes, is whether to take payments that are fixed or index-linked to inflation. Only the UK state pension offers a late retirement enhanced pension if its uptake is deferred.


Author(s):  
Swarn Chatterjee

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">This study examines the retirement plan participation and savings for United States government employees using the Panel Study of Income Dynamics data set. The findings of this study indicate that plan participation increases with age, income and educational attainment. More Government employees are enrolled in defined benefit plans than non Government employees. Also, those government employees who participate in defined contribution plans hold greater amounts within their plans and make greater contributions into their retirement plans than the non government employees. Minorities and employees with lower income are less likely to participate in the Individual Retirement Accounts, while those with higher educational attainment are more likely to participate. </span></span></p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-206
Author(s):  
L.-A. Morgan ◽  
S. A. Lothian

AbstractThe move from defined benefit to defined contribution (DC) has transferred the longevity and investment risks from the plan sponsor to the individual plan member. Without the actuarial cross-subsidies implied by pooling these risks, the danger of outliving one’s savings is significant. Much attention has been focussed on pre-retirement investment design but less on post-retirement. In most countries, the post-retirement systems in place are insufficient to solve this challenge for small asset sizes or small proportions of individuals’ retirement accounts. However, a number of DC markets are mature, such as Australia and Chile, and the principles of a solution that works for all must be identified. This paper researches a number of post-retirement systems around the world and identifies ten key factors that contribute to post-retirement solution design. These factors can result in an inconsistency between countries regarding the most appropriate post-retirement solution. Additionally, a disconnect is apparent between what retirees need and want in post-retirement. Successful post-retirement solutions will inevitably blend investment and insurance components in a balanced manner. With lengthening life expectancies, research supports strategies that blend a growth and income account-based approach for the first 15–20 years after retirement with longevity protection in later life.


2004 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT L. CLARK ◽  
SYLVESTER J. SCHIEBER

Over the past 15 to 20 years, many companies have converted their traditional defined benefit plans to cash balance or pension equity plans. In a cash balance plan, the worker's ‘account’ is based on an annual contribution rate for each year of employment, plus accumulating interest on annual contributions. A pension equity plan defines the benefit as a percentage of final average earnings for each year of service under the plan. Both types of plans specify the benefit as a lump sum payable at termination. In contrast, traditional defined benefit plans specify benefits in terms of an annuity payable at retirement. From the employees' perspective, cash balance and pension equity plans look somewhat like defined contribution plans. However, they are funded, administered, and regulated as defined benefit plans.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document