scholarly journals A life-cycle analysis of defined benefit pension plans

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID McCARTHY
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Older Workers ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Retirement Policy ◽  
Risk Free Rate ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plans

This paper employs a lifecycle model from the consumption–savings literature to examine the tradeoffs between defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans. We examine the effects of varying risk aversion, varying initial income and financial wealth, and varying wage processes (that may be correlated with returns on the risky asset).Results indicate that wage-indexed claims are not an optimal vehicle for retirement policy if the decision to participate is made early in life, because individuals hold most of their wealth in their human capital and would not wish to increase their exposure to income shocks. Later in life, after most of a worker's human capital has been converted to financial assets, defined benefit pension plans help increase diversification by reducing exposure to financial market risk. The access that defined benefit plans provide to annuities markets and possible guaranteed rates of return over the risk-free rate increase the value of defined benefit plans to workers. The model also predicts that wage-indexed claims will be more valuable when equity markets provide low expected returns or are highly variable and when annuity markets are inefficient.The model illustrates two economic functions performed by defined benefit plans. Firstly, DB plans pool individual wage risks. This allows older workers to buy a wage-linked security that increases their exposure to wage risks. Secondly, they create a group annuities market that reduces the cost of adverse selection.

scholarly journals The Distribution of Investment Risk in Defined Benefit Pension Plans: A Reconsideration

2005 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-157
Author(s):  
Douglas E. Hyatt ◽  
James E. Pesando
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Pension Fund ◽  
Fund Performance ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Investment Risk ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plans

The "textbook " description is that members of defined benefit pension plans bear no investment risk, in sharp contrast to members of defined contribution plans. Yet formal or informal bargaining may focus on the size of required employer contributions to a defined benefit plan. If at least some of the costs of such employer contributions are shifted back to workers, then members of defined benefit plans do bear investment risk. We utilize three sources of empirical evidence (a survey of pension specialists, econometric analysis, and case studies) to support the proposition that employees do bear at least some of the investment risk associated with pension fund performance. Poor fund performance leads to larger employer contributions to maintain the defined benefit obligation and this in turn leads to lower levels of other forms of compensation. We conclude that riskshifting does occur, in at least some plans, and that the textbook distinction is overstated.

scholarly journals The impact of aggregate mortality risk on defined benefit pension plans

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 481-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
IRENA DUSHI ◽  
LEORA FRIEDBERG ◽  
TONY WEBB
Keyword(s):  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Benefit Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Carter Model ◽  
Male Workers ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plans

AbstractWe calculate the risk faced by defined benefit plan providers arising from uncertain aggregate mortality – the risk that the average participant will live longer than expected. First, comparing the widely cited Lee–Carter model to industry benchmarks that are commonly employed by plan providers, we show that these benchmarks appear to substantially underestimate longevity. The resultant understatement of liabilities may reach 12.2% for typical male participants in defined benefit plans and may reach 22.4% for male workers aged 22. Next, we consider consequences for plan liabilities if aggregate mortality declines unexpectedly faster than is predicted by a putatively unbiased projection. There is a 5% chance that liabilities of a terminated plan would be 3.1% to 5.3% higher than what is expected, depending on the mix of workers covered.

Overview of the Issue

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-98
Author(s):  
JEFFREY BROWN ◽  
STEVEN HABERMAN ◽  
MOSHE MILEVSKY ◽  
MIKE ORSZAG
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Older Workers ◽  
Life Cycle Analysis ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Benefit Design ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Younger Workers ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Pensions

This issue features three original research articles and an issues & policy article. The first article in the issue is by David McCarthy (Oxford University, UK). A Life Cycle Analysis of Defined Benefit Plans examines optimal benefit design within the context of a lifecycle model. The model finds that the structure of defined benefit plans is unlikely to be optimal for younger workers. The intuition is straightforward: defined benefit pensions depend heavily on the evolution of a worker's human capital and young workers are already heavily exposed to human capital risks. Older workers however may find wage indexed claims to be more valuable as most other human capital uncertainty has vanished.

Scrambling the Nest Egg: How Well Do Teachers Understand Their Pensions, and What Do They Think about Alternative Pension Structures?

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 558-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael DeArmond ◽  
Dan Goldhaber
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plans ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Retirement Savings ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Administrative Records ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Alternative Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Career Teachers

In this article we focus on two questions: How well do teachers understand their current pension plans, and what do they think about alternative plan structures? The data come from administrative records and a 2006 survey of teachers in Washington State. The results suggest that Washington's teachers are fairly knowledgeable about their pensions, although new entrants and mid-career teachers appear to be less knowledgeable than veterans. As for teachers' preferences for plan structure, the survey suggests that when it comes to investing additional retirement savings, a plurality of teachers favor defined contribution plans that offer more portability and choice but also more risk than traditional defined benefit plans. Again, perhaps unsurprisingly, the findings suggest that, all else equal, teachers newer to the profession are more likely than veterans to favor a defined contribution structure.

scholarly journals Life After Defined Benefit Plans

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin A. Goldberg ◽  
Robert E. Wnek ◽  
Michael J. Rolleri
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plan ◽  
Profit Sharing ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Cash Balance ◽  
Benefit Plan ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Recent Developments

Employers have moved from traditional pension plans to cash balance and other alternative defined benefit plans. However, it may be that the best approach lies beyond defined benefit plans completely. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) was enacted to protect workers. Its focus was on the defined benefit plan, which at that time meant a traditional pension plan that provided lifetime income to retired workers. Over the years traditional pension plans have declined in number, often due to their increasing costs. Many of these plans have been replaced by the 401(k) plan, a profit-sharing plan partly or wholly funded by employee contributions. There has also been a rise in hybrid plans, plans that have features of both defined benefit and defined contribution plans. Recent developments highlight the weaknesses in traditional pension plans. Replacing a traditional pension plan with a cash balance plan, a hybrid plan that qualifies as a defined benefit plan, does not fully address all the problems. It may be that there is limited advantage to the continued emphasis on defined benefit plans. Instead, defined contribution plans that contain some features of defined benefit plans may better address the current retirement-plan issues.

scholarly journals Cash Balance Pension Plans: Good News or Bad News?

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arundhati Rao ◽  
Leslee Higgins ◽  
Sandra Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Financial Incentive ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Bad News ◽  
Good News ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Net Income ◽  
Cash Balance ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Cash Balance Pension Plans

<span>Modification of defined benefit plans and conversion of defined contribution plans into Cash Balance Pension Plans (CBPs) has attracted a lot of attention recently.  A comparison of the three plans and an examination of 10 companies reveal a significant financial incentive in favor of CBPs.  The “good news” for a younger employee is level accrual of benefits and plan portability, and for stockholders, a smaller impact on net income.  CBPs bear “bad news” for older and/or less mobile employees and the stockholders when the plan assets perform poorly. </span>

Adopting cash balance pension plans: implications and issues

2004 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT L. CLARK ◽  
SYLVESTER J. SCHIEBER
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Contribution Rate ◽  
Cash Balance ◽  
The Past ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Lump Sum ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Cash Balance Pension Plans

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.

Optimal ALM strategies for defined benefit pension plans

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arun Muralidhar ◽  
Ronald van der Wouden
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plans
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document