Getting More from Less in Defined Benefit Plans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Wallick ◽  
Daniel B. Berkowitz ◽  
Andrew S. Clarke ◽  
Kevin J. DiCiurcio ◽  
Kimberly A. Stockton
Keyword(s):  
Interest Rates ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Portfolio Risk ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Investment Returns ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Asset Class ◽  
Reduced Costs

As global interest rates hover near historic lows, defined benefit pension plan sponsors must grapple with the prospect of lower investment returns. We examine three levers that can enhance portfolio outcomes in a low-return world: increased contributions; reduced investment costs; and increased portfolio risk. We use portfolio simulations based on a stochastic asset class forecasting model to evaluate each lever according to two criteria: the magnitude of impact and the certainty that this impact will be realized. We show that increased contributions have the greatest and most certain impact. Reduced costs have a more modest, but equally certain impact. Increased risk can deliver a significant impact, but with the least certainty.

scholarly journals The missing link: economic exposure and pension plan risk

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 290-303
Author(s):  
Paul Sweeting ◽  
Alexandre Christie ◽  
Edward Gladwyn
Keyword(s):  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Asset Returns ◽  
Oil Price ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Financial Health ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Asset Class ◽  
Normal Shape ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe funding position of a defined benefit pension plan is often closely linked to the performance of the sponsoring company’s business. For example, a plan sponsor whose financial health is dependent on high oil prices may struggle during periods of oil price weakness. If the pension plan’s assets perform poorly at this time, the ability of the sponsor to address any funding requirement could be restricted precisely when the need for funding is heightened. In this paper, we propose an approach to dealing with joint plan and sponsor risk that can provide protection against extreme adverse events for the sponsor. In particular, adopt a strategy of minimising a portfolio’s expected losses in the event of an assumed drop of x% in the oil price. Our methodology relies on an asset allocation framework that takes into account the impact of serial correlation in asset returns, as well as the negative skewness and leptokurtosis resulting from the non-normal shape of marginal distributions of historical asset returns. We also make use of copulas to measure the dependence between asset class returns.

Expected Benefit Payments and Asset Allocation in Defined Benefit Plans Post-SFAS 132(R)

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-82
Author(s):  
Alan I. Blankley ◽  
Philip Keejae Hong ◽  
Kristin C. Roland
Keyword(s):  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Investment Decisions ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Benefit ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Pension Asset ◽  
Short Horizon ◽  
Reporting Environment

SYNOPSIS We contribute to the literature examining defined benefit pension plan asset allocation in the post-SFAS 132(R) reporting environment. SFAS 132(R) requires firms to disclose the expected annual pension benefit payments, thus providing a direct way to measure pension plan payout horizon. Controlling for previously documented determinants of pension asset allocation, we find evidence that a payout horizon measure constructed from SFAS 132(R) disclosures is associated with the firm's pension investment decisions. Specifically, we document that firms with a greater proportion of pension obligations due in the short horizon allocate a smaller portion of their plan assets to equity investments. Additionally, we provide evidence that our proposed measure explains asset allocation over and above previously used proxies representing plan horizon, confirming the usefulness of the 132(R) mandated disclosures.

scholarly journals Interest Rate in Pension Plan Premium Calculation

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
Khafsah Joebaedi ◽  
Kankan Parmikanti ◽  
Agus Supriatna ◽  
Fauzi Akhmad ◽  
Badrulfalah Badrulfalah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interest Rate ◽  
Interest Rates ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Life Annuity ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Rate Relationship ◽  
Premium Calculation ◽  
The Interest Rate ◽  
The Relationship

This research aims to analyze the relationship between the interest rate relationship is inversely proportional to the amount of the premium on the pension plan. The method used is to measure several variables, among others FSL (Future Service Liability), PVFSAL (Present Value Future Salary), PR (Pension Rate) and Premiums. Calculation, life annuity uses actuarial assumptions, one of which is the interest rate assumption, if the assumptions used are not in accordance with the actual conditions, then what happens is excessive payments or deficient payments. The interest rate has an influence in the process of calculating the defined benefit pension plan premium. Using the assumption of different interest rates (11%, 12 % and 13%), it is found that the interest rate relationship is inversely proportional to the amount of the premium. The results of this study are FSL, PVFSAL, PR and Premiums for the interest of 11%, 12% and 13% (participants aged 25 years) as follows 720,187.97; 554,000,24; 430,570.07 (FSL in Rupiah); 27,155,187.70; 24,922,770,59; 23,002,699.40 (PVFSAL in Rupiah); 2.6521; 2.2229; 1.8718 (PR in%) and 55,535.38; 46,546.85; 39,196.00 (Premiums in Rupiah)The higher the interest rate, the smaller the pension premium and vice versa.

The Potential for Inflating Earnings through the Expected Rate of Return on Defined Benefit Pension Plan Assets

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Adams ◽  
Mary Margaret Frank ◽  
Tod Perry
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Cumulative Effect ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Rate Of Return ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Operating Income ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Reported Earnings

SYNOPSIS Using a sample of firms over the period of 1991 through 2005, we examine the opportunity that exists for firms to inflate earnings through the expected rate of return (ERR) assumption associated with defined benefit pension plans. The evidence suggests that, on average, the ERR is not overstated relative to several benchmarks, including contemporaneous actual returns, historical cumulative actual returns, and expected future returns based on asset allocation within the pension. We also find that actual changes in the ERR are infrequent and typically have less than a 1 percent impact on annual operating income. We also estimate that a 0.5 percent change (50 bps) in the ERR will result in a cumulative effect on operating income over a five-year period of approximately 0.5 percent or less for the majority of firms. When we examine firms with the highest ERRs or with the greatest opportunity to inflate earnings, again, we find that the ERR is not overstated relative to several benchmarks. Although we do not observe pervasive inflating of reported income through the ERR during our sample period, we do find that for some firms, small increases in ERR can have a material impact on reported earnings. Our results provide evidence related to the pervasiveness, materiality, and impact of overstated earnings through the ERR, which helps regulators assess the costs and benefits of eliminating this discretion in financial reporting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document