IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jpenef/v3y2004i03p271-295_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adopting cash balance pension plans: implications and issues

Author

Listed:
  • CLARK, ROBERT L.
  • SCHIEBER, SYLVESTER J.

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Clark, Robert L. & Schieber, Sylvester J., 2004. "Adopting cash balance pension plans: implications and issues," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 271-295, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:3:y:2004:i:03:p:271-295_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474747204001738/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mitchell, O.S. & Piggott, J., 2016. "Workplace-Linked Pensions for an Aging Demographic," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 865-904, Elsevier.
    2. Novy-Marx, Robert & Rauh, Joshua D., 2014. "Linking benefits to investment performance in US public pension systems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 47-61.
    3. Dirk Broeders & An Chen & David Rijsbergen, 2013. "Valuation of liabilities in hybrid pension plans," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(15), pages 1215-1229, August.
    4. Tang, Chun-Hua, 2018. "Subjective value of the guarantees embedded in public cash-balance pension plans," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 231-250, April.
    5. Robert Novy-Marx & Joshua D. Rauh, 2012. "Linking Benefits to Investment Performance in US Public Pension Systems," NBER Working Papers 18491, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:3:y:2004:i:03:p:271-295_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pef .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.