IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jrinsu/v72y2005i2p321-352.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cash‐Balance Plan Conversions: Evidence on Excise Taxes and Implicit Contracts

Author

Listed:
  • Greg Niehaus
  • Tong Yu

Abstract

Firms that wish to switch from a traditional defined‐benefit pension plan to a defined‐contribution‐type plan have a choice between converting to a cash‐balance plan or replacing the defined‐benefit plan with a full‐fledged defined‐contribution plan. According to Ippolito and Thompson's (1999; Industrial Relations, 39: 228‐245) excise tax avoidance hypothesis, a number of firms have switched to cash‐balance plans because conversion allows the firm to avoid excise taxes on its excess pension assets. In contrast to existing studies, our evidence supports the excise tax avoidance hypothesis. Cash‐balance plan conversions also have been criticized for imposing pension losses on older employees. The implicit contract theory of pensions predicts that poorly performing firms would be the ones that would impose losses on employees. However, our evidence indicates that firms converting to cash‐balance plans typically are not poor performers.

Suggested Citation

  • Greg Niehaus & Tong Yu, 2005. "Cash‐Balance Plan Conversions: Evidence on Excise Taxes and Implicit Contracts," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 72(2), pages 321-352, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jrinsu:v:72:y:2005:i:2:p:321-352
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6975.2005.00125.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6975.2005.00125.x
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Phillip C. Copeland & Julia Lynn Coronado, 2003. "Cash balance pension plan conversions and the new economy," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2003-63, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), revised 2003.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kandice Kapinos, 2009. "On the Determinants of Defined Benefit Pension Plan Conversions," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 30(2), pages 149-167, June.
    2. Moshe A. Milevsky & Keke Song, 2010. "Do Markets Like Frozen Defined Benefit Pensions? An Event Study," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 77(4), pages 893-909, December.
    3. Kandice Kapinos, 2012. "Changes in Firm Pension Policy: Trends Away from Traditional Defined Benefit Plans," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 91-103, March.
    4. Cathy Beaudoin & Nandini Chandar & Edward M. Werner, 2010. "Are potential effects of SFAS 158 associated with firms' decisions to freeze their defined benefit pension plans?," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 9(4), pages 424-451, November.
    5. Broeders, Dirk & Chen, An, 2010. "Pension regulation and the market value of pension liabilities: A contingent claims analysis using Parisian options," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1201-1214, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Kandice Kapinos, 2011. "Changes in Firm Pension Policy: Trends Away from Traditional Defined Benefit Plans," Working Papers 11-36, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    8. Kandice Kapinos, 2009. "On the Determinants of Defined Benefit Pension Plan Conversions," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 149-167, June.
    9. 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.

    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:bla:jrinsu:v:72:y:2005:i:2:p:321-352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ariaaea.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.