IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/insuma/v42y2008i3p1138-1145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The private value of public pensions

Author

Listed:
  • Petrichev, Konstantin
  • Thorp, Susan

Abstract

As individual retirement savings accounts replace public pensions and defined benefit schemes, more retirees will decumulate using commercial income streams rather than public or corporate annuities. Here we use an approximation to the retirement income problem [Huang, H., Milevsky, M.A., Wang, J., 2004. Ruined moments in your life: How good are the approximations? Insurance: Math. Econom. 34, 421-447] to compute the cost of replicating a public real life annuity (the Australian Age Pension) using commercial decumulation products. We treat the public pension as a phased withdrawal plan, matching insurance and payment features, and back out the stochastic present value of the plan under an arbitrarily small ruin probability. To reproduce the pension payment with 99% certainty, a male retiree needs 3.6 times the current average retirement savings account balance, and a female retiree needs more than 10 times the average female account balance. At 95% certainty, required wealth falls by around 25%. We measure separately the impact of gender, investment strategy, retirement age and management fees on this valuation.

Suggested Citation

  • Petrichev, Konstantin & Thorp, Susan, 2008. "The private value of public pensions," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 1138-1145, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:42:y:2008:i:3:p:1138-1145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-6687(08)00022-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, H. & Milevsky, M. A. & Wang, J., 2004. "Ruined moments in your life: how good are the approximations?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 421-447, June.
    2. Hazel Bateman & Susan Thorp, 2008. "Choices and Constraints over Retirement Income Streams: Comparing Rules and Regulations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 84(s1), pages 17-31, September.
    3. repec:bla:ausecr:v:37:y:2004:i:4:p:402-416 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Pitacco, Ermanno, 2004. "Survival models in a dynamic context: a survey," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 279-298, October.
    5. Moshe Milevsky & Chris Robinson, 2000. "Self-Annuitization and Ruin in Retirement," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 112-124.
    6. Estelle James & Xue Song, 2001. "Annuities Markets Around the World: Money’s Worth and Risk Intermediation," CeRP Working Papers 16, Center for Research on Pensions and Welfare Policies, Turin (Italy).
    7. Milevsky,Moshe A., 2006. "The Calculus of Retirement Income," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521842587, October.
    8. Erhan Bayraktar & Virginia Young, 2007. "Correspondence between lifetime minimum wealth and utility of consumption," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 213-236, April.
    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. Milevsky, Moshe A., 2020. "Calibrating Gompertz in reverse: What is your longevity-risk-adjusted global age?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 147-161.
    2. Hardy Hulley & Rebecca Mckibbin & Andreas Pedersen & Susan Thorp, 2013. "Means-Tested Public Pensions, Portfolio Choice and Decumulation in Retirement," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 89(284), pages 31-51, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stamos, Michael Z., 2008. "Optimal consumption and portfolio choice for pooled annuity funds," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 56-68, August.
    2. Matheus R Grasselli & Sebastiano Silla, 2009. "A policyholder's utility indifference valuation model for the guaranteed annuity option," Papers 0908.3196, arXiv.org.
    3. Horneff, Vanya & Kaschützke, Barbara & Maurer, Raimond & Rogalla, Ralph, 2014. "Welfare implications of product choice regulation during the payout phase of funded pensions," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 272-296, July.
    4. Wolfram J. Horneff & Raimond Maurer & Olivia S. Mitchell & Ivica Dus, 2006. "Optimizing the Retirement Portfolio: Asset Allocation, Annuitization, and Risk Aversion," NBER Working Papers 12392, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Van Weert, Koen & Dhaene, Jan & Goovaerts, Marc, 2010. "Optimal portfolio selection for general provisioning and terminal wealth problems," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 90-97, August.
    6. H. Huang & M. A. Milevsky & T. S. Salisbury, 2014. "Valuation and Hedging of the Ruin-Contingent Life Annuity (RCLA)," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 81(2), pages 367-395, June.
    7. Erhan Bayraktar & Asaf Cohen, 2015. "Risk Sensitive Control of the Lifetime Ruin Problem," Papers 1503.05769, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2016.
    8. Erhan Bayraktar & Virginia Young, 2011. "Proving regularity of the minimal probability of ruin via a game of stopping and control," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 785-818, December.
    9. Erhan Bayraktar & Yuchong Zhang, 2014. "Minimizing the Probability of Lifetime Ruin Under Ambiguity Aversion," Papers 1402.1809, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2014.
    10. Sutcliffe, Charles, 2015. "Trading death: The implications of annuity replication for the annuity puzzle, arbitrage, speculation and portfolios," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 163-174.
    11. Horneff, Wolfram J. & Maurer, Raimond H. & Mitchell, Olivia S. & Dus, Ivica, 2008. "Following the rules: Integrating asset allocation and annuitization in retirement portfolios," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 396-408, February.
    12. Hári, Norbert & De Waegenaere, Anja & Melenberg, Bertrand & Nijman, Theo E., 2008. "Longevity risk in portfolios of pension annuities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 505-519, April.
    13. Gong, Guan & Webb, Anthony, 2010. "Evaluating the Advanced Life Deferred Annuity -- An annuity people might actually buy," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 210-221, February.
    14. Butler, Monika & Teppa, Federica, 2005. "Should You Take a Lump-Sum or Annuitize? Results from Swiss Pension Funds," CEPR Discussion Papers 5316, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Di Giacinto, Marina & Federico, Salvatore & Gozzi, Fausto & Vigna, Elena, 2014. "Income drawdown option with minimum guarantee," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(3), pages 610-624.
    16. Gao, Huan & Mamon, Rogemar & Liu, Xiaoming & Tenyakov, Anton, 2015. "Mortality modelling with regime-switching for the valuation of a guaranteed annuity option," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 108-120.
    17. Cannon, Edmund & Tonks, Ian, 2016. "Cohort mortality risk or adverse selection in annuity markets?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 68-81.
    18. Huang, H. & Milevsky, M. A. & Wang, J., 2004. "Ruined moments in your life: how good are the approximations?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 421-447, June.
    19. Hainaut, Donatien, 2012. "Multidimensional Lee–Carter model with switching mortality processes," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 236-246.
    20. Young, Virginia R., 2017. "Purchasing casualty insurance to avoid lifetime ruin," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 133-142.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
    • J14 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of the Elderly; Economics of the Handicapped; Non-Labor Market Discrimination
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    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:eee:insuma:v:42:y:2008:i:3:p:1138-1145. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505554 .

    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.