Factors affecting corporate choices of postretirement benefits in the USA
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the determinants of US firms' postretirement benefits choices. Design/methodology/approach - The paper uses empirical methodology (univariate and multivariate) to test the research hypotheses. Findings - Industry norm, average employee age, financial structure, and firm size are significant factors in the determination of the proportion of compensation that is deferred. Industry norm, financial structure, and firm size are significant factors that determine the percentage of deferred compensation that is negotiated as defined benefits. Finally, industry norm, corporate tax rates, and cash flow help explain the percentage of defined benefits that are paid in the form of retiree health benefit plans. Research limitations/implications - Data requirements might bias the sample towards larger sized firms. Data availability limits the number of observations in 2000 and 2001. Practical implications - The trends in post-retirement benefits reported in this paper are important for policy makers. Originality/value - These findings have implications for the baby boomers. The trend to offer smaller proportion of compensation as deferred benefits reflects the increasing costs of deferral to the employers. This increases the employees' responsibilities to save on their own. This also would shift the retirees' dependence on the public pension system for their retirement income. The trend to favor defined-contribution plans instead of defined-benefit plans reflects the employers' attempts to diversify their risks of paying promised post-retirement benefits by transferring the risk to the employee. On the other hand, the popularity of defined-contribution pension plans also reflects the increased Government's incentives to encourage savings via 401-k plans and employee's willingness to manage their own pension portfolios.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 21 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=arj Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:arjpps:v:21:y:2008:i:2:p:123-146. 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: (Virginia Chapman)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.