IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2005.00715.html

Closed-form Solutions for an Explicit Modern Ideal Tontine with Bequest Motive

Author

Listed:
  • John Dagpunar

Abstract

In this paper I extend the work of Bernhardt and Donnelly (2019) dealing with modern explicit tontines, as a way of providing income under a specified bequest motive, from a defined contribution pension pot. A key feature of the present paper is that it relaxes the assumption of fixed proportions invested in tontine and bequest accounts. In making the bequest proportion an additional control function I obtain, hitherto unavailable, closed-form solutions for the fractional consumption rate, wealth, bequest amount, and bequest proportion under a constant relative risk averse utility. I show that the optimal bequest proportion is the product of the optimum fractional consumption rate and an exponentiated bequest parameter. I show that under certain circumstances, such as a very high bequest motive, a life-cycle utility maximisation strategy will necessitate negative mortality credits analogous to a member paying life insurance premiums. Typical scenarios are explored using UK Office of National Statistics life tables.

Suggested Citation

  • John Dagpunar, 2020. "Closed-form Solutions for an Explicit Modern Ideal Tontine with Bequest Motive," Papers 2005.00715, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2005.00715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.00715
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhardt, Thomas & Donnelly, Catherine, 2019. "Modern tontine with bequest: Innovation in pooled annuity products," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 168-188.
    2. Richard, Scott F., 1975. "Optimal consumption, portfolio and life insurance rules for an uncertain lived individual in a continuous time model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 187-203, June.
    3. Merton, Robert C, 1969. "Lifetime Portfolio Selection under Uncertainty: The Continuous-Time Case," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 51(3), pages 247-257, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Thomas Bernhardt & Catherine Donnelly, 2019. "Modern tontine with bequest: innovation in pooled annuity products," Papers 1903.05990, arXiv.org.
    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. Thomas Bernhardt, 2025. "A note on bequest preferences in utility maximisation for modern tontines," Papers 2501.08972, arXiv.org.
    2. Bernhardt, Thomas, 2025. "A note on bequest preferences in utility maximisation for modern tontines," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Moshe A. Milevsky & Thomas S. Salisbury, 2025. "The Riccati tontine: how to satisfy regulators on average," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 50(1), pages 72-102, March.
    4. Lin He & Zongxia Liang & Sheng Wang, 2022. "Modern Tontine with Transaction Costs," Papers 2209.09709, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    5. Moshe A. Milevsky & Thomas S. Salisbury & Robyn Allen, 2025. "Equitable Longevity Risk Sharing or, the raison d'\^etre for a First Nations Pension Plan," Papers 2512.00122, arXiv.org.
    6. Ng, Tak Wa & Nguyen, Thai, 2025. "Individual survivor fund account: The impact of bequest motives on tontine participation," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    7. An Chen & Steven Vanduffel, 2025. "On the unfairness of actuarial fair annuities," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 48(2), pages 803-825, December.

    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. Dagpunar, John, 2021. "Closed-form solutions for an explicit modern ideal tontine with bequest motive," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 261-273.
    2. Lin He & Zongxia Liang & Sheng Wang, 2022. "Modern Tontine with Transaction Costs," Papers 2209.09709, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    3. Ng, Tak Wa & Nguyen, Thai, 2025. "Individual survivor fund account: The impact of bequest motives on tontine participation," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. An Chen & Thai Nguyen & Thorsten Sehner, 2022. "Unit-Linked Tontine: Utility-Based Design, Pricing and Performance," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-27, April.
    5. Moshe A. Milevsky & Thomas S. Salisbury & Robyn Allen, 2025. "Equitable Longevity Risk Sharing or, the raison d'\^etre for a First Nations Pension Plan," Papers 2512.00122, arXiv.org.
    6. Dhaene, Jan & Milevsky, Moshe A., 2024. "Egalitarian pooling and sharing of longevity risk a.k.a. can an administrator help skin the tontine cat?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 238-250.
    7. Chen, An & Guillen, Montserrat & Rach, Manuel, 2021. "Fees in tontines," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 89-106.
    8. Gerrard, Russell & Hiabu, Munir & Nielsen, Jens Perch & Vodička, Peter, 2020. "Long-term real dynamic investment planning," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 90-103.
    9. Fahrenwaldt, Matthias A. & Sun, Chaofan, 2020. "Expected utility approximation and portfolio optimisation," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 301-314.
    10. Chen, An & Hieber, Peter & Rach, Manuel, 2021. "Optimal retirement products under subjective mortality beliefs," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(PA), pages 55-69.
    11. Bégin, Jean-François & Sanders, Barbara, 2024. "Benefit volatility-targeting strategies in lifetime pension pools," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 72-94.
    12. Moshe A. Milevsky & Thomas S. Salisbury, 2025. "The Riccati tontine: how to satisfy regulators on average," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 50(1), pages 72-102, March.
    13. John Armstrong & Cristin Buescu & James Dalby & Rohan Hobbs, 2025. "Machine-learning a family of solutions to an optimal pension investment problem," Papers 2511.07045, arXiv.org.
    14. An Chen & Alexander Muermann & Casey Rothschild, 2025. "Tontines and their modern (re)discovery," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 50(1), pages 1-5, March.
    15. Chen, An & Müller, Alfred & Rach, Manuel, 2025. "The tontine puzzle," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Hieber, Peter & Lucas, Nathalie, 2020. "Life-Care Tontines," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2020026, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    17. Xie, Lin & Chen, Lv & Qian, Linyi & Li, Danping & Yang, Zhixin, 2023. "Optimal investment and consumption strategies for pooled annuity with partial information," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 129-155.
    18. Bernhardt, Thomas, 2025. "A note on bequest preferences in utility maximisation for modern tontines," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Pliska, Stanley R. & Ye, Jinchun, 2007. "Optimal life insurance purchase and consumption/investment under uncertain lifetime," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 1307-1319, May.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2005.00715. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.