IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

(UBS Pensions series 034) Long-Term Care Insurance, Annuities and Asymmetric Information: The Case for Bundling Contracts


  • David C Webb



Within an asymmetric information set-up in which individuals differ in terms of their risk aversion and can choose whether or not to take preventative action, we illustrate in a unified framework the equilibrium possibilities with stand-alone long-term care insuranceand annuity contracts. With costs of administering insurance, so that insurance is unfair, we show the existence of an equilibrium in which the risk averse type, who take more preventative action, obtain more of both types of insurance, even though their probability of using long-tern care coverage is lower than the less risk averse. Hence, we show that the empirical observations of Finkelstein and Poterba (2004) and Finkelstein and McGarry (2003) are consistent with simultaneous separating equilibria in the two markets. A key finding of the paper is that as individuals who take care will be relatively low risk in the long-term care insurance market but high risk in the annuities market, with the opposite being the case for those who take less preventative action, an equilibrium exists in bundled contracts that Pareto dominates the outcome with stand-alone contracts.

Suggested Citation

  • David C Webb, 2006. "(UBS Pensions series 034) Long-Term Care Insurance, Annuities and Asymmetric Information: The Case for Bundling Contracts," FMG Discussion Papers dp530, Financial Markets Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:fmg:fmgdps:dp530

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Stein, Jeremy C, 1997. " Internal Capital Markets and the Competition for Corporate Resources," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 111-133, March.
    2. Kovenock, Dan & Phillips, Gordon M, 1997. "Capital Structure and Product Market Behavior: An Examination of Plant Exit and Investment Decisions," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(3), pages 767-803.
    3. Vojislav Maksimovic & Gordon Phillips, 2002. "Do Conglomerate Firms Allocate Resources Inefficiently Across Industries? Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(2), pages 721-767, April.
    4. Mary E. Deily, 1991. "Exit Strategies and Plant-Closing Decisions: The Case of Steel," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(2), pages 250-263, Summer.
    5. Comment, Robert & Jarrell, Gregg A., 1995. "Corporate focus and stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 67-87, January.
    6. Bolton, Patrick & Scharfstein, David S, 1990. "A Theory of Predation Based on Agency Problems in Financial Contracting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 93-106, March.
    7. Raghuram Rajan & Henri Servaes & Luigi Zingales, 2000. "The Cost of Diversity: The Diversification Discount and Inefficient Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 35-80, February.
    8. Steven M. Fazzari & R. Glenn Hubbard & Bruce C. Petersen, 1988. "Financing Constraints and Corporate Investment," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 19(1), pages 141-206.
    9. David S. Scharfstein & Jeremy C. Stein, 2000. "The Dark Side of Internal Capital Markets: Divisional Rent-Seeking and Inefficient Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(6), pages 2537-2564, December.
    10. Douglas W. Diamond, 1984. "Financial Intermediation and Delegated Monitoring," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 393-414.
    11. Roman Inderst & Holger M. Müller, 2003. "Internal versus External Financing: An Optimal Contracting Approach," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(3), pages 1033-1062, June.
    12. Naveen Khanna, 2001. "The Bright Side of Internal Capital Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1489-1528, August.
    13. Jean-Pierre Benoit, 1984. "Financially Constrained Entry in a Game with Incomplete Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 490-499, Winter.
    14. Fluck, Zsuzsanna & Lynch, Anthony W, 1999. "Why Do Firms Merge and Then Divest? A Theory of Financial Synergy," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(3), pages 319-346, July.
    15. Pankaj Ghemawat & Barry Nalebuff, 1990. "The Devolution of Declining Industries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 167-186.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:fmg:fmgdps:dp530. 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: (The FMG Administration). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.