Longevity Insurance Annuities in 401(K) Plans and Iras
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Longevity Insurance: Financial Product for the Ages by Andrew L
Longevity Insurance: Financial Product for the Ages By Andrew L. Gespass There has been a lot of buzz lately about a new financial product dubbed "longevity insurance." In its current form, longevity insurance is a deep-deferred annuity with a forfeiture provision. A typical example might be as follows: Mr. Smith, age 60, pays Old Grand-Dad Insurance Co. a single premium of $50,000. In return, Old Grand-Dad promises to pay Mr. Smith $4,000 a month for life beginning at age 85. If Mr. Smith fails to make it to age 85, the investment is lost. If he makes it to 100, Old Grand-Dad will have paid Mr. Smith $720,000. That's the concept in its purest form. Variations include a refund-of-premium feature and an option for increasing annuity payments, both of which add to the initial cost. The continued popularity of contribution plans and IRAs has allowed many investors to accumulate more retirement assets. But the declining confidence in the Social Security system, as well as the dwindling presence of old-style pensions and defined-benefit retirement plans, leave soon-to-be retirees less certain about their financial future. This, along with the increasing probability of living into advanced old age-a woman age 65 has a 44 percent chance of surviving to age 90 and a 23 percent chance of surviving to age 95-creates some well-founded anxiety among those planning for retirement that they will outlive their assets. Longevity insurance not only eases this anxiety by providing guaranteed income, it can also provide additional benefits when used as part of a larger financial strategy. -
Overview of Medicare for Financial Professionals
Medicare Nationwide is on your side White paper NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT INSTITUTE® Preparing clients for health care expenses Introduction Many people enter their later years unaware that health care costs in retirement can be burdensome. What’s more, the many Medicare options available to individuals who are about to turn 65 can be daunting. To provide valuable assistance, you don’t need to be an expert — but you do need to be prepared. This paper outlines the basics of Medicare, explains the enrollment process and discusses the Medicare surcharges your more affluent clients may face, as well as uncovered costs. As a financial professional, knowing the health care costs your clients Tim O'Mara could face in retirement may affect the strategies you devise for them. Understanding how Medicare fits into their long-term retirement income plan Vice President, Nationwide allows you to provide extra value. Retirement Institute® Tim O’Mara is dedicated to educating financial professionals, clients, plan sponsors and plan participants about the latest in retirement income trends. He implements practical and comprehensive retirement income solutions. Tim is a graduate of Mercyhurst University, where he majored in Business Management. He is FINRA Series 63, 66 and 7 licensed. His areas of focus include retirement income planning, Medicare, Social Security and long-term care. The looming costs of health care Many older clients may be under the impression that once they turn 65, Medicare will cover their health care costs. Unfortunately, that’s not entirely true. Medicare is not free, even if the client paid the Medicare payroll tax throughout their entire career. -
Not Another Government Program
to lower one’s lifestyle below a reasonable or desired Oh, No! Not level. From an institutional point of view, such as a pension plan or insurance company, longevity risk can be viewed as the risk that benefit claims on annuity Another products exceed what has been reserved on account of underestimating life expectancy, thus leading to Government negative financial consequences. A third take on longevity risk is from the societal point of view; that is Program the financial impact on all members of society being confronted with an aged population with insufficient financial resources. Supporting a high percentage of Mark Shemtob the elder population reduces funds available for other societal needs or desires. Longevity risk at the individual level can be mitigated through the use of risk pooling. Though solutions Should any of the readers of this essay believe I have been living under a rock for the last decade, let me exist, they are far from ideal (and often unattractive) assure them I am very aware of the current trend to for reasons including high cost and complexity. If, bash government programs. Such sentiment continues however, pricing came down and the solutions more to thrive regardless of the fact that any attempt to heavily utilized an increase in the longevity risk borne curtail Medicare or Social Security is a career-limiting by institutions that guarantee these benefits (pension move for politicians. With that as a back drop, I want to plans and insurance companies) increased utilization outline some very basic ideas regarding a potential new could follow. Should those institutions fail, the onus government program. -
Optimal Mandates and the Welfare Cost of Asymmetric Information: Evidence from the U.K
Econometrica, Vol. 78, No. 3 (May, 2010), 1031–1092 OPTIMAL MANDATES AND THE WELFARE COST OF ASYMMETRIC INFORMATION: EVIDENCE FROM THE U.K. ANNUITY MARKET BY LIRAN EINAV,AMY FINKELSTEIN, AND PAUL SCHRIMPF1 Much of the extensive empirical literature on insurance markets has focused on whether adverse selection can be detected. Once detected, however, there has been little attempt to quantify its welfare cost or to assess whether and what potential gov- ernment interventions may reduce these costs. To do so, we develop a model of annuity contract choice and estimate it using data from the U.K. annuity market. The model allows for private information about mortality risk as well as heterogeneity in prefer- ences over different contract options. We focus on the choice of length of guarantee among individuals who are required to buy annuities. The results suggest that asym- metric information along the guarantee margin reduces welfare relative to a first-best symmetric information benchmark by about £127 million per year or about 2 percent of annuitized wealth. We also find that by requiring that individuals choose the longest guarantee period allowed, mandates could achieve the first-best allocation. However, we estimate that other mandated guarantee lengths would have detrimental effects on welfare. Since determining the optimal mandate is empirically difficult, our findings suggest that achieving welfare gains through mandatory social insurance may be harder in practice than simple theory may suggest. KEYWORDS: Annuities, contract choice, adverse selection, structural estimation. 1. INTRODUCTION EVER SINCE THE SEMINAL WORKS of Akerlof (1970) and Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976), a rich theoretical literature has emphasized the negative wel- fare consequences of adverse selection in insurance markets and the potential for welfare-improving government intervention. -
Longevity Risk Quantification and Management: a Review of Relevant Literature
Longevity Risk Quantification and Management: A Review of Relevant Literature Thomas Crawford, FIA, FSA, MAAA Richard de Haan, FIA, FSA, MAAA Chad Runchey, FSA, MAAA Ernst & Young LLP November 2008 © 2008 Society of Actuaries I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................4 III. OBSERVED TRENDS AND OUTLOOK ON MORTALITY ...........................6 IV. DEVELOPMENT OF RETIREMENT MARKETS.........................................13 The retirement market in the US ............................................................................................... 13 Retirement markets in other geographies................................................................................. 15 External factors and the impact on product development......................................................... 17 V. WAYS IN WHICH INDIVIDUALS CAN MITIGATE LONGEVITY RISK ......20 VI. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTS WITH LONGEVITY RISK EXPOSURE .........23 Immediate annuities .................................................................................................................. 24 Enhanced and impaired life annuities ....................................................................................... 26 Deferred annuities..................................................................................................................... 26 Corporate pensions.................................................................................................................. -
The Challenge of Longevity Risk: Making Retirement Income Last A
The Challenge of Longevity Risk Making Retirement Income Last a Lifetime October 2015 Contents About our organisations ...................................................................................ii Overview ................................................................................................................1 Managing longevity risk ...................................................................................3 Five principles .......................................................................................................5 Appropriate defaults at decumulation ........................................................8 Guidance and advice ...................................................................................... 11 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 12 Appendix A: Overview of the Australian system .................................. 13 Social security ................................................................................................ 13 Private pension provision .......................................................................... 13 Taxation of private pension savings ...................................................... 14 Decumulation ................................................................................................ 14 Financial literacy, guidance, and advice ............................................... 15 Future of financial advice (FoFA) ............................................................ -
Longevity Insurance: Strengthening Social Security for Older Retirees, 46 J
UIC Law Review Volume 46 Issue 3 Article 6 2013 Longevity Insurance: Strengthening Social Security for Older Retirees, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 843 (2013) John A. Turner Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Elder Law Commons, Insurance Law Commons, Labor and Employment Law Commons, Retirement Security Law Commons, and the Social Welfare Law Commons Recommended Citation John A. Turner, Longevity Insurance: Strengthening Social Security for Older Retirees, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 843 (2013) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol46/iss3/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Do Not Delete 10/18/2013 4:31 PM LONGEVITY INSURANCE: STRENGTHENING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR OLDER RETIREES JOHN A. TURNER* I. INTRODUCTION Social Security provides a guaranteed lifetime benefit, but it is insufficient for most people to maintain their pre-retirement standard of living. Accordingly, most people need to supplement their Social Security benefits with other sources of income. While low-income retirees at age 62 often rely largely on Social Security, other retirees tend to have additional sources of retirement income. However, as people grow older, especially as they live past their life expectancies, they risk exhausting their non-Social Security sources of income. Individuals in their 80s and older who have low Social Security benefits face particular economic vulnerability. At that age, few of them are able to offset their low benefits by working. -
2016 Sidley Global Insurance Review
OFFICES BEIJING DALLAS LOS ANGELES SINGAPORE Suite 608, Tower C2 2001 Ross Avenue 555 West Fifth Street Level 31 Oriental Plaza Suite 3600 Los Angeles, California 90013 Six Battery Road No. 1 East Chang An Avenue Dallas, Texas 75201 +1 213 896 6000 Singapore 049909 Dong Cheng District +1 214 981 3300 +65 6230 3900 Beijing 100738, China NEW YORK +86 10 5905 5588 GENEVA 787 Seventh Avenue SYDNEY Rue du Pré-de-la-Bichette 1 New York, New York 10019 Level 10, 7 Macquarie Place BOSTON 1202 Geneva, Switzerland +1 212 839 5300 Sydney NSW 2000, Australia 60 State Street +41 22 308 00 00 +61 2 8214 2200 36th Floor PALO ALTO Boston, Massachusetts 02109 HONG KONG 1001 Page Mill Road TOKYO +1 617 223 0300 39/F, Two Int’l Finance Centre Building 1 Sidley Austin Nishikawa Central, Hong Kong Palo Alto, California 94304 Foreign Law Joint Enterprise BRUSSELS +852 2509 7888 +1 650 565 7000 Marunouchi Building 23F NEO Building 4-1, Marunouchi 2-chome Rue Montoyer 51 HOUSTON SAN FRANCISCO Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo 100-6323, Japan Montoyerstraat 1000 Louisiana Street 555 California Street +81 3 3218 5900 B-1000 Brussels, Belgium Suite 6000 Suite 2000 +32 2 504 6400 Houston, Texas 77002 San Francisco, California 94104 WASHINGTON, D.C. March 2016 +1 713 495 4500 +1 415 772 1200 CENTURY CITY 1501 K Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 1999 Avenue of the Stars LONDON SHANGHAI +1 202 736 8000 SIDLEY GLOBAL Los Angeles, California 90067 Woolgate Exchange Suite 2009 +1 310 595 9500 25 Basinghall Street 5 Corporate Avenue London, EC2V 5HA, United Kingdom 150 Hubin Road INSURANCE REVIEW CHICAGO +44 20 7360 3600 Shanghai 200021, China One South Dearborn +86 21 2322 9322 Chicago, Illinois 60603 +1 312 853 7000 sidley.com AMERICA • ASIA PACIFIC • EUROPE Attorney Advertising - For purposes of compliance with New York State Bar rules, our headquarters are Sidley Austin LLP, 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019, 212 839 5300; One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603, 312 853 7000; and 1501 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. -
Pension Risk Bulletin Readiness Paid Off in a Turbulent Year
Pension Risk Bulletin Readiness paid off in a turbulent year Volume 2 | Issue 1 | January 2021 Editorial Team Morneau Shepell publishes original content Marc Drolet, FCIA, FSA, CFA that provides insights for pension plan Principal, Asset & Risk Management sponsors and pension plan administrators 514 293-1571 on the topic of pension risk. [email protected] Our goal is to draw upon our research and our experience to advance the conversation Véronique Lauzière, FCIA, FSA on a spectrum of topics related to pension Principal, Asset & Risk Management risk management and transfer. 514 231-3352 [email protected] Benoît Labrosse, FSA, CERA Partner, Asset & Risk Management 514 641-4556 [email protected] Key points • Overall, the Canadian Group Annuity Market was resilient in 2020 • Buy-in group annuities are becoming more popular, reinforcing the notion that they can produce a superior net risk adjusted return than LDI strategies • Market dislocations offer pension risk transfer opportunities • Level of pension risk transfer activities is expected to be high for 2021 and beyond 2020: Anatomy of the group annuity market In the face of the public health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Canadian group annuity market, sponsors and insurers, has proven to be strong and resilient with an estimated volume of $4.5 billion, a figure not too far from 2019’s record-breaking year for Canada. Figure 1 – Canadian Pension Risk Transfer Market Evolution 5.5 $5.2B +13% 5.0 $4.6B ≈$4.5B $ Billions +25% 4.5 -13% 4.0 $3.7B +35% 2,630 3.5 1,759 1,700 3.0 $2.7B $2.5B $2.6B +6% 1,123 +11% +4% 2.5 $2.2B 2.0 1,120 694 1,194 733 1,070 1.5 1,474 2,269 1,280 717 659 1.0 871 1,342 595 332 178 693 0.5 1,020 580 705 379 935 457 435 0 180 356 47 260 108 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 The economic uncertainty and some regulatory restrictions introduced as a result of the crisis led to a volume of only $540M (12% of the 2020 volume) to be transacted during the first two quarters, which is a noticeable drop compared to prior years. -
Public Comment
Jason Berkowitz Director and Counsel Regulatory Affairs Filed Electronically April 27, 2010 Office of Regulations and Interpretations Employee Benefits Security Administration Room N-5655 U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210 Attn: Lifetime Income RFI Re: Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in Retirement Plans [RIN 1210-AB33] Ladies and Gentlemen: The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (NYSE: HIG) (“The Hartford”) appreciates the opportunity to comment in response to the request for information (“RFI”) by the Department of Labor (“DOL”) and the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) (collectively, the “Agencies”) regarding lifetime income options for participants and beneficiaries in retirement plans. We commend the Agencies for undertaking this effort to learn more about guaranteed lifetime income products, and for their willingness to consider possible rulemaking to facilitate their use. In this comment letter, we will provide our perspective on recent trends in retirement saving and planning, and on the various impediments to broader usage of guaranteed lifetime income products. We will also describe our recent efforts to address some of those impediments, and offer some recommendations as to what the Agencies can do to help. Founded in 1810, The Hartford is one of the largest investment and insurance companies based in the United States. A Fortune 100 Company, The Hartford is a leading provider of investment products – annuities, mutual funds, college savings plans – as well as life insurance, group and employee benefits, automobile and homeowners’ insurance, and business insurance. The Hartford serves millions of customers worldwide – including individuals, institutions, and businesses – through independent agents and brokers, financial institutions, and online services. -
6. the Valuation of Life Annuities ______
6. The Valuation of Life Annuities ____________________________________________________________ Origins of Life Annuities The origins of life annuities can be traced to ancient times. Socially determined rules of inheritance usually meant a sizable portion of the family estate would be left to a predetermined individual, often the first born son. Bequests such as usufructs, maintenances and life incomes were common methods of providing security to family members and others not directly entitled to inheritances. 1 One element of the Falcidian law of ancient Rome, effective from 40 BC, was that the rightful heir(s) to an estate was entitled to not less than one quarter of the property left by a testator, the so-called “Falcidian fourth’ (Bernoulli 1709, ch. 5). This created a judicial quandary requiring any other legacies to be valued and, if the total legacy value exceeded three quarters of the value of the total estate, these bequests had to be reduced proportionately. The Falcidian fourth created a legitimate valuation problem for jurists because many types of bequests did not have observable market values. Because there was not a developed market for life annuities, this was the case for bequests of life incomes. Some method was required to convert bequests of life incomes to a form that could be valued. In Roman law, this problem was solved by the jurist Ulpian (Domitianus Ulpianus, ?- 228) who devised a table for the conversion of life annuities to annuities certain, a security for which there was a known method of valuation. Ulpian's Conversion Table is given by Greenwood (1940) and Hald (1990, p.117): Age of annuitant in years 0-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40...49 50-54 55-59 60- Comparable Term to maturity of an annuity certain in years 30 28 25 22 20 19...10 9 7 5 The connection between age and the pricing of life annuities is a fundamental insight of Ulpian's table. -
What Makes a Better Annuity? Jason S
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarlyCommons@Penn University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Wharton Pension Research Council Working Wharton Pension Research Council Papers 5-1-2009 What Makes a Better Annuity? Jason S. Scott Financial Engines, Inc., [email protected] John G. Watson Financial Engines, Inc., [email protected] Wei-Yin Hu Financial Engines, Inc., [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/prc_papers Part of the Economics Commons Scott, Jason S.; Watson, John G.; and Hu, Wei-Yin, "What Makes a Better Annuity?" (2009). Wharton Pension Research Council Working Papers. 324. https://repository.upenn.edu/prc_papers/324 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/prc_papers/324 For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Makes a Better Annuity? Abstract The wide gulf between actual and predicted annuity demand has been well documented. However, a comparable gap exists between the current and ideal annuity market. In a world with costly and limited annuity products, we investigate what types of new annuity products could improve annuity market participation and increase individual welfare. We find that participation gains are most likely for new annuity products that focus on late-life payouts which offer a large price discount relative to their financial market analogues. For example, the marginal utility from the first dollar allocated to a late-life annuity can be several times that of an immediate annuity. Our welfare analysis indicates that an individual’s current assets suggest desirable new annuity products since annuities that lower the cost of the existing consumption plan necessarily improve welfare.