IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/2464.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The decumulation (payout) phase of defined contribution pillars - policy issues in the provision of annuities and other benefits

Author

Listed:
  • James, Estelle
  • Vittas, Dimitri

Abstract

Most countries reforming their pension system, focus more on the accumulation phase, than on the decumulation (pay-out), because the number of beneficiaries is likely to be small initially, especially if older workers are discouraged from joining the new system. Policymakers place a priority on the new accumulation system being administratively efficient, and well regulated. But the decumulation phase must also be well organized, and efficient. The purpose of pension systems is, after all, to pay retirement benefits - old age, survivor, and disability pensions. The authors argue that: 1) Pay-out arrangements are likely to evolve gradually, through trial and error, as problems are discovered and tackled. 2) Adverse selection may not be as great a problem as is sometimes thought. 3) Many other annuity, and insurance market problems have yet to be solved, and policies must be formulated to make these markets work as well. The under-development of voluntary annuity markets is only partly explained by adverse selection, argue the authors. Other factors are also at work: the bequest, and precautionary motives for saving; individuals'myopia and ignorance; mistrust of insurance companies; the"luxury good"nature of annuities; tax policies that favor lump sum withdrawals; and, last but not least, public policies (such as the offer of social security pensions and the encouragement of occupational pension plans) that tend to crowd out individual annuities. The long-term success of pension reform depends on vigorous efforts to develop the insurance industry. Weak and under-developed in most developing countries, the insurance industry should play a central role in providing old age, survivor, and disability benefits. Many policy issues require careful thought, and extensive empirical analysis: Should annuitization be mandatory, and at what level? Should indexed (or"real") annuities be required? Should variable annuities be permitted, or encouraged? Should joint annuities be required? How much"group rating"and"risk classification"should be permitted?

Suggested Citation

  • James, Estelle & Vittas, Dimitri, 2000. "The decumulation (payout) phase of defined contribution pillars - policy issues in the provision of annuities and other benefits," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2464, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:2464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/11/17/000094946_00110305370940/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernheim, B Douglas & Shleifer, Andrei & Summers, Lawrence H, 1986. "The Strategic Bequest Motive," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(3), pages 151-182, July.
    2. Zvi Bodie, 2001. "Financial Engineering and Social Security Reform," NBER Chapters, in: Risk Aspects of Investment-Based Social Security Reform, pages 291-320, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Vittas, Dimitri, 2002. "Policies to promote saving for retirement : a synthetic overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2801, The World Bank.

    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. Francisco Alvarez-Cuadrado & Ngo Van Long, 2012. "Envy and Inequality," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 114(3), pages 949-973, September.
    2. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    3. Jellal, Mohamed, 2009. "Family Institution and Filial Attention Contract," MPRA Paper 17713, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Arrondel, Luc & Masson, Andre, 2001. " Family Transfers Involving Three Generations," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(3), pages 415-443, September.
    5. Kee, Hiau Looi & Hoon, Hian Teck, 2005. "Trade, capital accumulation and structural unemployment: an empirical study of the Singapore economy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 125-152, June.
    6. Nikolov, Plamen & Adelman, Alan, 2019. "Do private household transfers to the elderly respond to public pension benefits? Evidence from rural China," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    7. Nataliya Kusa, 2018. "Should intra-familial time transfers be compensated financially?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201802, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    8. Elmendorf, Douglas W. & Gregory Mankiw, N., 1999. "Government debt," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 25, pages 1615-1669, Elsevier.
    9. Maristella Botticini & Aloysius Siow, 2003. "Why Dowries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1385-1398, September.
    10. Shinichi Nishiyama, 2000. "Bequests, Inter Vivos Transfers, and Wealth Distribution: Technical Paper 2000-8," Working Papers 13332, Congressional Budget Office.
    11. Olivera, Javier, 2017. "The division of inter-vivos parental transfers in Europe," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 41-51.
    12. Neil Bruce & Michael Waldman, 1990. "The Rotten-Kid Theorem Meets the Samaritan's Dilemma," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(1), pages 155-165.
    13. Douglas Holtz-Eakin & David Joulfaian & Harvey S. Rosen, 1993. "The Carnegie Conjecture: Some Empirical Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(2), pages 413-435.
    14. John B. Shoven & Scott B. Smart & Joel Waldfogel, 1992. "Real Interest Rates and the Savings and Loan Crisis: The Moral Hazard Premium," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 155-167, Winter.
    15. Elinder, Mikael & Erixson, Oscar & Waldenström, Daniel, 2018. "Inheritance and wealth inequality: Evidence from population registers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 17-30.
    16. James Poterba, 1997. "The Estate Tax and After-Tax Investment Returns," NBER Working Papers 6337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Gokhale, Jagadeesh & Kotlikoff, Laurence J. & Sefton, James & Weale, Martin, 2001. "Simulating the transmission of wealth inequality via bequests," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 93-128, January.
    18. Junya Hamaaki & Masahiro Hori & Keiko Murata, 2019. "The intra-family division of bequests and bequest motives: empirical evidence from a survey on Japanese households," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 309-346, January.
    19. Andres Victorio, 2002. "Non-market insurance and intrafamily transfers," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 99-102.
    20. Audrey Light & Kathleen McGarry, 2004. "Why Parents Play Favorites: Explanations for Unequal Bequests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1669-1681, December.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:2464. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    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.