IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bco/mbrqaa/v14y2020p61-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial Actuarial Assumptions: Empirical Study of How Brazilian Companies Manage Their Defined Benefit Plans

Author

Listed:
  • João Evangelista de Souza Neto

    (Fucape Business School, Brazil)

  • Fernando Caio Galdi

    (Fucape Business School, Brazil)

Abstract

This study investigates the factors that Brazilian companies use to manage their defined benefit plans, specifically the determinants of the three financial actuarial assumptions: discount rate, expected return on assets and compensation growth rate. The focus of this research is the companies listed on the B3 – Brazilian Stock Exchange - that recognized and disclosed, from 2010 to 2017, post-employment benefit characterized as Defined Benefit (DB). The sample containing 296 firm/year was divided into two subgroups considering the firm’s political connections. The results suggest that politically connected companies are less effective in managing the solvency of funds or, according to Kido, Petacchi and Weber (2012) act intentionally to justify the company's financial stress. The year before the elections proved to be the most relevant period of discretion, while the specific year of the electoral election only influences the determination of the actuarial financial premises in politically connected companies and, just like in Naughton, Petacchi and Weber (2015) the manager acts to improve the solvency (reduce the deficit) of the pension fund in these periods. The hypothesis that politically connected companies have an incremental adjustment in actuarial assumptions in electoral years has shown results consistent with the theory suggesting that this group of companies manages the reduction of the actuarial deficit in election times more incisively

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:bco:mbrqaa::v:14:y:2020:p:61-77
DOI: 10.32038/mbrq.2020.14.05
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://api.eurokd.com/Uploads/Article/420/mbrq.2020.14.05.pdf
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.32038/mbrq.2020.14.05?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

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:bco:mbrqaa::v:14:y:2020:p:61-77. 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.

We have no bibliographic 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.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sara Gunen (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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.