IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jfrcpp/v15y2007i2p166-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mortality projections and unisex pricing of annuities in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Hudson

Abstract

Purpose - In the UK, there is a strong government commitment to the compulsory use of annuities to manage the “decumulation” of assets in defined contribution pension schemes. Almost all annuity rates are determined by reference to the gender of the individual involved. This has the implication that females receive a lower pension for a given size of pension fund. It is arguable that this situation represents a clear case of sex discrimination and moral, legal‐ and policy‐based arguments can be made for and against this view. The purpose of this paper is to review these arguments in the light of emerging evidence about longevity. Design/methodology/approach - The paper outlines the nature of the UK annuity market and the associated methods of annuity pricing, details the difficulties of predicting longevity and discusses the economic implications of a move to unisex annuity rates. Findings - A number of recent trends are weakening the financial and statistical arguments against introducing unisex annuity rates. The life expectancy of males and females is converging, the use of annuity pricing factors other than gender is increasingly common and it has become clear that there is great uncertainty in mortality projections. Practical implications - Statistical and financial arguments that gender should be a primary factor for costing annuities should be accorded less weight than in the past. Originality/value - The paper offers an evaluation of the merits of unisex annuity rates in the light of recent evidence about longevity.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Hudson, 2007. "Mortality projections and unisex pricing of annuities in the UK," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 15(2), pages 166-179, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:jfrcpp:v:15:y:2007:i:2:p:166-179
    DOI: 10.1108/13581980710744057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13581980710744057/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13581980710744057/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/13581980710744057?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mabbett, Deborah, 2015. "Polanyi in the European Single Market: The Re-Regulation of Insurance," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 17(1), pages 25-31.
    2. Deborah Mabbett, 2011. "A Rights Revolution in Europe? Regulatory and judicial approaches to nondiscrimination in insurance," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 38, European Institute, LSE.
    3. Deborah Mabbett, 2014. "Polanyi in Brussels or Luxembourg? Social rights and market regulation in European insurance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 186-202, June.
    4. Deborah Mabbett, 2011. "A Rights Revolution in Europe? Regulatory and judicial approaches to nondiscrimination in insurance," Europe in Question Discussion Paper Series of the London School of Economics (LEQs) 8, London School of Economics / European Institute.

    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:eme:jfrcpp:v:15:y:2007:i:2:p:166-179. 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: Emerald Support (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.