IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/dafaab/13-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reforming the Valuation and Funding of Pension Promises: Are Occupational Pension Plans Safer?

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Yermo

    (OECD)

Abstract

This paper assesses current regulatory and accounting developments in the OECD area against their purported goals. It specifically considers the different approaches to valuing pension liabilities and questions the possibility of convergence between funding and business accountants' valuation standards for pension liabilities. It concludes that the trend towards market-based valuation methods in business accounting is not entirely consistent with the parallel exercise undertaken by many pension regulators. Since valuation methods for funding purposes are likely to continue moving towards a market-based model, policymakers should be all the more cautious in setting funding regulations so as to provide sufficient flexibility to pension funds in covering funding deficits while providing incentives to establish funding buffers in good economic times. We also argue that accounting rules and regulatory changes are driving plan design in some OECD countries such as Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom and can lead to procyclical investment behaviour by pension funds. Réformer l'estimation et le financement des promesses sur les retraites : les plans de retraite professionnels sont-ils plus sûrs ? L‘auteur évalue dans ce document les évolutions actuelles des dispositions réglementaires et comptables dans la zone OCDE au regard de leurs objectifs supposés. Il examine plus précisément les différentes méthodes d'évaluation des engagements au titre des retraites, et s'interroge sur la possibilité d'une convergence entre les méthodes d'évaluation de ces engagements utilisées aux fins de financement, d'une part, et celles employées par les comptables d'entreprises, d'autre part. L'auteur parvient à la conclusion que l'évolution de la comptabilité d'entreprise vers des méthodes d'évaluation fondées sur les mécanismes de marché ne concorde par tout à fait avec l'exercice parallèle entrepris par de nombreuses instances de réglementation des retraites. Selon l'auteur, il est probable que les méthodes d'évaluation utilisées aux fins de financement continueront à évoluer vers un modèle fondé sur les mécanismes de marché. Compte tenu de cette tendance, les responsables de l'action publique devraient se montrer extrêmement prudents dans l'élaboration des règles de financement, de manière à laisser aux organismes de retraite des marges de manoeuvre suffisantes pour couvrir leurs déficits de financement, tout en les incitant à constituer des fonds de réserve en période de conjoncture économique favorable. Toujours selon l'auteur, les modifications des dispositions comptables et réglementaires influent sur la conception des plans de retraite dans certains pays de l'OCDE, comme le Japon, les Pays-Bas et le Royaume-Uni, et elles peuvent déboucher sur des comportements d'investissement procycliques de la part des organismes de retraite.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Yermo, 2007. "Reforming the Valuation and Funding of Pension Promises: Are Occupational Pension Plans Safer?," OECD Working Papers on Insurance and Private Pensions 13, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:dafaab:13-en
    DOI: 10.1787/078561284626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/078561284626
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/078561284626?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ian Tower & Gregorio Impavido, 2009. "How the Financial Crisis Affects Pensions and Insurance and Why the Impacts Matter," IMF Working Papers 2009/151, International Monetary Fund.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accounting; actuarial method; comptabilité; defined benefit; discount rate; fair value; funding rule; investissement; investment; juste valeur; méthode actuarielle; méthode d'évaluation; organisme de retraite; pension fund; prestation définie; règle de financement; taux d'actualisation; valuation method;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • J32 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Nonwage Labor Costs and Benefits; Retirement Plans; Private Pensions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oec:dafaab:13-en. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caoecfr.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.