Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 848 items :

  • "defined contribution" x
Clear All

The Notional Defined Contribution Pension Scheme and the German ‘Point System’: A Comparison Vera Gurtovaya and Sergio Nistico University of Cassino and Southern Lazio Abstract. This paper examines the analytical properties of the German ‘points- based’ pension system. These properties are compared with those of a canonical Notional Defined Contribution (NDC) pension scheme. The paper identifies the circum- stances under which the German ‘points-based’ system would mimic a Swedish-type NDC scheme and verifies to what extent the German ‘points-based’ scheme

The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy Contributions Volume 12, Issue 1 2012 Article 23 Timing of Retirement Plan Contributions and Investment Returns: The Case of Defined Benefit versus Defined Contribution Tomas Dvorak∗ ∗Union College, dvorakt@union.edu Recommended Citation Tomas Dvorak (2012) “Timing of Retirement Plan Contributions and Investment Returns: The Case of Defined Benefit versus Defined Contribution,” The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy: Vol. 12: Iss. 1 (Contributions), Article 23. DOI: 10.1515/1935-1682.3110 Copyright c©2012 De

generational equity in sustainable unfunded pension systems, Journal of Public Economics 95 (1) (2011) 16–27. [5] M. Angrisani, A. Attias, S. Bianchi, Z. Varga, Sustainability of a pay-as-you-go pension system by dynamic immigration control, Applied Mathematics and Computation 219 (5) (2012) 2442–2452. [6] R. Holzmann, E. E. Palmer, et al., Pension reform: Issues and prospects for non-financial defined contribution (NDC) schemes, World Bank Publications, 2006. [7] R. Holzmann, E. Palmer, D. Robalino, Nonfinancial Defined Contribution Pension Schemes in a Changing Pension

of investment-based social security reform. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2000. [8] R. HOLZMANN, E. PALMER, and D. ROBALINO. Nonfinancial Defined Contribution Pension Schemes in a Changing Pension World: Volume 1 Progress, issues, and implementation , volume 1. World Bank Publications, 2012. [9] R. HOLZMANN, E. PALMER, and D. ROBALINO. Nonfinancial Defined Contribution Pension Schemes in a Changing Pension World: Volume 2 Gender, Politics, and Financial Stability , volume 2. World Bank Publications, 2012. [10] Human Mortality Database

taxes away from the current system and into PRAs. In exchange for the ability to participate in the personal accounts program, an individual would give up the right to some portion of the traditional Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) benefit, a feature that is commonly referred to as a “benefit offset.” An interesting and diffi- cult question is who would choose to participate in such a plan were it to be offered. 4 Who Chooses Defined Contribution Plans? Jeffrey R. Brown and Scott J. Weisbenner Jeffrey R. Brown is the William G. Karnes Professor of

Chapter 16 NAIVE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGIES IN DEFINED CONTRIBUTION SAVINGS PLANS Shlomo Benartzi and Richard H. Thaler There is a worldwide trend toward defined contribution saving plans in which investment decisions are made by the plan participants themselves (Employee Benefit Research Institute 1997). While the advantages of such plans are numerous (e.g., the plans tend to be fully funded and portable), many have expressed concern about the quality of the decisions being made by the participants (e.g., Mitchell and Zeldes 1996). One of the reasons for concern

5 Defined Benefit versus Defined Contribution Pension Plans: What are the Real Trade-offs? Zvi Bodie, Alan J. Marcus, and Robert C. Merton Although employer pension programs vary in design, they are usually classified into two broad types: defined contribution and defined ben- efit. These two categories are distinguished in the law under ERISA. Under a defined contribution (DC) plan each employee has an account into which the employer and, if it is a contributory plan, the employee make regular contributions. Benefit levels depend on the total contri

than the rate of return that can be earned in the market, either through low-risk bonds or through investment in equities. The programs’ long-term fiscal problems relate to a misalign- ment between these low but feasible rates of return and promised rates of return that may once have been feasible but no longer are so. The tradi- 2 Notional Defined Contribution Pension Systems in a Stochastic Context Design and Stability Alan J. Auerbach and Ronald Lee Alan J. Auerbach is the Robert D. Burch Professor of Economics and Law at the Univer- sity of California, Berkeley

) (2002) 3–36. [5] N. Barr, P. Diamond, Reforming pensions: Principles, analytical errors and policy directions, International Social Security Review 62 (2) (2009) 5–29. [6] OECD, Pensions at a Glance 2017: OECD and G20 Indicators, OECD Publishing, 2017. [7] P. Whiteford, E. Whitehouse, Pension challenges and pension reforms in OECD countries, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22 (1) (2006) 78–94. [8] R. Holzmann, E. Palmer, Pension reform: Issues and prospects for nonfinancial defined contribution (NDC) schemes, The World Bank, 2006. [9] M. Angrisani, G. Di Nella, C. Di

Abstract

The Czech Republic, as many other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, faced and is still facing a pension-reform challenge. The diversification of pension pillars led to the massive displacements of participant contributions from the public PAYG pension pillars to the newly constructed private, defined-contribution, fully-funded pillars. In the Czech Republic, the adoption of the relevant law was preceded by serious political conflict between supporters and opponents of this step (both among different political actors and among professionals). In an analysis of the conflict we critically apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework. We work mainly with the analysis of policy documents, public statements of the individual actors and an analysis of voting on the relevant law in both chambers of the Czech Parliament towards the identification of the crystallization process of two clear-cut coalitions between actors from both sides of the spectrum. The Advocacy Coalition Framework in exploring the dynamics of the public-policy process proved to be able to explain situations where there is sharp political conflict. Through the lens of the devil-shift of both camps (advocacy coalitions with different beliefs), each fell into extreme positions within the coalition to affirm the correctness of their arguments and positions.