2006 general meeting assembl e g n rale 2006 chicago illinois
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 10

2006 General Meeting Assemblée générale 2006 Chicago, Illinois PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 59 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Canadian Institute of Actuaries. L’Institut canadien des actuaires. 2006 General Meeting Assemblée générale 2006 Chicago, Illinois. There are problems with the private pension system…. Pension coverage is decreasing Complex regulatory framework Lack of flexibility in pension rules

Download Presentation

2006 General Meeting Assemblée générale 2006 Chicago, Illinois

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


2006 general meeting assembl e g n rale 2006 chicago illinois

Canadian

Institute

of

Actuaries

L’Institut canadien

des

actuaires

2006 General Meeting

Assemblée générale 2006

Chicago, Illinois


There are problems with the private pension system

There are problems with the private pension system…..

  • Pension coverage is decreasing

    • Complex regulatory framework

    • Lack of flexibility in pension rules

    • Alternatives that avoid pension regulation

    • Employer perception that DB plans are too “risky”

    • Perceived value not sufficient to offset the exposure/pitfalls

  • Gradual process underway to move from DB to DC

    • Lack of symmetry

    • Lack of member understanding of value

    • Inappropriateness of traditional DB plan to today’s workforce

    • Cost uncertainty surrounding DB plans

    • Proposed changes in accounting rules

    • Process has advanced much more quickly in UK and US


Some interesting statistics

Some interesting statistics….

  • In private sector, RPPs are disappearing

    • Public sector plans (>10 members) have increased from 873 in 1992 to 1,064 in 2004(1)

    • Private sector plans (>10 members) have decreased from 9,756 to 8,352 over the same period(1)

  • For retiree with annual income of $30-40K(2):

    • 51% of earnings come from pension plans

    • 46% of earnings come from CPP/OAS

  • For retiree with annual income of $70-80K(2):

    • 71% of earnings come from pension plans

    • 24% of earnings come from CPP/OAS

  • Source: Statistics Canada

  • Source: Canada Revenue Agency (2004)


Pension design principles

Pension design principles

  • Retirement income system must contain three strong participants

  • Sharing of responsibilities is a key function in design

    • Employer historically focused on providing a reasonable pension

    • Increasingly, private sector employers are looking to employees to pick up a larger share of the responsibility (and risks)


Potential outcome of move to dc

Potential outcome of move to DC

  • Key elements that affect member’s ultimate pension

    • Age at which member begins contributing

    • Rate at which member contributes each year

    • Size of employer contribution or match

    • Investment strategy employed by member

    • Age at which member retires

    • Whether member buys annuity at retirement

    • Member’s longevity

  • Risks involved in each factor are borne by each individual member

  • Most evidence suggests that member’s are negatively affected by many of these risks


Potential outcome of move to dc1

Potential outcome of move to DC

  • Member contribution risks

    • Young members often delay contributing

    • During first half of career, often contribute well below maximum amount

    • Contributions above matching level subject to each individual’s personal decisions

    • Member may withdraw money

  • Retirement risks

    • Early/late retirement

    • Mortality risk

    • Inflation risk


2006 general meeting assembl e g n rale 2006 chicago illinois

Investment risks:

Difficulty understanding nuances of some options

Invest more conservatively (individual vs. collective risk)

Members tend not to adjust their asset mix over time

Members tend to buy/sell funds at wrong time

Members may not be fully aware of quality of investment performance

Plan sponsors may not replace poorly performing products

Members cannot obtain as much “fund” disclosure as plan sponsor

Investment advisors may have potential bias/conflict if a commission structure is used to pay them

Potential outcome of move to DC


2006 general meeting assembl e g n rale 2006 chicago illinois

Potential outcome of move to DC

  • Member allocations(1)

Fund Category

Minimum

Maximum

Average

Balanced/Lifestyle

26%

59%

36%

Equities:

-- Canada

11%

30%

21%

-- U.S.

0%

4%

2%

-- International

1%

4%

2%

-- Global

1%

6%

3%

-- Company

0%

11%

4%

-- Total

18%

52%

33%

Fixed Income:

-- Bonds

3%

13%

8%

-- Term Deposits

0%

33%

16%

-- Money Market

2%

15%

6%

-- Total

11%

47%

31%

(1)Based on information from 8 major Canadian record keepers as at December 31, 2004. Averages are weighted by number of members.


2006 general meeting assembl e g n rale 2006 chicago illinois

Potential outcome of move to DC

  • Based on Towers Perrin Benefits Data Bank

    • Employer contributions lower under DC than DB

      • Median employer contribution to DC is 5%

      • Median DB benefit is 1.45% FAE formula

    • Translates into difference in ultimate benefit

      • For career employee, DB provides double the benefit

      • For employee with three equal length careers, DB plan provides 50% more pension

    • Results are sensitive to:

      • Assumed rate of salary increase (4%)

      • Investment return assumption (7%)

      • Annuity purchase rate (5%)


Key messages

Key Messages

  • There are fundamental problems with the Canadian pension system

  • If the problems are not addressed, inevitable move to DC

    • Not in anyone’s interests

    • DB should remain as an option for employment pensions

  • Significant change is required

    • Collaboration from all stakeholders


  • Login