Extensive research by demographers and economists has shown that longevity differs across socio-economic status (SES), with low-educated or low-income people living, on average, shorter lives than their better-endowed and wealthier peers. Therefore, a pension system with a unique retirement age is a priori problematic. The usual policy recommendation to address this problem is to differentiate the retirement age by SES. This paper explores the relative merits of partial de-annuitization of public pensions as a way of addressing the (imperfectly assessed) inequality of longevity.

A comparison of the performances of pension products that ignores long-term trends might significantly overestimate the long-term impact of volatility risks while underestimating the impact of persistent, low-frequency trends. This paper proposes a comparison making use of projection models based on the long-term risk–return tradeoff proposed by Campbell and Viceira (2005) to explicitly take into account slow-moving economic trends. In order to illustrate the approach and its implications, we discuss the capital protection provided by life-cycle target-date fund strategies and minimum guarantee strategies.

As the heterogeneity in life expectancy by socioeconomic status increases, many pension systems imply a wealth transfer from short- to long-lived individuals. Various pension reforms aim to reduce inequalities that are caused by ex-ante differences in life expectancy. However, these pension reforms may induce redistribution effects. We introduce a dynamic general equilibrium-overlapping generations model with heterogeneous individuals that differ in their education, labor supply, lifetime income, and life expectancy. Within this framework we study six different pension reforms that foster the sustainability of the pension system and aim to account for heterogeneous life expectancy. Our results highlight that pension reforms have to be evaluated at various dimensions. Reforms that may increase the sustainability of the pension system are not necessarily conducive to reduce the redistributive wealth transfers from short- to long-lived individuals. Our paper emphasizes the need for studying pension reforms in models with behavioral feedback and heterogeneous socioeconomic groups.

We study the impact of changing the existing terminology to describe the rules governing Social Security retirement benefits. We provided respondents from a nationally representative online panel with information pertinent to the decision of when to claim Social Security retirement benefits. The content of the information treatments was identical for all respondents, but some were randomly given an alternative set of terms to refer to the key claiming ages (the experimental treatment group), while others were given the current terms (the control group). Despite the minimal nature of the change, there were significant differences in outcomes. Those in the treatment group spent less time reading the information, but their understanding of the Social Security program improved more than the control group. In addition, the treatment delayed retirement claiming intentions by an average of about two and a half months and increased the recommended claiming age to vignette characters by a similar magnitude. The effects were particularly strong for those with low levels of financial literacy. The relative gains in knowledge persisted several months after the treatment.

The replacement rate (RR) is a quintessential property of pension systems. Yet, current measures of the RR are plagued with problems. We argue that the concept of RR should be based on the replacement of lifetime permanent income rather than pre-retirement income, and we show that the self-financeable RR with respect to the permanent income has the advantage of being independent of labor income (wages and density of contributions). We define an RR measure, called CRR, as the country-level RR of the permanent labor income that the working-age population could buy with their mandatory pension deposits if they stay constant over time. Pension deposits refer to national mandatory contributions plus the fraction of non-contributory pensions whose financing could be attributed to the working-age population, all as a percentage of the gross domestic product. The CRR is easy to compute and interpret, is nationally representative, and provides an international ranking because it is independent of pension rules, GDP, intertemporal and intergenerational redistributions, and sustainability. The application of the CRR to most OECD countries using the available data shows a 65% average across them, with several countries achieving a 100% RR, all mostly due to their high mandatory contributions as a percentage of GDP.

State and local employees comprise a significant proportion of the workforce and are largely covered by defined benefit pensions. Many of these retirement plans have been facing funding gaps, but legal restrictions often prevent them from reducing benefits for current employees. However, retirement plans can reduce liabilities by changing cost-of-living adjustments, or COLAs, which are commonly applied to benefits each year to allow retirees to maintain purchasing power in retirement. In this study, we examine the prevalence of COLAs in public sector retirement plans through original data collection for 49 plans in 30 states, which cover approximately 52% of public sector workers overall. Among these samples, on average 45% of workers each year experienced some change in COLAs between 2005 and 2018, with more than half of these workers experiencing negative changes. We consider stylized examples of public sector workers subject to reductions in COLAs to understand how COLAs may affect workers’ retirement decisions. Our analysis suggests that eliminating a 3% COLA could delay retirement of affected workers by approximately 4.5 months.