The funding position of a defined benefit pension plan is often closely linked to the performance of the sponsoring company’s business. For example, a plan sponsor whose financial health is dependent on high oil prices may struggle during periods of oil price weakness. If the pension plan’s assets perform poorly at this time, the ability of the sponsor to address any funding requirement could be restricted precisely when the need for funding is heightened. In this paper, we propose an approach to dealing with joint plan and sponsor risk that can provide protection against extreme adverse events for the sponsor. In particular, adopt a strategy of minimising a portfolio’s expected losses in the event of an assumed drop of x% in the oil price. Our methodology relies on an asset allocation framework that takes into account the impact of serial correlation in asset returns, as well as the negative skewness and leptokurtosis resulting from the non-normal shape of marginal distributions of historical asset returns. We also make use of copulas to measure the dependence between asset class returns.

The statutory Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR) introduces fundamental change to the funding of pension schemes in the United Kingdom. While only a minority of schemes will actually be affected materially in terms of actual contributions or benefits, taken over a period of years, the influence of MFR will be much more widely felt. This is because the MFR is an absolute standard to be met, whereas long-term funding targets for ongoing schemes are, at least up to a point, optional and adjustable. The paper discusses the difference between MFR and long-term funding and suggests a variation on traditional actuarial methods to control explicitly the risk of MFR failure, based on a combination of traditional methods and the theories underlying asset/liability modelling. The paper also discusses the implications for pension expensing and communication of funding levels.

The theoretical basis for, and practical application of, the discounted income method for valuing UK pension fund assets is discussed, with particular reference to the widely adopted application to variable income (equity type) assets, as proposed by Day & McKelvey (1964), in the context of both the management and compliance objectives of pension fund valuation. An alternative methodology is proposed in which consistency with assets, liabilities, and market values is demanded, with smoothing of the valuation result achieved on an explicit rather than implicit basis. It is then demonstrated that the explicit smoothing parameter can be set so as to achieve the historic smoothness framework for establishing pension fund investment policy.

In conclusion the paper suggests greater emphasis on market-related methodologies for compliance valuations and leaves open the choice of methodology for management valuations and monitoring purposes, on the grounds that there is a large subjective element in any realistic basis. However, it is demonstrated that while smoother than unadjusted market-related methods, other aspects of the dynamics of the funding level under the method of Day & McKelvey can be perverse and it is suggested that this method should not be allowed to dictate investment decisions.

This paper takes an overview of the potential roles and responsibilities of pension scheme actuaries in the United Kingdom in relation to defined contribution (DC) schemes.

First it summarises briefly the background to UK retirement provision and in particular the move to DC arrangements. The paper then compares and contrasts the pension scheme actuary's current role in both defined benefit (DB) and DC schemes. This is then developed to consider what further statutory roles there may be for actuaries in DC schemes.

The paper challenges the profession to champion the public interest by seeking clarity and simplification, and finally considers the impact on actuarial employment.

The traditional approach to United Kingdom pension fund valuations is to use an off-market approach to valuing assets and liabilities. This approach has been called into question for a number of reasons, such as changes to the taxation of U.K. share dividends and a growing understanding and appreciation of the key principles of financial economics. This paper looks at the history of the traditional approach and focuses on the drivers for change. We compare the properties of various methods that take assets into the balance sheet at market value against the traditional valuation method. Our principal aim throughout has been to produce a paper that is practical and helpful to pension scheme actuaries.

Recent developments which affect the financing of occupational pension schemes in the U.K. arc reviewed. These point to the need for realistic bases, and an approach to finding a ‘best estimate’ is described. It is suggested that typical bases contain significant margins and the long-term dangers of using bases which contain margins are illustrated using a model fund. A review of funding methods suggests that the projected unit and entry age methods should be used for normal purposes in conjunction with a discounted income approach to the valuation of assets. Suggestions are made as to the degree of prudence appropriate for funding purposes.

EXD6: The purpose of this draft Guidance is to enable the actuary, in the interests of his client, to determine the appropriate method and assumptions for calculating pension costs, while recognising and interpreting, in the actuarial context, the requirements of SSAP 24.

EXD7: The purpose of the proposed Guidance results from a report from the Occupational Pensions Board: ‘Protecting Pensions: Safeguarding Benefits in a Changing Environment’. This recommended that bulk transfers of members without consent from one pension scheme to another should be permitted only if the actuary believes that certain conditions have been fulfilled to protect the interests of members and that in this context Professional Guidance should be given.

EXD8: This draft Guidance results from a request from the DSS to provide Professional Guidance in connection with the implementation of those provisions of the Social Security Act 1990 regarding the determination and application of the ‘valuation surplus’ to provide Limited Price Indexation for pensions in payment.

The authors discuss the investment of pension and other institutional funds. stressing a theme of investing to meet liabilities. Their aim is to stimulate debate by actuaries and the investment community, leading to the development of better approaches to pension fund investment and its monitoring.

The first part of the paper considers the matching of assets to liabilities, concentrating on a major principle applicable to actuarial valuations where assets and liabilities are mismatched.

The paper goes on to consider principles of institutional investment and includes discussions of the meaning and measurement of risk, the setting of investment objectives, decision-making, asset allocation and investment performance monitoring.