Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T00:50:57.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ANNUITIZATION BEHAVIOR: TAX INCENTIVES VS. PRODUCT DESIGN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2014

Alexander Kling ,
Andreas Richter  and
Jochen Ruß
Alexander Kling*
Affiliation:
Institut für Finanz- und Aktuarwissenschaften, Ulm, Germany phone: +49 731 20 644 242
Andreas Richter
Affiliation:
Professor, Chair in Risk & Insurance, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany phone: +49 89 2180 3755 E-Mail: [email protected]
Jochen Ruß
Affiliation:
Managing Partner, Institut für Finanz- und Aktuarwissenschaften, Ulm, Germany phone: +49 731 20 644 233 E-Mail: [email protected]
*
E-Mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We analyze and compare the impact of tax incentives and of introducing enhanced annuities on annuitization behavior considering heterogeneity among the insured. We find that tax incentives for annuitization result in a significant increase of the portion of people who should annuitize and also an increase of the insurer's profit since less healthy individuals also annuitize, i.e. adverse selection is reduced. However, the problem that different insured receive a different value for money is even increased by tax incentives. If enhanced annuities are introduced, the percentage of insured who should annuitize further increases. Adverse selection is further reduced and the differences in value for money from annuitizing shrink.

Keywords

Tax incentivesenhanced annuitiesoptimal annuitization
Type
Research Article
Information
ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the IAA , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 535 - 558
Copyright
Copyright © ASTIN Bulletin 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akerlof, George A. (1970) The market for ‘Lemons’: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. (1991) How strong are bequest motives? Evidence based on estimates of the demand for life insurance and annuities. Journal of Political Economy 99, 899–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, L. (2009) An unhealthy interest. Life & Pensions December 2009, 19–22.Google Scholar
Charupat, N. and Milevsky, M.A. (2001) Mortality swaps and tax arbitrage in the Canadian insurance and annuity market. The Journal of Risk and Insurance 68, 277–302.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, A. and Poterba, J. (2004) Adverse selection in insurance markets: Policyholder evidence from the UK annuity market. Journal of Political Economy 112, 183–208.Google Scholar
Gatzert, N., Hoermann, G. and Schmeiser, H. (2009) Optimal rate classification and underwriting risk for substandard annuities. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Versicherungswissenschaft 98 (5), 565–577.Google Scholar
Gong, G. and Webb, A. (2008) Mortality heterogeneity and the distributional consequences of mandatory annuitization. Journal of Risk and Insurance 75, 1055–1079.Google Scholar
Hoermann, G. and Ruß, J. (2008) Enhanced annuities, individual underwriting and adverse selection - A solution for the annuity puzzle? Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 43, 150–157.Google Scholar
James, E. and Song, X. (2001) Annuities Markets Around the World: Money's Worth and Risk Intermediation, working paper.Google Scholar
Kotlikoff, L. J. and Spivak, A. (1981) The family as an incomplete annuities market. Journal of Political Economy 89, 372–391.Google Scholar
Mitchell, O., Poterba, J. M., Warshawsky, M. J. and Brown, J. R. (1999) New evidence on the money's worth of individual annuities. American Economic Review 89, 1299–1318.Google Scholar
Richards, S. and Jones, G. (2004) Financial aspects of longevity risk, Working Paper presented to the Staple Inn Actuarial Society.Google Scholar
Richter, A. and Ruß, J. (2002) Tax arbitrage in the German insurance market. Blätter der DGVM, XXV (3), 659–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawczynski, M. (1999) Income uncertainty and the demand for annuities. Economic Letters 63, 91–96.Google Scholar
Vaupel, J., Manton, K. and Stallard, E. (1979) The impact of heterogeneity in individual frailty on the dynamics of mortality. Demography 16 (3), 439–454.Google Scholar
Weinert, T. (2006): Enhanced Annuities on the Move, in: Hannover Re's Perspectives - Current Topics of International Life Insurance, 13.Google Scholar