Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T08:31:40.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE EXCEDENTS OF FUNDS WITH ASSETS AND LIABILITIES IN PRESENCE OF SOLVENCY AND RECOVERY REQUIREMENTS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2018

Benjamin Avanzi ,
Lars Frederik Brandt Henriksen  and
Bernard Wong
Benjamin Avanzi
Affiliation:
School of Risk and Actuarial Studies, UNSW Sydney Business School, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia Département de Mathématiques et de Statistique, Université de Montréal, Montréal QC H3T 1J4, Canada E-Mail: [email protected]
Lars Frederik Brandt Henriksen*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark
Bernard Wong
Affiliation:
School of Risk and Actuarial Studies, UNSW Sydney Business School, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia E-Mail: [email protected]
*
E-Mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We consider a profitable, risky setting with two separate, correlated asset and liability processes (first introduced by Gerber and Shiu, 2003). The company that is considered is allowed to distribute excess profits (traditionally referred to as dividends in the literature), but is regulated and is subject to particular regulatory (solvency) constraints. Because of the bivariate nature of the surplus formulation, such distributions of excess profits can take two alternative forms. These can originate from a reduction of assets (and hence a payment to owners), but also from an increase of liabilities (when these represent the wealth of owners, such as in pension funds). The latter is particularly relevant if distributions of assets do not make sense because of the context, such as in regulated pension funds where assets are locked until retirement. In this paper, we extend the model of Gerber and Shiu (2003) and consider recovery requirements for the distribution of excess funds. Such recovery requirements are an extension of the plain vanilla solvency constraints considered in Paulsen (2003), and require funds to reach a higher level of funding than the solvency level (if and after it is triggered) before excess funds can be distributed again. We obtain closed-form expressions for the expected present value of distributions (asset decrements or liability increments) when a distribution barrier is used.

Keywords

Dividendsfunding ratioregulationsolvencyrecovery requirementsC44G24G32G35
Type
Research Article
Information
ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the IAA , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , May 2018 , pp. 647 - 672
Copyright
Copyright © Astin Bulletin 2018 

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

Albrecher, H. and Thonhauser, S. (2009) Optimality results for dividend problems in insurance. RACSAM Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias; Serie A, Mathemáticas, 100 (2), 295–320.Google Scholar
Asmussen, S. and Albrecher, H. (2010) Ruin Probabilities, Advanced Series on Statistical Science and Applied Probability, 2nd Edition. Vol. 14. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Australian Actuaries Institute (31 May 2016) Cross-practice target capital working group: Information note: Target capital (life and GI). Tech. rep., Institute of Actuaries of Australia.Google Scholar
Avanzi, B. (2009) Strategies for dividend distribution: A review. North American Actuarial Journal, 13 (2), 217–251.Google Scholar
Avanzi, B., Henriksen, L.F.B. and Wong, B. (2017) Optimal dividends in an asset-liability surplus model under solvency considerations. UNSW Australia Business School Research Paper Series No 2017ACTL01.Google Scholar
Avanzi, B., Tu, V.W. and Wong, B. (2016) A note on realistic dividends in actuarial surplus models. Risks, 4 (4), 37.Google Scholar
Avanzi, B. and Wong, B. (2012) On a mean reverting dividend strategy with Brownian motion. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 51 (2), 229–238.Google Scholar
Bühlmann, H. (1970) Mathematical Methods in Risk Theory. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Chen, P. and Yang, H. (2010) Pension funding problem with regime-switching geometric brownian motion assets and liabilities. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, 26 (2), 125–141.Google Scholar
de Finetti, B. (1957) Su un'impostazione alternativa della teoria collettiva del rischio. Transactions of the XVth International Congress of Actuaries, 2, 433–443.Google Scholar
Decamps, M., Schepper, A.D. and Goovaerts, M. (2006) A path integral approach to asset-liability management. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 363 (2), 404–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decamps, M., Schepper, A.D. and Goovaerts, M. (2009) Spectral decomposition of optimal asset-liability management. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 33 (3), 710–724.Google Scholar
Gerber, H.U. (1972) Games of economic survival with discrete- and continuous-income processes. Operations Research, 20 (1), 37–45.Google Scholar
Gerber, H.U. (1974) The dilemma between dividends and safety and a generalization of the Lundberg–Cramér formulas. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 1974, 46–57.Google Scholar
Gerber, H.U. and Shiu, E.S.W. (2003) Geometric brownian motion models for assets and liabilities: From pension funding to optimal dividends. North American Actuarial Journal, 7 (3), 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, P. and Wagner, J. (2017) The impact of pension funding mechanisms on the stability and payoff from Swiss dc pension schemes: A sensitivity analysis. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, 42 (32), 423–452.Google Scholar
Paulsen, J. Oct. (2003) Optimal dividend payouts for diffusions with solvency constraints. Finance and Stochastics, 7 (4), 457–473.Google Scholar
Sethi, S.P. and Taksar, M.I. (2002) Optimal financing of a corporation subject to random returns. Mathematical Finance, 12 (2), 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar