We analyze how taxes affect the choice between a life-long annuity and a one-off lump sum payment, the so-called annuitization decision. Using administrative data from a large Swiss pension fund, we impute taxes for the lump sum and the life-long annuity option. We show that taxes can explain a significant part of the variation in annuity rates. Exploiting kinks in the tax schedule of the one-off lump sum, we further find evidence for tax optimization strategies. Our findings suggest that individuals react strongly to tax incentives when making retirement choices.

We field a large online survey to study preferences and hypothetical product choices for phased withdrawal accounts and compare their demand to the demand of annuities. We find that most individuals prefer phased withdrawal accounts with dynamic withdrawal rates and equity-based asset allocation. Additionally, when offered the opportunity to exchange the phased withdrawal account with an annuity, most individuals decline to annuitize. Our results suggest that policymakers should consider offering combined solutions of phased withdrawals and annuities. Retirees who are averse to full annuitization could preserve some of their accumulated wealth while also acquiring protection against longevity risk.

The low demand for immediate annuities at retirement has been a long-standing puzzle. We show that a hyperbolic discount model can explain this behaviour and results in the attractiveness of long-term deferred annuities. With a set of benchmark assumptions, we find that retirees would be willing to pay a much higher price than the actuarial fair price for annuities with longer deferred periods. Moreover, if governments were to introduce a pre-commitment device which requires pensioners to make annuitisation decisions around 10 years before retirement, the take up rate of annuities could become higher.

We report the effects of framing settings in annuity demand after conducting a survey-based experiment with members of a Dutch occupational pension plan. We gave participants the option to allocate up to 20% of their projected pension accrual to a lump sum. In particular, we investigated the joint effects of consumption and investment frames and gain and loss frames. We present strong evidence for framing effects in annuity demand. Framing effects remain significant when we control for individual characteristics. We also find robust evidence of individual characteristics influencing annuity demand, highlighting the importance of heterogeneity among participants, for example risk aversion, time preference and trust in the pension fund. Gender and long-term debt positions have significant impact how one responds to framing. We conclude that Dutch plan members generally welcome the partial lump sum option over mandatory full annuitization. The application of frames appears to predictively steer annuity demand. The precise effect framing may have, would probably also depend on the institutional environment, which predefines the perspective through which individuals filter annuities.

This paper addresses some of the problems a majority of retired individuals face: Why and in what proportion should they invest in a life annuity to maximize the utility of their future consumption or a bequest? The market considered in this work is made up of three assets: a life annuity, a risky asset and a cash account. As this problem doesn’t accept any suitable explicit solution, it is numerically solved by the Markov Chain approximation developed by Kushner and Dupuis. Without a bequest motive, we observe that the optimal planning of consumption is divided into two periods and that optimal asset allocation should include the risky asset. Next, the influence of a bequest on consumption and investment pattern is developed. We demonstrate that even with a bequest motive, pensioners should allocate a part of their wealth to the purchase of life annuities.