Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:34:45.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TAXATION OF A GMWB VARIABLE ANNUITY IN A STOCHASTIC INTEREST RATE MODEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2020

Andrea Molent
Andrea Molent*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy E-Mail: andrea.molent@uniud.it
*
E-Mail: andrea.molent@uniud.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Modeling taxation of Variable Annuities has been frequently neglected, but accounting for it can significantly improve the explanation of the withdrawal dynamics and lead to a better modeling of the financial cost of these insurance products. The importance of including a model for taxation has first been observed by Moenig and Bauer (2016) while considering a Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB) Variable Annuity. In particular, they consider the simple Black–Scholes dynamics to describe the underlying security. Nevertheless, GMWB are long-term products, and thus accounting for stochastic interest rate has relevant effects on both the financial evaluation and the policyholder behavior, as observed by Goudenège et al. (2018). In this paper, we investigate the outcomes of these two elements together on GMWB evaluation. To this aim, we develop a numerical framework which allows one to efficiently compute the fair value of a policy. Numerical results show that accounting for both taxation and stochastic interest rate has a determinant impact on the withdrawal strategy and on the cost of GMWB contracts. In addition, it can explain why these products are so popular with people looking for a protected form of investment for retirement.

Keywords

Variable Annuitiestaxationstochastic interest rateoptimal withdrawaltree methodG2G22G12G13C6
Type
Research Article
Information
ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the IAA , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 1001 - 1035
Copyright
© 2020 by Astin Bulletin. All rights reserved

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

Bacinello, A.R. and Zoccolan, I. (2019) Variable annuities with a threshold fee: Valuation, numerical implementation and comparative static analysis. Decisions in Economics and Finance, 42(1), 21–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, C. and Kwak, M. (2016) Semi-static hedging of variable annuities. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 67, 173–186.Google Scholar
Brigo, D. and Mercurio, F. (2007) Interest Rate Models-Theory and Practice: with Smile, Inflation and Credit. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Campbell, J.Y. (2006) Household finance. The Journal of Finance, 61(4), 1553–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costabile, M. (2017) A lattice-based model to evaluate variable annuities with guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits under a regime-switching model. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 2017(3), 231–244.Google Scholar
Costabile, M., Massabò, I. and Russo, E. (2020) Evaluating variable annuities with GMWB when exogenous factors influence the policy-holder’s withdrawals. The European Journal of Finance, 26(2–3), 238–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, T.-S., Yang, S.S. and Liu, L.-C. (2015) Pricing guaranteed minimum/lifetime withdrawal benefits with various provisions under investment, interest rate and mortality risks. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 64, 364–379.Google Scholar
Donnelly, R.F., Jaimungal, S. and Rubisov, D. (2014) Valuing guaranteed withdrawal benefits with stochastic interest rates and volatility. Quantitative Finance, 14(2), 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekvall, N. (1996) A lattice approach for pricing of multivariate contingent claims. European Journal of Operational Research, 91(2), 214–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsyth, P. and Vetzal, K. (2014) An optimal stochastic control framework for determining the cost of hedging of variable annuities. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 44, 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomes, A., Voiculescu, I., Jorge, J., Wyvill, B. and Galbraith, C. (2009) Implicit Curves and Surfaces: Mathematics, Data Structures and Algorithms. Springer-Verlag London: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goudenège, L., Molent, A. and Zanette, A. (2016) Pricing and hedging GLWB in the Heston and in the Black–Scholes with stochastic interest rate models. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 70, 38–57.Google Scholar
Goudenège, L., Molent, A. and Zanette, A. (2018) Pricing and hedging GMWB in the Heston and in the Black–Scholes with stochastic interest rate models. Computational Management Science, 16(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goudenège, L., Molent, A. and Zanette, A. (2019) Gaussian process regression for pricing variable annuities with stochastic volatility and interest rate. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.00369.Google Scholar
Gudkov, N., Ignatieva, K. and Ziveyi, J. (2019) Pricing of guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits in variable annuities under stochastic volatility, stochastic interest rates and stochastic mortality via the componentwise splitting method. Quantitative Finance, 19(3), 501–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haentjens, T. and In’t Hout, K.J. (2012) Alternating direction implicit finite difference schemes for the Heston–Hull–White partial differential equation. The Journal of Computational Finance, 16(1), 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, J. and White, A. (1994) Numerical procedures for implementing term structure models I: Single-factor models. Journal of Derivatives, 2(1), 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd, K.L. (1998) Numerical Methods in Economics. Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kling, A., Ruez, F. and Ruß, J. (2014) The impact of policyholder behavior on pricing, hedging, and hedge efficiency of withdrawal benefit guarantees in variable annuities. European Actuarial Journal, 4(2), 281–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, E.L. (2004) Elements of Large-Sample Theory. Springer-Verlag New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Lin, X.S., Wu, P. and Wang, X. (2016) Move-based hedging of variable annuities: A semi-analytic approach. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 71, 40–49.Google Scholar
MacKay, A., Augustyniak, M., Bernard, C. and Hardy, M.R. (2017) Risk management of policyholder behavior in equity-linked life insurance. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 84(2), 661–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moenig, T. (2012) Optimal policyholder behavior in personal savings products and its impact on valuation. Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia State University.Google Scholar
Moenig, T. and Bauer, D. (2016) Revisiting the risk-neutral approach to optimal policyholder behavior: A study of withdrawal guarantees in Variable Annuities. Review of Finance, 20(2), 759–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moenig, T. and Zhu, N. (2018) Lapse-and-reentry in Variable Annuities. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 85(4), 911–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, S. (2017) Taxation of insurance companies. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lfb/informational_papers. Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau.Google Scholar
Nelson, D.B. and Ramaswamy, K. (1990) Simple binomial processes as diffusion approximations in financial models. The Review of Financial Studies, 3(3), 393–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissim, D. (2010) Analysis and valuation of insurance companies. Center for Excellence in Accounting and Security Analysis, (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, J., Leung, K.S. and Kwok, Y.K. (2012) Pricing guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits under stochastic interest rates. Quantitative Finance, 12(6), 933–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piscopo, G. and Haberman, S. (2011) The valuation of guaranteed lifelong withdrawal benefit options in variable annuity contracts and the impact of mortality risk. North American Actuarial Journal, 15(1), 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, D. (2012) Convergence of Stochastic Processes. Springer-Verlag New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Ross, S. (1987) Arbitrage and martingales with taxation. Journal of Political Economy, 95(2), 371–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secure Retirement Institute (2019) U.S. individual annuity sales survey, third quarter. https://www.limra.com/globalassets/limra/newsroom/fact-tank/sales-data/2019/q4/4q-2019-annuity-sales-estimates-vfinal.pdf. Accessed: 01 Apr 2020.Google Scholar
Shevchenko, P.V. and Luo, X. (2017) Valuation of variable annuities with guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit under stochastic interest rate. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 76, 104–117.Google Scholar
Sibley, M. (2002) On the valuation of tax-advantaged retirement accounts. Financial Services Review, 11(3), 233.Google Scholar
Skipper, H.D. Jr. (2001) The taxation of life insurance policies in OECD countries: Implications for tax policy and planning. In Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Social, Security Administration. Actuarial Life Table. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6_2007.html.Google Scholar
Sun, J., Shevchenko, P.V. and Fung, M.C. (2018) The impact of management fees on the pricing of variable annuity guarantees. Risks, 6(3), 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Berg, I. (2000) Principles of Infinitesimal Stochastic and Financial Analysis. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar