This paper summarizes recent developments in Dutch occupational pensions of both the defined contribution and defined benefit (DB) types. A reform of DB schemes is discussed that introduces financial assets as individual entitlements. At the same time, the reformed schemes derive (dis)saving, financial risk management and insurance decisions from the explicit objective of adequate and stable lifelong retirement income. The proposed system also involves an insurance contract pooling longevity risks and possibly collective buffers that share systematic risks with future pension savers. The paper identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the Dutch contract design and draws lessons for other countries.

Using unique data about capital flows from the public social security institute ZUS (Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych) to private pension funds OFEs (Otwarte Fundusze Emerytalne) in Poland, we find that their impact, as a group of large institutional investors, on stock returns is statistically significant in short-term but no such effect exists in the long-run. This result is consistent with the temporary price pressure hypothesis of Ben-Rephael et al. (2011). We analyze the capital transfers, in the form of the aggregated pension contributions collected from all employees in the entire Polish economy, from the ZUS to the private pension funds, which further invest this capital on the stock market. The average time for the subsequent reaction of stock prices is found to be 4 days. The trading strategy based on this result generates superior outcomes in comparison with the passive strategy, which further confirms the price impact of capital inflows. Our findings are not only relevant for stock market investors but they also have broader policy implications for stock market regulators and for the national pension regulators.

Defined benefit pension plans are an important and unexplored aspect of not-for-profit compensation, covering between 15% and 21% of the estimated national not-for-profit workforce. Here we consider whether pension contributions and actuarial assumptions are mechanisms for achieving not-for-profit financial management objectives such as smoothing consumption, managing reported net earnings, and minimizing pension liabilities. The empirical results indicate a variety of these behaviors. Not-for-profit pension plan sponsors use accumulated net assets to smooth consumption. Further, not-for-profits manage reported profits downwards when they exceed expectations by increasing pension contributions, but both minimize contributions and liberalize actuarial assumptions when they underperform relative to their desired earnings targets.

This paper investigates the effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on retirement. The first part of the paper is a difference-in-difference analysis of changes in retirement (and retirement expectations) before and after adoption of the ACA. We find no statistically significant evidence that ACA increased the propensity to retire or changed retirement expectations. The second part of the analysis is based on a structural retirement model. For those age 50 at the time ACA was introduced, the overall reduction in full-time work over the age span 54–65 is simulated to be about 0.1 percentage points. Data are from the Health and Retirement Study.

We estimate the impact of increasing the female early retirement age (ERA) on household living standards. Examining the increase in the female ERA from 60 to 63 in the UK, we find increased earnings only partially offset lost public pension income, leaving affected women's household incomes £32 per week lower on average. The proportional effect was substantially larger for women in lower income households. This increased the income poverty rate among affected women by 6.4 percentage points. We find no evidence of an increased inability to afford important material items, potentially suggesting that material deprivation has been avoided through smoothing of consumption.

We considered a pension fund that needs to hedge uncertain long-term liabilities. We modeled the pension fund as a robust investor facing an incomplete market and fearing model uncertainty for the evolution of its liabilities. The robust agent is assumed to minimize the shortfall between the assets and liabilities under an endogenous worst-case scenario by means of solving a min–max robust optimization problem. When the funding ratio is low, robustness reduces the demand for risky assets. However, cherishing the hope of covering the liabilities, a substantial risk exposure is still optimal. A longer investment horizon or a higher funding ratio weakens the investor's fear of model misspecification. If the expected equity return is overestimated, the initial capital requirement for hedging can be decreased by following the robust strategy.