1 / 5

OECD/IOPS Global Forum on Private Pensions

OECD/IOPS Global Forum on Private Pensions. Session 6 Policy Recommendations to Policymakers and Regulators Colin Pugh. Helping readers know where they are!. I was confused from the first paragraph,

deacon-holcomb
Download Presentation

OECD/IOPS Global Forum on Private Pensions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OECD/IOPS Global Forumon Private Pensions Session 6 Policy Recommendations to Policymakers and Regulators Colin Pugh

  2. Helping readers know where they are! I was confused from the first paragraph, • “Arrangements to provide retirement income have shifted from PAYG to funded” “public arrangements…” • “Pension funds “DC pension funds” in most places, because (i) that is the subject and (ii) statements often do not make sense for DB plans. 108 occurrences! • Without clarification, “arrangements” and “pension funds” must imply “all arrangements” and “all pension funds”, so… • “Developing a performance measurement framework that is specific to DC pension funds is a relatively new topic.” • Pillars. Confirm to readers that this is WB counting system.

  3. Three quick reactions • Many thanks to authors for making such a clear delineation between lifestyle funds and lifecycle funds. • “Pension funds in emerging economies should keep unhedged currency positions” (pp.11&13). Interesting. • “The need to rebalance the equilibrium between the government and the market in traditional DC pensions systems is an important policy conclusion that can be extracted from this book” (page 5). Questions to panel: • Meaning of “traditional” in this context? • Rebalance equilibrium in which direction? • Ideas for rebalancing?

  4. Minimum guarantees (Chapter 4) • Imposition of minimum return guarantees, i.e. mandated. • I do not like them, and the authors seem to confirm my intuition that such requirements are counterproductive. • At least two families of minimum guarantee requirements: • Absolute rate (e.g. 4%) or rate linked to an index; • In comparison with the other fund managers. The first demands conservative investments linked to requirement; second encourages herding. Both bad. • Who pays for guarantee? Private (occupational) plan = employer = better of DC and cash balance? Pension fund manager? Government, i.e. taxpayer? • In contrast, I am not against pension fund managers offering guaranteed funds as an option !!

  5. Final slide “Governments should assume responsibility for setting up benchmarks that may optimize the expected pensions of individuals (last page)”. I wish good luck to the governments on this issue! And I wish good luck to the authors. Thank you. Muito obrigado.

More Related