Valuation of Spouse and Survivor Benefits In a Defined Benefit Retirement Plan

R. Strangways, Bruce L. Rubin, Michael T. Zugelder
{"title":"Valuation of Spouse and Survivor Benefits In a Defined Benefit Retirement Plan","authors":"R. Strangways, Bruce L. Rubin, Michael T. Zugelder","doi":"10.5085/0898-5510-23.2.159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A search of the forensic economic literature fails to disclose any discussion of the proper methodology for valuing the loss of survivor benefits in a defined benefit retirement plan when a wrongful death event occurs. A first approximation, which might be used to calculate a widow's loss of retirement benefits resulting from the wrongful death of her spouse, is the retiree's benefit payments minus his personal consumption (or maintenance allowance) minus the widow's survivor benefit, if there is one. Economic analysis reveals that while the actual payment to the retiree includes the spouse's benefit if the retiree does survive, it fails to include the spouse's expected survivor benefit in the event that the retiree does not survive. This omitted benefit is significant and should be included in valuing the spouse's expected benefit from the total retirement plan and the widow's loss. Legal analysis reveals that the widow's benefit is essentially the same as proceeds from privately purchased life insurance, which in common law would be considered a collateral source and protected from disclosure at trial or offset against an award. However, tort reform efforts over the past 30 years have led many states to modify or even repeal the traditional collateral source rules. Therefore, the widow's benefit may or may not be considered in valuing the loss of retirement, depending on the jurisdiction, the cause of death (e.g., medical malpractice), and even the interpretation of the collateral source rules by the trial judge. If it is determined that the collateral source rule excludes introduction of the survivor benefit, a reasonable alternative for the plaintiff would be to claim the loss as the retiree's gross benefit minus his personal consumption weighted by the joint probability of survival.","PeriodicalId":265321,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5085/0898-5510-23.2.159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A search of the forensic economic literature fails to disclose any discussion of the proper methodology for valuing the loss of survivor benefits in a defined benefit retirement plan when a wrongful death event occurs. A first approximation, which might be used to calculate a widow's loss of retirement benefits resulting from the wrongful death of her spouse, is the retiree's benefit payments minus his personal consumption (or maintenance allowance) minus the widow's survivor benefit, if there is one. Economic analysis reveals that while the actual payment to the retiree includes the spouse's benefit if the retiree does survive, it fails to include the spouse's expected survivor benefit in the event that the retiree does not survive. This omitted benefit is significant and should be included in valuing the spouse's expected benefit from the total retirement plan and the widow's loss. Legal analysis reveals that the widow's benefit is essentially the same as proceeds from privately purchased life insurance, which in common law would be considered a collateral source and protected from disclosure at trial or offset against an award. However, tort reform efforts over the past 30 years have led many states to modify or even repeal the traditional collateral source rules. Therefore, the widow's benefit may or may not be considered in valuing the loss of retirement, depending on the jurisdiction, the cause of death (e.g., medical malpractice), and even the interpretation of the collateral source rules by the trial judge. If it is determined that the collateral source rule excludes introduction of the survivor benefit, a reasonable alternative for the plaintiff would be to claim the loss as the retiree's gross benefit minus his personal consumption weighted by the joint probability of survival.
固定收益退休计划中配偶和遗属福利的评估
经济分析显示,虽然实际支付给退休人员的款项中包括了退休人员在世时配偶的抚恤金,但没有包括退休人员去世时配偶的预期抚恤金。这一被忽略的利益是重要的,应该包括在评估配偶从整个退休计划和寡妇的损失中预期的利益。法律分析表明,寡妇的利益基本上与私人购买人寿保险的收益相同,在普通法中,这将被视为附带来源,在审判时不被披露,也不被补偿。然而,在过去30年的侵权改革努力中,许多州修改甚至废除了传统的附带来源规则。因此,在评估退休损失时可能考虑也可能不考虑寡妇的福利,这取决于管辖权、死亡原因(例如医疗事故),甚至是初审法官对附带来源规则的解释。如果确定附带来源规则排除了遗属抚恤金的引入,那么原告的一个合理的替代方案是将损失索赔为退休人员的总抚恤金减去他的个人消费,并以共同生存概率加权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信