最低年金法的意外后果:一项实验研究

Abigail Hurwitz, Orly Sade, Eyal Winter
{"title":"最低年金法的意外后果:一项实验研究","authors":"Abigail Hurwitz, Orly Sade, Eyal Winter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3117804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The need to ensure that people have adequate savings for retirement has prompted debate among regulators and academics. Certain countries have implemented or are considering implementing mandatory minimum annuity laws (e.g., Singapore and Israel), whereas others have repealed or are considering repealing such legislation (e.g., the U.K.). We investigate the introduction as well as the repeal of a regulatory change—specifically, a mandatory minimum annuity rule—using a laboratory experiment and two surveys. Our results indicate that imposing a mandatory minimum may create an anchoring effect to the threshold level. Furthermore, our results suggest that the mandatory requirement may have unintended consequences: Such laws may fail to provide an increase in the demand for annuities and may even reduce it for certain individuals. The outcome is sensitive to the relation between the level of the mandatory minimum and anticipated consumption (i.e., future financial need). Moreover, we provide novel evidence about the consequences of a repeal of mandatory minimum annuity laws and suggest that it may not restore the demand for annuities to the pre-law level.","PeriodicalId":82443,"journal":{"name":"Real property, probate, and trust journal","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unintended Consequences of Minimum Annuity Laws: An Experimental Study\",\"authors\":\"Abigail Hurwitz, Orly Sade, Eyal Winter\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3117804\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The need to ensure that people have adequate savings for retirement has prompted debate among regulators and academics. Certain countries have implemented or are considering implementing mandatory minimum annuity laws (e.g., Singapore and Israel), whereas others have repealed or are considering repealing such legislation (e.g., the U.K.). We investigate the introduction as well as the repeal of a regulatory change—specifically, a mandatory minimum annuity rule—using a laboratory experiment and two surveys. Our results indicate that imposing a mandatory minimum may create an anchoring effect to the threshold level. Furthermore, our results suggest that the mandatory requirement may have unintended consequences: Such laws may fail to provide an increase in the demand for annuities and may even reduce it for certain individuals. The outcome is sensitive to the relation between the level of the mandatory minimum and anticipated consumption (i.e., future financial need). Moreover, we provide novel evidence about the consequences of a repeal of mandatory minimum annuity laws and suggest that it may not restore the demand for annuities to the pre-law level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82443,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Real property, probate, and trust journal\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Real property, probate, and trust journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3117804\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Real property, probate, and trust journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3117804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

确保人们有足够的退休储蓄的必要性引发了监管机构和学术界的争论。某些国家已经实施或正在考虑实施强制性最低年金法(例如,新加坡和以色列),而其他国家已经废除或正在考虑废除此类立法(例如,英国)。我们使用实验室实验和两次调查来调查监管变化的引入和废除-特别是强制性最低年金规则。我们的研究结果表明,强制实施最低限度可能会对阈值水平产生锚定效应。此外,我们的研究结果表明,强制性要求可能会产生意想不到的后果:此类法律可能无法增加对年金的需求,甚至可能减少某些个人的需求。结果对强制性最低消费水平与预期消费(即未来的财政需要)之间的关系很敏感。此外,我们提供了关于废除强制性最低年金法的后果的新证据,并建议它可能不会将年金需求恢复到法律出台前的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unintended Consequences of Minimum Annuity Laws: An Experimental Study
Abstract The need to ensure that people have adequate savings for retirement has prompted debate among regulators and academics. Certain countries have implemented or are considering implementing mandatory minimum annuity laws (e.g., Singapore and Israel), whereas others have repealed or are considering repealing such legislation (e.g., the U.K.). We investigate the introduction as well as the repeal of a regulatory change—specifically, a mandatory minimum annuity rule—using a laboratory experiment and two surveys. Our results indicate that imposing a mandatory minimum may create an anchoring effect to the threshold level. Furthermore, our results suggest that the mandatory requirement may have unintended consequences: Such laws may fail to provide an increase in the demand for annuities and may even reduce it for certain individuals. The outcome is sensitive to the relation between the level of the mandatory minimum and anticipated consumption (i.e., future financial need). Moreover, we provide novel evidence about the consequences of a repeal of mandatory minimum annuity laws and suggest that it may not restore the demand for annuities to the pre-law level.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信