Description: The primary purpose of this paper is to set forth one method of evaluating vested pension costs and to suggest a simple way for the actuary to make provision in his pension cost calculations for specific vesting schedules. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1966, Vol. 18, Pt. 1, No. 52.

Description: This paper presents a theoretical treatment of the determination of the cost of vesting by a method not hitherto demonstrated to the Society. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1966, Vol. 18, Pt. 1, No. 52.

Description: In this article, the authors introduce a new policy-making model for pension plan funding which openly represents the uncertainty. The word 'policy' is used here to indicate a strategy which is intended to be followed most [but not necessarily all] of the time. In unusual circumstances, the policy will have to be modified at the end of the year to retain qualification. However, the frequency with which this remedial action is needed is controllable by the actuary [unlike the method of using expected values]. The simple substitution of expected values of random quantities produces an unknown frequency of last minute remedial actions at possibly disastrous investment costs to the pension plan. However, with this paper's techniques, once the actuary acknowledges the uncertainty associated with the various aspects of the pension plan, he/she can explicitly trade off the costs associated with remedial actions, tax penalties, etc. with the investment returns in order to meet the pension plan goals. The method that this paper introduces is a new Chance-Constrained Programming approach to selecting annual contribution levels and asset allocation [holding other factors fixed] that the authors believe will better fit the employer's goals while recognizing the many risks and constraints associated with defined benefit plans. From Actuarial Research Clearing House 1993, Vol. 3.

Description: Traditional pension cost methods are based on the actuarial present value of future benefits [which is a mean value]. As a consequence, these cost methods are deficient because they cannot provide plan sponsors with certain valuable information such as the probability that the accumulation of a particular sequence of contributions will ultimately provide sufficient funds to pay benefits, or the size of fund needed to ensure that retirees' lifetime benefits are paid with a specified probability. In response to these deficiencies, a new family of cost methods, called a-percentile cost methods, is developed. These cost methods are based on the probability of adequately covering all participants' benefits. Expressions for the normal cost, the accrued liability and the gain are provided. From Transactions of Society of Actuaries 1993, Vol. 45.