자료: "Neutral or Fair? Actuarial Concepts and Pension-System Design," http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/2/42/37811399.pdf
By Monika Queisser and Edward Whitehouse
04-Dec-2006
OECD SOCIAL, EMPLOYMENT AND MIGRATION WORKING PAPERS
참고정보: All Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers are now available through OECD's Internet website at http://www.oecd.org/els
※ 메모 1:
"연금수리(年金數理)적으로 공정하다" 혹은 "보험계리(保險計理)적으로 공정하다"는 뜻이라는 "actuarially fair," "actuarial fairness"가 뜻하는 정확한 정의를 찾기가 어려웠다. 정확히 "연금수리적 공정성"을 지적하는 언급은 아니어도, 이에 관계된 다음과 같은 기술을 찾을 수 있었다.
계리적 연금채무(actuarial liability)란 계리인이 적립된 연금자산에 대응하여 해당 연금기금의 계산기초와 기금적립방식을 이용하여 산정한 바람직한 수준의 부채를 말한다. 이렇게 산정된 부채를 연금수리에서는 "표준부채" 라고도 한다. 생명보험의 순보험료식 책임준비금과 유사한 개념이다.
- 연금채무에서 "계리적 또는 보험수리적(actuarial)" 이란 의미는 위험요소를 반영한다는 의미이며, 현재가치(present value)란 이자율로 할인된 가액(dicounted value)으로서 화폐의 시간가치(time value of money)를 반영하였다는 의미이다.
- 본문에서 언급되는 모든 "연금채무"는 "계리적 연금채무"를, "연금채무의 현재가치" 는 "연금채무의 계리적 현재가치"를 의미하는 것으로 한다. 성주호·김진억(1998), p .92., OECD (1998), p .80.
한편, 다행히도 맨 위에 하이퍼링크를 기록해둔 표제의 OECD 자료를 찾아서 살펴보니 비교적 정확하다고 판단되는 정의가 나왔다. 즉,
연금 가입자 개인이 평생 동안 불입하는 기여금 총액의 현재가치가 평생 지급받을 연금급여 총액의 현재가치와 같다.
예컨대 "연금수리적으로 공정한 연금보험(혹은 사회보장)"이라고 하면, 등식에 올라오는 이 두 가지가 동일하게 설계되어 있는 연금보험(혹은 사회보장)을 뜻한다. 결과적으로 연금 가입자 사이의 소득 재분배가 발생하지 않는 상태고, 가입자별로 평생 불입한 기여금과 똑같은 가치의 연금급여에다 연금적립 기간에 붙은 이자를 은퇴 후에 지급받는다는 점에서 "공정하다"는 뜻이 된다. 물론, OECD에서 발행한 일개 워킹페이퍼에 언급된 사항이어서 최종적인 정의라고 판단할 수 없을지는 몰라도, 지금까지 검색해본 자료들 중에서는 가장 신빙성이 높아 보이는 정의다.
이러한 정의를 몰라도, "연금수리적 공정성"이란 역어만 채용해서 번역의 문제가 완료될 수도 있다. 그러나 그렇지 않을 때도 있다. 이 개념이 다른 개념들과의 관계에서 인과관계와 대조가 진행되는 원문을 만나면, 개념의 뜻을 모르고는 문장이 성립되지 못할 때가 대부분이다. 사회복지학이나 재정학, 공공경제학을 전공으로 공부하지 않아서인지, 아니면 우리말로 된 자료를 충분히 찾아보지 못해서인지, 우리말로 이와 관련된 체계적인 지식을--물론, 인터넷에서--찾아보기 어렵다.
번역의 질은 번역가의 능력과 노력에 따라 달라지겠지만, 그에 못지않게 어느 언어문화권에 축적돼있는 지식(달리 말해 지적 자본)의 영향도 크게 받는다는 생각을 하게 된다.
※ 메모 2:
... the debate about the application of actuarial principles to pension-system design has unfortunately become confused. Governments, policy advisors and pension experts loosely use terms such as “actuarially fair” and “actuarially neutral” to describe desirable attributes of pension systems. But the terms are used by different people to mean different things. And it is often unclear precisely what is meant.
This paper aims to define the different “actuarial” concepts in a formal manner (section 2). It goes on to look at different types of pension scheme (section 3) and how they measure up against the benchmark actuarial concepts (section 4).
This paper distinguishes two actuarial concepts and discusses their importance for defined-benefit, defined-contribution and notional accounts pension plans.
- Actuarial fairness, which requires that the present value of lifetime contributions equals the present value of lifetime benefits. Actuarial fairness relates to the entire lifetime of contributions and benefits
- Actuarial neutrality, which requires that the present value of accrued pension benefits for working an additional year is the same as in the year before (meaning that benefits increase only by the additional entitlement earned in that year). Conversely, retiring a year earlier should reduce the pension benefit both by the entitlement that would have been earned during the year and by an amount to reflect the longer duration for which the pension must be paid. Actuarial neutrality is a marginal concept, relating to the effect of working an additional year.
The two concepts differ fundamentally in the time periods that each covers. Actuarial fairness relates to the entire lifetime total of contributions and benefits. Actuarial neutrality is, in contrast, a marginal concept, relating to the effect of working an additional year. It is also important to note that both concepts only make sense ex ante. Actual or ex post outcomes will differ because the calculations are based on probabilities but, in reality, people die at different ages.
2.1. Actuarial fairness
- An actuarially fair pension is one that equalises lifetime individual pension entitlements to lifetime individual pension contributions. By definition, therefore, there is no redistribution towards or away from any individual: what you get out in retirement is the same as what you paid in when working, together with any interest that was earned before retirement. To examine actuarial fairness, we obviously need to measure lifetime contributions and benefits.
...
2.2. Actuarial neutrality
- The second “actuarial” concept is actuarial neutrality. This concept is based on a comparison of entitlements conditional on different ages of withdrawal of pension benefits. Actuarial neutrality is a central concept both to equity between individuals who retire at different ages and to incentives to retire.7
- Actuarial neutrality, as defined here, requires that pension wealth for retiring a year later is the same as pension wealth when retiring today plus whatever pension is accrued during the additional year of work. Actuarial neutrality therefore relates to the pension already accrued at the beginning of the year and not to the extra pension earned during the year.
3. A taxonomy of pension schemes
- Having introduced the actuarial concepts, this section presents a taxonomy of four different types of pension schemes. The analysis focuses on “insurance-oriented” pension plans, which target some level of earnings replacement during retirement. Actuarial concepts are less useful when it comes to schemes with very little or no link between contributions and benefits, such as minimum pensions, resource-tested retirement income programmes and basic pensions.12
(1) Defined-benefit plans
- Some 17 OECD countries have public, defined-benefit (DB) plans, making them by far the most common form of pension-insurance provision in OECD countries. In DB schemes, the amount a pensioner will receive depends on the number of years of contributions made throughout the working life and on some measure of individual earnings from work. As for private DB plans, these are mandatory (or quasi-mandatory) in Iceland, the Netherlands and Sweden. There is widespread coverage of voluntary, DB, occupational plans in Canada, Germany, Ireland, Japan, the United Kingdom and United States.
(2) Defined-contribution plans
- The next most common form of pension-insurance provision is the defined-contribution (DC) plan. In these schemes, each worker has an individual account in which contributions are saved and invested, and the accumulated capital is usually converted into a pension-income stream at retirement; lump-sum withdrawals are rarely permitted. Typically, the capital has to be used to buy an annuity, i.e. a guaranteed pension payment until death, which meets certain conditions (such as indexation of benefits and provision of survivors’ benefits). Six OECD countries have mandatory DC pensions: Australia, Denmark, ....
(3) Points systems
- Some countries have earnings-related schemes that do not follow the “traditional” DB model. There are four points systems in OECD countries: French occupational plans and the German, Norwegian and Slovak public schemes. Workers earn pension points based on their individual earnings for each year of contributions. At retirement, the sum of pension points is multiplied by a pension-point value to convert them into a regular pension payment.
(4) Notional accounts
- The final variant of earnings-related schemes is notional accounts, found in three OECD countries: the public plans of Italy, Poland and Sweden. These schemes record each worker’s contributions in an individual account and apply a rate of return to the accounts. The accounts are “notional” in that both the incoming contributions and the interest charged to them exist only on the books of the managing institution. At retirement, the accumulated notional capital in each account is converted to a stream of pension payments using a formula based on life expectancy at the time of retirement. Since they are designed to mimic the features of funded, defined-contribution plans, they are often called “notional defined-contribution” schemes.
3.1. Calculating benefits...
3.2. Inter-relationship between different kinds of earnings-related scheme
- The three kinds of public, earnings-related pension plan – DB, points and notional accounts – are closely related. All take an input – individual earnings in different years over the career – and turn it into an output, a pension entitlement. The difference is in the parameters that are used in the benefit calculations.
글
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기