Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 590

Global pension reforms and how Australia can improve

In 2009, we issued the first Melbourne Mercer Global Pension Index, which compared and ranked 11 pension system around the world. Although it had a modest and uncertain beginning, this benchmarking exercise has continued to grow so that the 2024 Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index (MCGPI) considers 48 pension systems covering two-thirds of the world’s population.

Its growth and relevance have grown way beyond my initial expectations. Of course, one of the challenges has been to frame questions that are relevant to all pension systems given the huge diversity, and ask questions that will be understood by all, even when English is not the first language. Notwithstanding the differences, the primary purpose of pensions is similar and so we have been able to learn about challenges and solutions from each system.

The changes since inception

As I review our reports over the last 16 years prior to my retirement in 2025, there are several key trends and developments that will continue to influence the ever expanding global pension industry.

One of the key changes has been the global trend away from defined benefit (DB) employer-sponsored schemes to defined contribution (DC) arrangements where individuals bear most of the risks. Although Australia may have been ahead of this development with the introduction of compulsory superannuation in 1992, the world is following. Even the Netherlands, which again topped the MCGPI this year, is reforming its very well regarded pension system from DB to a collective DC arrangement.

In 2023 the OECD reported that

“More than 50% of pension assets were held in (occupational) DC plans or personal plans in 19 out of the 21 reporting OECD economies.”

This movement from DB to DC has also influenced some of the questions we have asked in the Index. For example, 16 years ago we were concerned with the separation of pension assets from the employer, the level of in-house assets held by a private sector pension plan and the minimum level of funding required for DB funds.

While these topics remain in the MCGPI, we are now more focused on the requirements relating to disclosure and transparency. That is, if individuals are now bearing the risks and more responsibility, it is critical that they have access to appropriate information. Hence our questions now explore the requirements for the pension plan’s annual report, including investment performance, and the contents of the member’s annual statement including income projections (not yet required in Australia) and showing the level of fees deducted from the account.

During this 16-year period, we have also strengthened the questions relating to the governance of pension plans as this topic has received increased focus around the world. Since 2009, we have added questions relating to codes of personal conduct, ESG, conflict of interest policies, anti-bribery and corruption policies, cyber security, and the reporting of data breaches. In essence, each of these additions have encouraged governments and policy makers to strengthen the governance of pension plans.

However, it is not just the structure and operations of pension and superannuation plans that have changed during this period. The world’s demography has changed significantly.

Fertility rates have fallen considerably, and this trend is likely to continue. The average fertility rate in the 16 nations in the 2011 Index was 1.75, even then below the required fertility rate of 2.1 for a stable population. By 2024, the average fertility rate for these nations was 1.45. Australia’s fertility rate in 2023 was 1.50, the lowest ever recorded.

While the world is aging faster than previously expected, there is also clear evidence that more people are working longer. For example, the average labour force participation rate for those aged 55-64 in the original 11 nations in 2009 was 59.6%.  By 2024, this average had increased to 70.6%. Interestingly, 5% of the Australian labour force is already over age 65. This has implications for employers as well as the rules relating to the Age Pension.

Notwithstanding the increased participation in the workforce at older ages, the ageing population will place increased pressure on pension systems around the world. Hence, we are likely to see some governments increasing normal retirement ages while others will increase the eligibility age for the state pension. In some cases, future benefits may even be reduced.

Another global development has been the increased focus on the gender pension gap. It is clear that in most pension systems, including Australia, the average retirement benefit for women is much lower than the average male benefit. Hence, in recent years we have added questions relating to the availability of additional retirement benefits for those on paid parental leave or those caring for young children, as well as the requirement to use unisex lifetime annuity rates.

How Australia fares

For most years of the Index, the Australian retirement income system has ranked in the top quartile of pension systems around the world given our relatively high level and affordable Age Pension, good coverage of the superannuation system and strong regulation. However, Australia has never attained the coveted A grade. Without a requirement to take part, but not all, of future retirement benefits as an income stream, Australia is likely to retain its current B+ grade. Such income `products could include longevity products as well as account-based pensions with minimum and maximum drawdown rates. In addition, the introduction of compulsory income projections on annual member statements would highlight the need to focus on income streams.

The government has made an important move to reduce the gender super gap by paying SG on government-funded paid parental leave. But it could go further. For example, by introducing a government superannuation contribution for those caring for young children and requiring unisex lifetime annuities, as occurs in Europe.

In its 16-year history, the Index has benchmarked pension systems around the world with objective data and has recommended improvements for every system.  There is no perfect system! Recently the OECD commented that:

“The pension policy debate in OECD countries has switched from pandemic responses back to a focus on more long-term structural issues. The question of how to address the impact of population ageing on pension systems has moved back to centre stage.”

By considering the policies, benefit designs and regulations of the better systems in the MCGPI, every system can improve the financial outcomes of future retirees.

 

Dr. David Knox is a Senior Partner and Senior Actuary at Mercer Australia. This article is general information and not investment advice, and does not consider the circumstances of any person.

 

6 Comments
Wildcat
December 15, 2024

There are always massive problems with averages. Not stated in this article but often cited is the number of super accounts cashed at retirement. What this number fails to critically show is firstly did the superannuant have debt when they retired and was it a small account? If you instead looked at. $$ cashed as a % of funds at aged 65 you would see the number incredibly lower.

The idea of locking up super in retirement would cause it to be massively less popular and a retrograde step.

Forget what international ‘experts’ decide. Our system is just fine thank you very much and one of the best in the world.

Victor
December 15, 2024

Yes absolutely. Life time annuities have a massive cost embedded into their pricing. Over a 20 year retirement period you can estimate you'll earn 25% less on your original capital versus a more balanced investment approach. It's unclear to me why you can't managed longevity risk or sequence risk better with the higher investment returns given the historic next to 0% of negative returns over the same period. Other than Age Pension concessions I cant see how they "max income" as a standalone proposition. They basically just give you your own money back over the 20 years.

VIC Victor
December 15, 2024

I'm always so curious as to why those inside the industry continues to push lifetime annuities. DB are being replaced often because of the unfunded liability it creates to the provider.

Certainty comes at a great cost to both the provider and recipient. The way life time annuities are priced locks in lower total returns (est 25%) over a 20 year retirement. They hide initial pricing when it comes to inflation indexing, promote new early return of capital (on death) and ultimately rely on concessional Asset Test treatment to create any income yield. Any decent adviser would understand that longevity and sequence risk can be managed much more cost effectively than via lifetime annuities.

Trustee Boards of large super funds need to do better before they get suckered into this proposition by actuarial driven spreadsheets. Unfortunately most don't have the basic understanding so have fallen for the marketing hype so prominent in the industry.

Michael
December 12, 2024

Unisex lifetime annuities - an interesting thought, which would be consistent with the fact that most super funds have unisex group life insurance premium rates. However lifetime annuity rates in Australia are already not that attractive, and converting them to unisex would make them even less attractive for males, who may take their money to other products. The annuity market would not be as profitable, resulting in even more pressure on lifetime annuity rates. I am not saying unisex rates are wrong, in fact I'm all in favour of doing away with gender based everything, it's just that there would be adverse consequences for males who may move away from these products, right at a time when we are trying to raise their profile as part of a retirement portfolio.

Cam
December 15, 2024

Correct .
There’s also longevity inequity for people in regional and remote locations, and of course First Nations people.

rob
December 12, 2024

".......Without a requirement to take part, but not all, of future retirement benefits as an income stream, Australia is likely to retain its current B+ grade......"

My personal view David, is that the very flexibility built into our Superannuation system, makes it A+, as it enables retirees to take a "little more or a little less" and even, God forbid, to leave some to their ungrateful children!!

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

The most complex super system in the world

Retaining some features of Defined Benefit funds

That horse has bolted: super is not only for retirement

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, one year on

Last year, I wrote an article suggesting returns from ASX stocks would trample those from housing over the next decade. One year later, this is an update on how that forecast is going and what's changed since.

Avoiding wealth transfer pitfalls

Australia is in the early throes of an intergenerational wealth transfer worth an estimated $3.5 trillion. Here's a case study highlighting some of the challenges with transferring wealth between generations.

Taxpayers betrayed by Future Fund debacle

The Future Fund's original purpose was to meet the unfunded liabilities of Commonwealth defined benefit schemes. These liabilities have ballooned to an estimated $290 billion and taxpayers continue to be treated like fools.

Australia’s shameful super gap

ASFA provides a key guide for how much you will need to live on in retirement. Unfortunately it has many deficiencies, and the averages don't tell the full story of the growing gender superannuation gap.

Looking beyond banks for dividend income

The Big Four banks have had an extraordinary run and it’s left income investors with a conundrum: to stick with them even though they now offer relatively low dividend yields and limited growth prospects or to look elsewhere.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

9 lessons from 2024

Key lessons include expensive stocks can always get more expensive, Bitcoin is our tulip mania, follow the smart money, the young are coming with pitchforks on housing, and the importance of staying invested.

Investment strategies

Time to announce the X-factor for 2024

What is the X-factor - the largely unexpected influence that wasn’t thought about when the year began but came from left field to have powerful effects on investment returns - for 2024? It's time to select the winner.

Shares

Australian shares struggle as 2020s reach halfway point

It’s halfway through the 2020s decade and time to get a scorecheck on the Australian stock market. The picture isn't pretty as Aussie shares are having a below-average decade so far, though history shows that all is not lost.

Shares

Is FOMO overruling investment basics?

Four years ago, we introduced our 'bubbles' chart to show how the market had become concentrated in one type of stock and one view of the future. This looks at what, if anything, has changed, and what it means for investors.

Shares

Is Medibank Private a bargain?

Regulatory tensions have weighed on Medibank's share price though it's unlikely that the government will step in and prop up private hospitals. This creates an opportunity to invest in Australia’s largest health insurer.

Shares

Negative correlations, positive allocations

A nascent theme today is that the inverse correlation between bonds and stocks has returned as inflation and economic growth moderate. This broadens the potential for risk-adjusted returns in multi-asset portfolios.

Retirement

The secret to a good retirement

An Australian anthropologist studying Japanese seniors has come to a counter-intuitive conclusion to what makes for a great retirement: she suggests the seeds may be found in how we approach our working years.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.