Public social security systems may provide diversification of risks to individuals' life-time income. Capturing that a pay-as-you-go program (paygo) may be considered as a "quasiasset", we study the optimal size of the social security program as well as the optimal split between a funded part and a paygo part by means of a theoretical portfolio choice approach.A low-yielding paygo system can benefit individuals if it contributes to hedge other risks to their lifetime resources. Moreover, a funded part of the social security system can be justified by potential imperfections to the individuals' free access to the stock market. Numerical calculations for Sweden, Norway, the US and the UK demonstrate that the optimal size of paygo-part of the pension program varies considerably in response to differences in projected growth rates and the correlation between stock returns and growth. Our calculations suggest that a paygo program has an important role in the three former countries -but not in the U.K. JEL Classification: H55, D91, G11

J26, H55, J22, Induced retirement, social security, matching estimators,

No abstract

In order to stimulate labor market participation and improve the financial viability of the social security systems, many recent reform proposals in various OECD economies suggest to scale down the non-actuarial parts of the pension systems. These reforms have a flavour of increased efficiency at the costs of welfare losses for low income individuals. Investigating such a belief, we employ an overlapping generations model which features an endogenous retirement age and heterogenous individuals within generations. Based on a simple theoretical version of the model we demonstrate that high income individuals are likely to gain. The sign of the welfare effect for low income households is ambiguous because we do not know whether the effect of lower pension benefits is offset by the effect of a reduced tax-burden. Employing an extended CGE version of the model, which is calibrated to the Norwegian economy, we consider five reform proposals. It turns out that the various reforms which scale down the public non-actuarial pension system, lead to increases in the retirement age and steady-state welfare gains for all income classes.JEL classification: H55, H23, E62