Jeffrey R. Brown

25 extraordinary leaders, 25 incisive profiles: Andy Grove, Intel Bill Gates, Microsoft John Bogle, The Vanguard Group Steve Jobs, Apple & Pixar Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway Herb Kelleher, Southwest Airlines Sam Walton, Wal-Mart Jack Welch, GE Jeff Bezos, Amazon Mary Kay Ash, Mary Kay Michael Dell, Dell Peter F. Drucker Alan Greenspan Oprah Winfrey, Harpo, Inc. George Soros, Soros Fund Management James Burke, Johnson & Johnson Lee Iacocca, Chrysler Peter Lynch, Fidelity Investments Frederick Smith, FedEx Mohammed Yunus, Grameen Bank Ted Turner, Turner Broadcasting Lou Gerstner, IBM & RJR Nabisco Charles Schwab, Charles Schwab Richard Branson, Virgin William George, Medtronic

This paper discusses the role of annuities in retirement planning. It begins by explaining the basic theory underlying the individual welfare gains available from annuitizing resources in retirement. It then contrasts these findings with the empirical findings that so few consumers behave in a manner that is consistent with them placing a high value on annuities. After reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the large literature that seeks to reconcile these findings through richer extensions of the basic model, this paper turns to a somewhat more speculative discussion of potential behavioral stories that may be limiting demand. Overall, the paper argues that while further extensions to the rational consumer model of annuity demand are useful for helping to clarify under what conditions annuitization is welfare-enhancing, at least part of the answer to why consumers are so reluctant to annuitize will likely be found through a more rigorous study of the various psychological biases that individuals bring to the annuity decision.

x, 229 p. : 24 cm

The recent financial crisis had a profound effect on both public and private universities, which faced shrinking endowments, declining charitable contributions, and reductions in government support. Universities responded to these stresses in different ways. This volume presents new evidence on the nature of these responses, and on how the incentives and constraints facing different institutions affected their behaviour.

"This paper establishes a causal relation between an individual's decision of whether to own stocks and average stock market participation decision of the individual's community. We instrument for the average ownership of an individual's community with lagged average ownership of the states in which one's non-native neighbors were born. Combining this instrumental variables approach with controls for individual and community fixed effects, a broad set of time-varying individual and community controls, and state-by-year effects, rules out alternative explanations. To further establish that word-of-mouth communication drives this causal effect, we show that the results are stronger in more sociable communities."--abstract.

"Using the 2003 reduction in dividend tax rates to identify an exogenous change in the after-tax value of dividends to shareholders, we test whether the composition of executives' stock and option holdings is an important determinant of payout policy. We find that when top executives have greater stock ownership, and thus have the incentive to increase dividends for liquidity reasons, there is a significantly greater likelihood of a dividend increase following the 2003 dividend tax cut, whereas no such relation existed in the prior decade when the dividend tax rate was much higher. In contrast, executives with large holdings of stock options, whose value is negatively related to the amount of dividends paid, were less likely to increase dividends both before and after the tax change. These findings hold for dividend increases in general, as well as dividend initiations, and are robust to a rich set of firm and shareholder characteristics. Our results suggest that about one-half of the unanticipated rise in the likelihood of a dividend increase or initiation observed in 2003 can be attributed to the stock vs. option composition of top executive holdings. Many of the firms that increased dividends in 2003 scaled back share repurchases, leaving total payouts little changed. This substitution may have raised the total tax burden on distributions because share repurchases are still tax-advantaged relative to dividends. We find that while dividend-paying firms with a large fraction of individual shareholders saw the biggest stock price gains in response to the tax cut, the market appears to have at least partially anticipated for which firms the tax cut would most likely lead to a substitution of dividends for share repurchases or earnings retention and thus a higher average tax burden on total distributions for individual shareholders"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.

"This paper examines why some employers provide matching contributions to 401(k) plans in company stock and explores the implications of match policy for employee retirement wealth. Unlike stock option grants to non-executives, a firm's decision to match in company stock does not appear to be strongly correlated with cash flow or with measures of the benefits of aligning incentives of employees and employers. Rather, we find evidence that firms are more likely to provide the match in company stock if firm risk is low (i.e. lower stock price volatility and lower bankruptcy risk) and employees are also covered by a defined benefit plan. These findings suggest that firms consider the retirement security of their workers in making the match decision, either because firms want to minimize the risk of violating their fiduciary responsibility or because employees more fully value company stock at companies with lower firm-specific risk. Evidence also indicates that firms may want to match in company stock to boost employee ownership, perhaps to help deter takeovers, or because of the tax advantages for dividends on the company stock match. Simulation results suggest that sufficiently risk-tolerant individuals actually prefer a 401(k) plan at a company with a company stock match to a plan at a company with an unrestricted match, unless the equity premium is reduced substantially"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.

"This paper examines the role of the federal government in the market for terrorism reinsurance. We investigate the stock price response of affected industries to a sequence of thirteen events culminating in the enactment of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) of 2002. In the industries most likely to be affected by TRIA banking, construction, insurance, real estate investment trusts, transportation, and public utilities the stock price effect was primarily negative. The Act was at best value-neutral for property-casualty insurers because it eliminated the option not to offer terrorism insurance. The negative response of the other industries may be attributable to the Act's impeding more efficient private market solutions, failing to address nuclear, chemical, and biological hazards, and reducing market expectations of federal assistance following future terrorist attacks"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.

"We show that the provision of even incomplete public insurance can substantially crowd out private insurance demand. We examine the interaction of the public Medicaid program with the private market for long-term care insurance and estimate that Medicaid can explain the lack of private insurance purchases for at least two-thirds and as much as 90 percent of the wealth distribution, even if comprehensive, actuarially fair private policies were available. Medicaid's large crowd out effect stems from the very large implicit tax (on the order of 60 to 75 percent for a median wealth individual) that Medicaid imposes on the benefits paid from private insurance policies. Importantly, Medicaid itself provides an inadequate mechanism for smoothing consumption for most individuals, so that its crowd out effect has important implications for overall risk exposure. An implication of our findings is that public policies designed to stimulate private insurance demand will be of limited efficacy as long as Medicaid continues to impose this large implicit tax"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.

"This paper is the first to investigate the importance of geography in explaining equity market participation. We provide evidence to support two distinct local area effects. The first is a community ownership effect, that is, individuals are influenced by the investment behavior of members of their community. Specifically, a ten percentage-point increase in equity market participation of the members of one's community makes it two percentage points more likely that the individual will invest in stocks. We find further evidence that the influence of community members is strongest for less financially sophisticated households and strongest within peer groups' as defined by age and income categories. The second is that proximity to publicly-traded firms also increases equity market participation. In particular, the presence of publicly-traded firms within 50 miles and the share of U.S. market value headquartered within the community are significantly correlated with equity ownership of individuals. These results are quite robust, holding up in the presence of a wide range of individual and community controls, instrumental variables estimation, the inclusion of individual fixed effects, and specification checks to rule out that the relations are driven solely by ownership of the stock of one's employer"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.

"This paper examines how the menu of investment options made available to workers in defined contribution plans influences portfolio choice. Using unique panel data of 401(k) plans in the U.S., we present three principle findings. First, we show that the share of investment options in a particular asset class (i.e., company stock, equities, fixed income, and balanced funds) has a significant effect on aggregate participant portfolio allocations across these asset classes. Second, we document that the vast majority of the new funds added to 401(k) plans are high-cost actively managed equity funds, as opposed to lower-cost equity index funds. Third, because the average share of assets invested in low-cost equity index funds declines with an increase in the number of options, average portfolio expenses increase and average portfolio performance is thus depressed. All of these findings are obtained from a panel data set, enabling us to control for heterogeneity in the investment preferences of workers across firms and across time."--abstract.

"Long-term care represents one of the largest uninsured financial risks facing the elderly in the United States. Whether the small size of this market is driven primarily by supply side market imperfections or by limitations to demand, however, is unresolved, largely due to the paucity of data about the structure of the private market. We provide what is to our knowledge the first empirical evidence on the pricing and benefit structure of long-term care insurance policies. We estimate that the typical policy purchased by a 65-year old has an average pricing load of about 18 percent and has a very limited benefit structure, covering only one-third of the expected present discounted value of long-term care expenditures. These findings are consistent with the presence of supply side market imperfections. However, we also find enormous gender differences in pricing -- typical loads are 44 cents on the dollar for men but better than actuarially fair for women %uF818 that do not translate into differences in coverage. And, although purchased policies provide limited benefits, we demonstrate that more comprehensive policies are widely-available at similar loads, but are rarely purchased. These findings suggest that while supply-side market imperfections exist, they are not the primary cause of the small size of the private long-term care insurance market"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.