is worldwide concern that people do not save enough towards retirement. To
stimulate savings, tax incentives are a method employed by governments to encourage
retirement savings. In this context, the asset allocation decisions that individuals make
and the asset allocation restrictions that are imposed by regulators in an attempt to protect
retirement savings, potentially impact the retirement ending wealth, which could be
accumulated in the pre-retirement phase of an individual.
The objective of the study was to determine the impact of tax legislation, Regulation 28
of the Pension Funds Act (24/1956) and asset allocation choices on accumulated
retirement ending wealth and what could be deemed appropriate for most individuals
considering different time horizons.
Therefore, the aim of this study was two-fold: to determine whether pension fund
legislation which limits the exposure to risky asset classes resulted in sub-optimal
accumulated retirement ending wealth despite the associated tax savings; and to
determine whether life cycle retirement funds, as opposed to different balanced retirement
funds, were appropriate for most individuals.
The study did not find support for the notion that direct investment funds dominated high
equity balanced retirement funds that complied with Regulation 28 as measured by firstorder
and almost stochastic dominance. Despite the higher asset allocation to equities
that was possible with direct investments, this benefit was outweighed by the tax savings
attributable to retirement funds. Additionally, the results of the study refuted the notion
that a direct investment fund could be optimal over a long investment horizon. The
implication of the finding was that an individual saving for retirement should, firstly, do so
by taking full advantage of the tax savings that retirement funds offered. Hence retirement
funds are an effective retirement saving tool despite the limitations on high-risk asset
class allocations. The study found only limited support for the hypothesis that a theoretical retirement fund
with a 100 per cent allocation to equities dominated a high equity balanced retirement
fund that complied with Regulation 28 (particularly in the case of a 100 per cent local
equity retirement fund compared with a Regulation 28 high equity balanced fund with no
foreign equity exposure). Because the South African equity asset class was very volatile
(annualised standard deviation of 19.8 per cent against 17.4 per cent for local against
foreign equity in the data used in the study), a high exposure could lead to very low
accumulated retirement ending wealth values; the intent of Regulation 28 was to protect
the retirement savings of individuals against such adversity. Despite being perceived as
very restrictive on the individual, the findings could not conclude that Regulation 28
restrictions on asset classes were inappropriate.
This study provided no support for the notion that a life cycle fund dominated a balanced
fund with similar starting asset allocation from the perspective of accumulated retirement
ending wealth. This raised the question whether life cycle funds, which are often included
as default options for members of retirement funds, have a place. Hence they were likely
not the optimal choice compared with a balanced fund counterpart with similar starting
asset allocation. However, they could be attuned to the preferences of the individual (such
as risk and personal preferences) rather than a rational objective assessment of one fund
compared with another.
The study provided mixed support for whether a life cycle fund dominated a balanced
fund with dissimilar starting asset allocations. This indicated that whether there was a
place for a life cycle fund in any retirement fund default options, or whether it was optimal
compared with an alternative balanced fund, strongly depended on the underlying asset
allocations of the funds while the length of the glide path, the investment horizon as well
as the risk and return characteristics of the investable universe could also influence the
conclusion.
The study uniquely contributed to the retirement savings question with evidence that did
not support the notion that Regulation 28 of the Pension Funds Act was necessarily inappropriate to serve the purpose of protecting retirement savings. The study also
showed how the lower risk attribute of life cycle strategies impacted on accumulated
retirement ending wealth, how it compared with balanced funds and which choice would
be appropriate for most individuals. Because the life cycle industry is a fast-growing
portion of the retirement fund market and becoming more popular as default options in
retirement funds, the study contributed by contrasting life cycle funds with balanced funds
and showed that the choice of which fund was optimal, was driven by the different
characteristics of the funds such as investment horizon, starting and ending asset
allocations as well as the length of the glide path. / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2015. / tm2016 / Financial Management / PhD / Unrestricted
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:up/oai:repository.up.ac.za:2263/57159 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Louw, Elbie |
| Contributors | Van Schalkwyk, Cornelis Hendrik, elbie.louw@up.ac.za, Reyers, Michelle |
| Publisher | University of Pretoria |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | © 2016 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria. |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds