|
Table Reference
|
Pension Experience Subcommittee, “Final Report: Canadian Pensioners’ Mortality”, Memorandum, Canadian Institute of Actuaries, (Ottawa, 2014). Accessed June, 2014 from http://www.cia-ica.ca/docs/default-source/2014/214013e.pdf?sfvrsn=4 and http://www.cia-ica.ca/docs/default-source/2014/214013t1e.xls
|
|
Comments
|
Study Data: In conjunction with development of the Canadian Pensioners’ Mortality Tables (See SOA Table Identities 2790-2795), projection scales for mortality improvement were designed. The Canadian Registered Pension Plans (RPP) Study had insufficient experience, over too limited a time frame, for use in the development of mortality improvement scales. On the other hand the Canadian Pension Plan and Quebec Pension Plan Study (C/QPP) provides substantive data on recent rates of improvement in the mortality of C/QPP pensioners. The subcommittee believes that the mortality improvement scales based on the results of the C/QPP Phase III Report, with some refinements, serves as a reasonable assumption of future mortality improvement rates of Canadian pensioners in registered pension plans. Methodology: Short-term rates applicable to years 2000–2011 are set equal to the smoothed 10-year experience based on the C/QPP income class 4 (35% of maximum pension and above) from the C/QPP Study for ages 65 and higher. Short-term rates for years 2000–2011 for ages up to age 50 are set equal to the CPP assumption for 2010 as reported in the 26th CPP Actuarial Report. Note that mortality experience data are not available for C/QPP at these younger ages. Short-term rates for years 2000–2011 for ages 51–64 are a linear interpolation between the above rates for ages 50 and 65. Ultimate rates, applicable for years 2030 and beyond, for ages 0–114 are set equal to the CPP year 2030 actuarial assumptions for those ages, as disclosed in the 26th CPP Actuarial Report. Rates for ages 115 and higher are zero. Rates for years 2012 to 2029 are derived by linear interpolation between the short-term rates and the ultimate rates. The subcommittee believes strongly that a two-dimensional improvement scale fits the experience data better than any one-dimensional scale could. However, the subcommittee also recognizes that not all practitioners will have immediate access to software that can handle a two-dimensional improvement scale. Therefore, as a transitional measure, the subcommittee has developed a one-dimensional improvement scale. The one-dimensional table should give approximately the same annuity values that are produced by the proposed two-dimensional basis. Hence, Mr. Bob Howard was asked to solve for the one-dimensional improvement rates that would give the same annuity values as the two-dimensional scale. It is important to remember that this one-dimensional scale exists only to approximate a reasonable two-dimensional scale. It is not possible to construct an approximation which will work in all situations. Note that this one-dimensional scale contains negative improvement rates for male ages 50–55. This fact illustrates that the one-dimensional scale is not reasonable in itself. It is a mathematical fiction developed to approximate the proposed two-dimensional scale. Data Transcription Errors: None. Data Certified: 06/2014
|