한국의 은퇴준비지수산정에 관한 연구

Abstract

This research is aimed at grasping the retirement readiness degree by developing retirement readiness index which makes it possible to have a seize on retirement readiness degree and to draw an international comparison. To grasp the retirement readiness degree, this research worked out two indexes- Retirement Income Replacement Ratio: Index 1 and Retirement Wealth Adequacy Ratio: Index 2-and also figured out Target Income Replacement Ratio as a frame to go by for comparing these two indexes. Retirement Income Replacement Ratio is the one of income after retirement as against the income just before retirement - a numerical value indicating in what degree the postretirement income can replace the income just before retirement. In short, what portion of the gross income converted in terms of the point of time for retirement can replace the income level just before retirement. Retirement Wealth Adequacy ratio is measured by retirement assets as against required capital for retirement -a numerical value indicating how much the assets saved until the point in time for retirement could replace the estimated living expenses needed for individual family budget after retirement. Target income replacement ratio is the one of the living expenses after retirement as against the income just before retirement- a numerical value showing how much proportion of the pre-retirement income should be given to living expenses after retirement. If one’s retirement income replacement ratio corresponds with target income replacement ratio or retirement wealth adequacy ratio equals 1, it could be said that one’s preparations for retirement is well made. Consequently, the disparity in these numerical values become the portion for which family budget has to prepare for the time to come. The data used in working out indexes are the raw data of the 2006 Korea Household Income and Expenditure Survey and the 2006 Korea Household Assets Survey by the National Statistical Office, the raw data of the 2006 Korean Retirement and Income Study(KReIS) by the National Pension Research Institute, and the 2007 Indirect Investor Survey by the Korea Investor Education Foundation. As for the calculation of severance pay, this research used the secondary data on the Survey on the Actual Condition of Wage Structure by the Ministry of Labor and as for Life Expectancy, this research used the 5th Experience Life Table by the Korea Life Insurance Association. The research results reveals that the retirement income replacement ratio[Index 1] of national worker’s family budget is 0.41. When the receipts and payments of national pension and personal pension, severance pay and gross savings are converted into an annuity, and measured by the addition of the annual receipts and payments in relation to the above items, the post-retirement income stays at the level of 41% of the income just before retirement, which is a little lower numerical value in comparison with the 47% in Japan and 43% in Hong Kong. The target income replacement ratio of the Korea labor family budget is 0.62, and thus, the 62% of the income just before retirement is regarded as the target income. Accordingly, it explains that the 21% of the income just before retirement should be more needed. On the other hand, retirement wealth adequacy ratio[Index 2] comes out as 0.60, showing that the 40% of the required capital for retirement lacks in reality. The target income replacement ratio of the national family budget is 62%, coming out more or less low comparing to other countries, which suggests that the national family budget holders tend to estimate their living expenses, which is thought to be needed for retirement period, to be low. In case of the US, their target income replacement ratio comes out as much as 85%, showing a very big difference from the case of Korea. At this point when the living at old age is being evolved into the concept of abundant old age away from destitution and shabbiness, the fact that the target income replacement ratio for old age is estimated overly low could bring about concerns that the family budgets in Korea might underestimate the preparations for retirement. Moreover, the retirement wealth adequacy ration for family budgets in Korea comes out much higher than other countries, but that doesn’t mean the retirement wealth adequacy ratio is enough; rather, it might be reasonable to judge such aspects to be the result from the fact that their targeted retirement income level is low. Considering the weight of the income by its source in the gross retirement income, the source of income having the most weight of the retirement income is the savings of family budgets, followed by public pension, personal pension, and severance pay. The weight of big three axes of the 3-tiered guaranty-public pension, personal pension, and severance paystays at a level of 40% whereas personal savings take up 60% of the retirement income; what is worse, public pension takes up only 32%. Such results suggest that public-guaranty function for old age living in Korea is extremely meager and the largest part of the preparations for retirement is responsible to an individual. As for the retirement preparations index which this research looked into, in case of the people in their 50s, their target income replacement ratio is high, but their retirement income replacement ratio is the lowest; moreover, their retirement wealth adequacy ratio is also lower than other age bracket, showing that the people in their 50s turn out to be the most insufficient in their preparations for retirement. In addition, in case of professional managerial salaried people, the retirement income replacement ratio is low while retirement wealth adequacy ratio comes out high; additionally, the higher their income level is, the less their retirement income replacement ratio becomes and oppositely, retirement wealth adequacy ratio tends to be bigger. In conclusion, the realities are that preparations for retirement are insufficient on the whole in Korea, and particularly the retirement income replacement ratio[Index 1] comes out smaller than retirement wealth adequacy ratio[Index 2], which reveals that people overly think little of the estimated living expenses. Accordingly, raised is the necessity of counseling that could help them determine the size of income[target income] needed after appropriate retirement in consideration of health-related risk, longevity-risk, and inflation-risk, etc. which prospective retirees are liable to overlook. Further, it is also necessary to set up a financial education program on the necessity of retirement planning & its practicable method for the socially underprivileged.