The taxpayer thus bears part of the risk of poor investment choices in Chile, Mexico, and Australia but not in the United Kingdom or Argentina. One would therefore expect the United Kingdom and Argentina to have little regulation and the others to regulate investment choices more closely. The odd couple are Australia and Argentina. In Australia, taxpayers bear some of the risk of the accounts, but regulation is as light as in the United Kingdom. In Argentina, by contrast, taxpayers do not bear that risk, but regulation is as heavy as in Chile, which has in other respects also been a model for Argentina.
Housing receives special treatment under the rules for the means-tested pension.
Currently, most people qualify for the pension. If that practice continues, the reform will have made almost no difference to the government's costs for retirement. Australia's experience suggests the importance of establishing rules that govern when, how, and for what purpose funds may be withdrawn from the accounts. Many proposals for reform in the United States, for example, prohibit lump-sum withdrawals and require workers to purchase an annuity at retirement. Having such rules would avoid the problem Australia encountered.