arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 22 Mar 2018

Transcription

1 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM MAURICIO JUNCA 1, HAROLD MORENO-FRANCO 2, JOSÉ LUIS PÉREZ 3, AND KAZUTOSHI YAMAZAKI 4 arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 22 Mar 218 ABSTRACT. We consider de Finetti s prolem for spectrally one-sided Lévy risk models with control strategies that are asolutely continuous with respect to the Leesgue measure. Furthermore, we consider the version with a constraint on the time of ruin. To characterize the solution to the aforementioned models, we first solve the optimal dividend prolem with a terminal value at ruin and show the optimality of threshold strategies. Next, we introduce the dual Lagrangian prolem and show that the complementary slackness conditions are satisfied, characterizing the optimal Lagrange multiplier. Finally, we illustrate our findings with a series of numerical examples. AMS 21 Suject Classifications: 6G51, 93E2, 91B3 Keywords: Dividend payment; Optimal control; Ruin time constraint; Spectrally one-sided Lévy processes; refracted Lévy processes; scale functions. 1. INTRODUCTION In de Finetti s optimal dividend prolem, the aim is to maximize the total expected discounted dividends accumulated until ruin. Intuitively, as the risk of ruin must e considered, dividends should e paid only when there is sufficient amount of surplus availale. With this conjecture and under the assumption of stationary increments of the underlying process in the Lévy cases, the optimality of a arrier strategy that pays out any amount aove a certain arrier has een pursued in various papers. Because the resulting controlled process ecomes a classical reflected process, existing fluctuation theoretical results have een efficiently applied to solve explicitly the prolem, at least under suitale conditions. See, among others, Avram et al. [2] for the spectrally negative case and Bayraktar et al. [3] for the spectrally positive case. Despite these important works, there are several disputes aout the classical model in the sense that the set of admissile strategies is too large and contains those that are in reality impossile to implement. In particular, under the arrier strategy that is shown to e optimal, ruin must occur almost surely, and 1 Department of Mathematics, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colomia. mj.junca2@uniandes.edu.co. 2 Laoratory of Stochastic Analysis and its Applications, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia. hmoreno@hse.ru. 3 Department of Proaility and Statistics, Centro de Investigación en Matemáticas A.C.,Guanajuato, Mexico. jluis.garmendia@cimat.mx. 4 Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Engineering Science, Kansai University, Osaka, Japan. kyamazak@kansai-u.ac.jp. 1

2 2 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI this is rather an undesirale conclusion. For these reasons, in the past decade, several extensions have een considered so as to otain a more realistic model, y considering more restricted sets of admissile strategies and modifications to the ojective function so as to incorporate more directly the risk of ruin. Motivated y these, in this paper we focus on the model with the asolutely continuous condition on the dividend strategy and additional condition on the time of ruin. We consider oth cases driven y spectrally negative and positive Lévy processes. Regarding the asolutely continuous condition, it is assumed that the rate at which dividends are paid is ounded. More specifically, the dividend strategy must e asolutely continuous with respect to the Leesgue measure with its density ounded y a given constant. Analogously to the arrier strategy that is optimal in the classical case, the threshold strategy that pays dividends at the maximal rate as long as the surplus is aove a certain fixed level is optimal in this case. For a spectrally negative Lévy surplus process, Kyprianou et al. [11] showed the optimality of the threshold strategy under a completely monotone assumption on the Lévy measure. The spectrally positive Lévy model has een solved y Yin et al. [21]. In oth cases, the optimally controlled process ecomes the refracted Lévy process of Kyprianou and Loeffen [1], and the fluctuation identities for this process can e used efficiently to solve de Finetti s prolem under the asolutely continuous condition. Following the recent work of Hernández et al. [7], we study the case in which the longevity feature is added to the prolem y considering a constraint on the time of ruin. The longevity aspect of the firm remained as a separate prolem; see [19] for a survey on this matter. Despite efforts to integrate oth features [16, 2, 5], it was not until very recently a successful solution to a model that actually accounts for the trade-off etween performance and longevity was presented. Hernández and Junca [6] considered de Finetti s prolem in the setting of Cramér-Lunderg reserves with i.i.d. exponentially distriuted jumps adding a constraint to the expected time of ruin of the firm. The contriution of this paper is twofold: 1 We first solve the optimal dividend prolem with a terminal value at ruin under the asolutely continuous assumption. We solve this prolem for the spectrally negative Lévy case under the assumption that the Lévy measure has a completely monotone density and also for the general spectrally positive Lévy case. In oth models we show that a threshold strategy is optimal see Theorems 4.19 and 6.5. The optimal refraction level as well as the value function are concisely expressed in terms of the scale function. Its optimality is confirmed y a verification lemma. 2 We then use these results to solve the constrained dividend maximization prolem over the set of strategies such that the Laplace transform of the ruin time must e ounded y a given constant. This is an extension of [7] under the asolutely continuous assumption. Theorem 5.6 shows the result when the reserves are modeled y a spectrally negative Lévy process with a completely monotone Lévy density and Theorem 6.7 for the general dual model. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we formulate the prolem. In Section 3, we present an overview of scale functions and some fluctuation identities related to spectrally negative Lévy

3 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 3 processes and their respective refracted processes. In Section 4, we solve the optimal dividend prolem with a terminal cost and the asolutely continuous assumption for the case of a spectrally negative Lévy process with a completely monotone Lévy density. In Section 5, we extend the results to solve the constrained dividends prolem. In Section 6 we solve the same prolems for the spectrally positive case. Finally, in Section 7, we give some numerical results. 2. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM In this section, we formulate the constrained de Finetti s prolem driven y a spectrally negative Lévy process. The spectrally positive Lévy process is its dual and a slight modification is only needed to formulate the spectrally positive case see Section Spectrally negative Lévy processes. Recall that a spectrally negative Lévy process is a stochastic process, which has càdlàg paths and stationary and independent increments such that there are no positive discontinuities. To avoid degenerate cases in the forthcoming discussion, we shall additionally exclude from this definition the case of monotone paths. This means that we are not interested in the case of a deterministic increasing linear drift or the negative of a suordinator. Henceforth we assume that X = {X t : t } is a spectrally negative Lévy process defined on a proaility space Ω, F, P with Lévy triplet given y γ, σ, Π, where γ R, σ and Π is a measure concentrated on, satisfying z 2 Πdz <., The Laplace exponent of X is given y 2.2 ψλ = log E [ e ] λx 1 = γλ σ2 λ 2, 1 e λz λz1 {<z 1} Πdz, which is well defined for λ. Here E denotes the expectation with respect to P. The reader is noted that, for convenience, we have arranged the representation of the Laplace exponent in such a way that the support of the Lévy measure is positive even though the process experiences only negative jumps. As a strong Markov process, we shall endow X with proailities {P x : x R} such that under P x we have X = x with proaility one. Note that P = P and E = E. It is well-known that X has paths of ounded variation if and only if σ = and zπdz <. In this case X can e written as X t = ct S t, t, where c := γ + zπdz and {S t : t } is a drift-less suordinator. Note that we must have c >,,1] since it is assumed that X does not have monotone paths. The process X is a generalization of what is known in the actuarial mathematics literature as the classical Cramér-Lunderg risk process. This process is often used to model the surplus wealth of an insurance company.,1]

4 4 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI 2.2. Admissile strategies. Let D = {D t : t } e a dividend strategy, meaning that it is a nonnegative and non-decreasing process adapted to the completed and right continuous filtration F := {F t : t } of X. Here, for each fixed t, the quantity D t represents the cumulative dividends paid out up to time t y the insurance company whose risk process is modeled y X. The controlled Lévy process ecomes U D = {Ut D = X t D t : t } and we write τ D := inf{t > : U D t < }, for the time at which ruin occurs when the dividend payments are taken into account. In this work we are interested in adding a constraint to the dividend processes. Specifically, we will only work with asolutely continuous strategies of ounded rate, i.e., D t = t dsds, t, such that the dividend rate d satisfies dt δ, for t, where δ > is a ceiling rate. We will denote y Θ the family of admissile strategies satisfying the conditions mentioned aove Constrained de Finetti s prolem and its dual. The expected net present value under the dividend policy D Θ with discounting at rate q > and initial capital x is given y [ ] τ D v D x = E x e qt dd t. The dividend prolem, originally considered y de Finetti, asks to maximize the expected net present value of dividend payments over the set of strategies Θ. Now, as studied in [7], we are interested in addressing a modification of this prolem y adding a restriction to the dividend process D, which is given y the following constraint E x [e qτ D] K, K 1 fixed. Strategies in Θ satisfying this constraint are called feasile, and are called infeasile otherwise. We want to maximize the expected net present value of dividend payments over the set of feasile strategies. That is, we aim to solve the optimization prolem, for x and K 1, 2.3 V x; K := sup v D x, s.t. E x [e qτ D] K, D Θ where, in the case E x [e qτ D ] > K for all D Θ, we set V x; K = and call the prolem 2.3 infeasile. Proceeding as in [7], we use Lagrange multipliers to reformulate the prolem. For we define the function [ 2.4 v D x; K := v D x + K E x e qτ D].

5 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 5 Note that we can write the prolem 2.3 as V x; K = sup inf D Θ vd x; K since any infeasile strategy D will make inf vd x; K =, and any feasile strategy D will make inf vd x; K = v D x; K = v D x. The dual prolem of 2.3 is otained y interchanging the sup with the inf in the expression aove, yielding an upper ound, 2.5 V x; K = sup inf vd x; K inf V x; K, where 2.6 D Θ V x; K := sup v D x; K. D Θ Therefore, the main goal is to prove that V x; K = inf V x; K and to find an optimal Lagrange multiplier with which the infimum is attained. In order to do this we will first solve 2.6. We remark that if we set 2.7 V x := V x; and v D x := v D x;, D Θ, then v D x; K = vd x+k and hence V x; K = V x+k. Therefore, solving 2.6 is equivalent to solving 2.8 V x := sup v D x. D Θ 3. REVIEW OF SCALE FUNCTIONS In this section we review the scale function of spectrally negative Lévy processes. First, we define the process Y = {Y t = X t δt : t } with its Laplace exponent 3.1 ψ Y θ := ψθ δθ, θ. We assume here that Y is a spectral negative Lévy process and not the negative of a suordinator see Assumption 4.5. Fix q >. Following the same notations as in [1], we use W q and W q for the scale functions of X and Y respectively. These are the mappings from R to [, that are zero on the negative half-line, while on the positive half-line they are strictly increasing functions that are defined y their Laplace transforms: e θx W q 1 xdx = ψθ q, θ > Φq, 3.2 where e θx W q xdx = 1 ψ Y θ q, θ > ϕq, 3.3 Φq := sup{λ : ψλ = q} and ϕq := sup{λ : ψ Y λ = q}.

6 6 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI By the strict convexity of ψ, we derive the inequality ϕq > Φq >. We also define, for x R, W q x := W q ydy, Z q x := 1 + qw q x, Z q x := Z q zdz = x + q Noting that W q x = for < x <, we have z W q wdwdz. W q x =, Z q x = 1 and Z q x = x, x. In addition, we define W q, Z q and Z q analogously for Y. The scale functions of X and Y are related, for x R, y the following equality 3.4 δ W q x yw q ydy = W q x W q x, which can e proven y showing that the Laplace transforms on oth sides are equal. Regarding their ehaviors as x, we have, as in Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2 of [8], { W q, if X is of unounded variation, = c 1, if X is of ounded variation, 3.5 { W q, if Y is of unounded variation, = c δ 1, if Y is of ounded variation, and 3.6 W q + := lim x W q x = W q + := lim x W q x = 2, if σ >, σ2, if σ = and Π, =, q + Π,, if σ = and Π, <, c 2 2, if σ >, σ2, if σ = and Π, =, q + Π,, if σ = and Π, <. c δ 2 On the other hand, as in Lemma 3.3 of [12], 3.7 e Φqx W q x ψ Φq 1 and e ϕqx W q x ψ Y ϕq 1, as x.

7 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 7 4. OPTIMAL DIVIDEND PROBLEM WITH A TERMINAL VALUE In this section, we solve the prolem 2.8. The results otained here are applied to the constrained case in the next section. In this and next sections where we deal with the spectrally negative case, we assume the following. Assumption 4.1. The Lévy measure Π of the process X has a completely monotone density. That is, Π has a density π whose n th derivative π n exists for all n 1 and satisfies 1 n π n x, x >. Remark 4.2. Under Assumption 4.1, the scale functions W q and W q defined in Section 3 are infinitely continuously differentiale on,. For more details, see Lemma This assumption is known to e a sufficient optimality condition for threshold strategies in the classical spectrally negative case y Loeffen [14], for the asolutely continuous case with = y Kyprianou et al. [11], and for the periodic case y Noa et al. [15] with =. In this section, we allow to e negative in which case a positive payoff is collected at ruin time ut need to assume the following in order to avoid the trivial case see Remark 4.4. Assumption 4.3. We assume q + δ >. Remark 4.4. In the case Assumption 4.3 does not hold i.e. q + δ, ecause the dividend rate is ounded y δ, we have that, for any dividend policy D Θ and x, [ ] τ D v D x δe x e qt dt + E x [e qτ D ] δ q q + δ [ qτ D] E x e δ q q q + δ sup E x [e qτ D ]. q D Θ This implies that v D is maximized y taking the strategy that pays dividends at the ceiling rate δ for all t ecause it maximizes E x [e qτ D ] over D Θ. Finally, we make the following assumption: Assumption 4.5. If X has paths of ounded variation, then δ < c. This assumption is commonly assumed in the literature see [11] and [17]. This is needed so that one cannot completely reflect the process at a given arrier otherwise, the prolem is almost identical to the classical case without the asolutely continuous assumption Threshold strategies. The ojective of this section is to show that the optimal strategies for 2.8 are of the threshold type. Under the threshold strategy D for, the resulting controlled process U is known as a refracted Lévy process of [1], which is the unique strong solution to U t = X t D t where D t := δ t 1 {U s >}ds, t.

8 8 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Let its ruin time e τ := inf{t > : U t < }. The next identities are lifted from Theorems 5.ii and 6.ii in [1]. For x R and, we have [ τ ] E x e qt ddt = δw q x W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy, h and 4.2 where Ψ x := E x [ e qτ ] = Z q x + δq W q x yw q ydy qϕqe ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy h W q x + δ 4.3 h := ϕqe ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy. Under the threshold strategy D, the expected net present value is denoted y [ τ ] 4.4 vx := E x e qt ddt Ψ x, for x. Using 4.1 and 4.2, we have the following result. W q x yw q ydy, Proposition 4.6. The function v, with, is given y vx = ξ W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy 4.5 Z q x + δq W q x yw q ydy δw q x, for x, where 4.6 In particular, for x, we have ξ := ϕqqe ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy. h 4.7 v x = ξ W q x Z q x. Remark 4.7. From 4.3 and integration y parts, 4.8 ϕqe ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy = W q + h ϕq,.

9 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 9 Hence, the function ξ, given in 4.6, can e rewritten in the following way 4.9 ξ = q W q + h,. h ϕq In particular, for the case =, these expressions can e simplified as follows; the proof is deferred to Appendix A.1. Lemma 4.8. We have 4.1 and, for x, h = ϕq ξ = 1 h 1 + q δ e ϕqy W q ydy = ϕq W q + δ 1, = δ + q ϕq1 δw q, 4.11 v x = ξ W q x1 δw q Z q x δw q x Selection of optimal threshold. Focusing on the set of threshold strategies, we now select our candidate optimal threshold, which we call. In view of 4.7, such must maximize ξ. Motivated y this fact, we pursue such that ξ vanishes if such a value exists. First, we rewrite the form of ξ as follows. Fix >. Taking a derivative in 4.9 and using that h = ϕqh W q y 4.3, 4.12 where ξ = q h h ξ = q ϕq h 1 + q W q + h ϕq = ϕqw q ξ g, h 4.13 g := 1 + qw q. W q + ϕqw q ξ h In view of 4.12, we now define the candidate optimal arrier level for 2.8 y 4.14 := inf{ > : ξ } = inf{ > : ξ g }. Here, we set inf = for convenience, ut we will see in Proposition 4.12 that is necessarily finite. Remark 4.9. Following the proof of Lemma 3 in [11], the function h as in 4.3 has the following properties: i As a special case with =, is the point where h attains its gloal minimum. Hence h < for < and h > for >.

10 1 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI ii We have that lim h =. Remark 4.1. Note that the function g plays a key role in [13] and satisfies the following: 1 g + = 1 + qw q and g W q q as y Φq 2 If we define a := sup{ : g g x, for all x }, we know that a is finite see [13, Proposition 3] and is the unique point where g has a gloal maximum; see [13, proof of Thm.1]. Moreover if a =, then g < for,, and if a > then g a =, g > for < a and g < for > a. We will now prove an auxiliary result which descries the asymptotic ehaviour of the function ξ. Lemma We have 4.15 lim ξ = lim g = q Φq. Proof. Recall from Remark 4.1 the convergence of g. Now, letting in 4.9, we oserve that lim ξ = q ϕq + lim W q, h since h as. On the other hand, y dominated convergence theorem and using 3.7, it follows that = ϕq e ϕq Φqy W q y + e Φq[y+] W q 1 y + dy 4.17 W q h ϕqφq W q y + e Φq W q 1 e ϕq Φqy ϕq Φq dy = ϕqφq, where we recall that ϕq > Φq. Now, applying 4.17 in 4.16, we get Proposition Under Assumption 4.1, we have [, a ]. 2 Moreover, = if and only if one of the following two cases holds: δ + qq + Π, i σ =, Π, <, and ϕq =: φ 1, or c + qc δ 2δ + q ii σ > and ϕq =: φ σ 2 2. Proof. 1 By the definition of as in 4.14 and the continuity of ξ and g, in order to show a it is sufficient to show ξ or equivalently ξ g on [a,. To show this, suppose there exists > a such that ξ g >. Then, since g is decreasing on a, as in Remark 4.1 2, we otain y 4.12 that ξ g is increasing on,. However, this contradicts with Hence, ξ on [a,.

11 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 11 2 Using 4.12 and the definition of given in 4.14, we otain that = if and only if g + ξ +. This is equivalent, y Lemma 4.8 and Remark 4.1 1, to ϕq δ + qw q qw q 1 δw q. From here, using 3.5 and 3.6, we otain the two cases announced in the proposition. Remark For the case σ = and Π, < and the case σ >, the functions φ 1 and φ 2, respectively, are oth strictly increasing since c > δ in the ounded variation case y Assumption 4.5, with φ 1 δ/q = φ 2 δ/q =. Hence there exists δ/q, ] such that = for all δ/q < and > for all >. 1 Suppose σ = and Π, <. Define φ 1 := lim φ 1 = q + Π,. c δ If ϕq φ 1, then y Proposition , =. Otherwise, we must have < and φ 1 = ϕq. 2 Suppose σ >. Because lim φ 2 =, we must have <. This also implies φ 2 = ϕq. 3 Suppose σ = and Π, =. Then, we can set = δ/q Verification. For the case >, y how is selected as in 4.14, together with 4.5 and 4.12, we can write v x = g W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy 4.18 Z q x + δq W q x yw q ydy δw q x, for x. For the case =, the function v v is given in Given the spectrally negative Lévy process X, we call a function F : R R sufficiently smooth, if F is continuously differentiale on, when X has paths of ounded variation and is twice continuously differentiale on, when X has paths of unounded variation. We let Γ e the operator acting on a sufficiently smooth function F, defined y ΓF x := γf x + σ2 2 F x +, F x z F x + F xz1 {<z 1} Πdz, x >. The following lemma constitutes standard technology as far as optimal control is concerned. For its proof we refer to that of Lemma 1 in [13].

12 12 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Lemma Suppose ˆD Θ is an admissile dividend strategy such that v ˆD is sufficiently smooth on,, v ˆD, and for all x >, 4.19 Γ qv ˆD x + sup r rv ˆD x. r δ Then v ˆD x = V x for all x and hence ˆD is an optimal strategy. We first show that our candidate value function v Lemma Consider given y Then v is indeed sufficiently smooth on,. is sufficiently smooth on,. Proof. i Let us consider the case >. For x, y differentiating 4.18, [ ] v x = g W q x + δ W q W q x + W q x yw q ydy [ ] q W q x + δ W q W q x + W q x yw q ydy 4.2 δw q x = g W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy q W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy + δw q x g W q qw q 1, 1 {x> } 1 {x> } where the last equality holds y integration y parts. Now y the definition of g as in 4.13, we have v x = g W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy 4.21 q W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy. Differentiating this further, we otain for x v x = g 1 + δw q 1 {x> }W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy 4.22 q 1 + δw q 1 {x> }W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy. By Remark 4.2, 4.21, and 4.22, the functions v and v are continuous on R\{ }. Regarding the continuity at, from 4.21 we have v + = v. In particular, for the case that X is of unounded variation where W q = as in 3.5, we have, using 4.22, that v + v =. ii For the case =, the result follows from a direct application of Lemma 4.8.

13 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 13 In order to prove the HJB inequality 4.19, we use a more friendly sufficient condition. For the proof of the following result we refer to the proof of Lemma 7 in [11]. Lemma The value function v satisfies 4.19 if and only if v 4.23 x 1, if < x, v x 1, if x >. In order to verify inequality 4.23, we will need the following result. Lemma 4.17 [13], Theorem 2. Under Assumption 4.1, the q-scale function W q can e written as 4.24 W q x = ϕ qe ϕqx ˆfx, where ˆf is a non-negative, completely monotone function given y ˆfx = + e xtˆµdt, where ˆµ is a finite measure on,. Moreover, W q is strictly log-convex and hence convex on,. Remark We note that an analogous result to Lemma 4.17 holds for W q, with f and µ playing the role of ˆf and ˆµ. We now show the main theorem of this section y verifying the inequality Theorem The optimal strategy for 2.8 consists of a refraction strategy at level, given y 4.14, and the corresponding value function is given y Proof. By Lemmas 4.14, 4.15, and 4.16, it is sufficient to verify 4.23, and the condition that v. i First, consider the case >. In this case, recall that ξ = g implied y ξ = and the expression Suppose that x. Since g is increasing on, a y Remark and a y Proposition , we otain 4.25 ξ = g g x = 1 + qw q x, for all < x W q. x Applying 4.25 in 4.21, it follows that v x 1. 2 Now suppose that x >. To show the desired inequality, we first rewrite v of the scale function given in The proof of the following lemma is deferred Appendix A.2. using the expression Lemma 4.2. For x >, we have 4.26 v x = e tx ltˆµdt, +

14 14 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI where 4.27 lt := g 1 δw q t δt + q 1 + δt e ty W q ydy Differentiating 4.27 twice, we have l t = δg 2 ye ty W q ydy + t δq 2 ye ty W q ydy + t e ty W q ydy + δe t. y 2 e ty W q ydy + δ 2 e t y 2 e ty W q ydy. On the other hand, using 4.25 we have that g W q y 1+qW q y for all y, ]. Hence, l t δ 2 ye ty 1 + qw q ydy + t y 2 e ty 1 + qw q ydy + δ 2 e t + δq 2 = δ 2 ye ty dy + t ye ty W q ydy + t y 2 e ty W q ydy y 2 e ty dy + δ 2 e t =. Therefore, l is a concave function. In addition, since l = q + δ, which is positive y Assumption 4.3, and recalling x >, it follows that there exists < p such that l is positive on, p and negative on p,. Consequently, 4.29 e x t lt e x p lt, t >. Now we note from 4.27 that there exists a constant C independent of t such that lt C 1+ te t. Therefore using the fact that x > and dominated convergence, we can take the derivative inside the integral in 4.26 and otain 4.3 v x = e x t e t tltˆµdt + e x p + = e x p v, e t tltˆµdt where the inequality holds y On the other hand, Proposition 4.12 implies that a, and hence, y Remark 4.1 2, g = q W q W q g.

15 Therefore, 4.22 gives OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 15 v + = 1 + δw q g W q qw q. In comination with 4.3, it follows that v using 4.13 and 4.21, that is non-increasing on,. On the other hand, we note v = g W q qw q = 1. Hence, we deduce that v x 1 for x >. 3 Finally, using 4.18, and the fact that g, v = g W q, as required. ii Now, consider the case =. By taking a derivative in 4.11, and using 4.1 and 4.24, we get W v q x x = δ + q W q x ϕq = δ + q ˆf x ϕq + ˆfx = δ + q ˆf x ϕq + ˆf 4.31 x, which is negative ecause ˆf is completely monotone. Therefore v x is non-increasing, and hence it is enough to verify that v + 1 or equivalently δ + qw q δ + qw q ϕq. This inequality is automatically satisfied in cases i and ii given in Proposition Therefore, we have 4.23 when =. To finish the proof, using 4.1, 4.11 and Assumption 4.3, we have v = δ + q W q. ϕq 5. SOLUTION OF THE CONSTRAINED DE FINETTI S PROBLEM In this section, we study the constrained de Finetti s prolem given in 2.3 under Assumptions 4.1 and 4.5. In order to solve this prolem, we use the results in Section 4, noting that the optimal strategy for 2.6 for any K [, 1] is the same as the case K =, i.e., D, with as in 4.14, is the optimal strategy for 2.6. See the discussion at the end of Section 2.3. Throughout this section, we assume the following see Remark 5.7 for the case it does not hold. Assumption 5.1. We assume that <, which, y Remark 4.13, is equivalent to 5.1 ϕq < φ 1 = q + Π,, if σ = and Π, <. c δ

16 16 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI First we need to study the relationship etween and its corresponding optimal arrier level, which will give us enough tools to see if the prolem 2.3 is feasile or not. Recall Remark 4.13 and fix > then necessarily >. Since ξ = and y the first equality of 4.12, we oserve that and satisfy the relation = λ where 5.2 with 5.3 λ := qh 1, H := [h]2 h W q + h. ϕq Lemma 5.2. The function H given in 5.3 is positive for,, where we recall that is as in 4.14 when =. Proof. First we note that, using 4.3, 5.4 h = ϕqh W q. Hence, W 5.5 h H = ϕqw q q W q + h h. W q ϕq Now since h > on, see Remark 4.9i, it is enough to show that the right side of 5.5 is positive. On the other hand, we know from [7] that W q is log-concave on, a ] and strictly logconcave on a,, where a is defined in Remark 4.1 for the case =. Then, W q η W q η W q ς, for any η and ς with < η ς. W q ς Note that the previous inequality is strict when a < η < ς. From here, it can e verified that W q W q and using 4.3 and 4.8, it follows that 5.6 W q W q e ϕqy W q ydy > W q + h ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy, > h, for all >. From 5.5 and 5.6, we have h H > for,, as desired. Note that Lemma 5.2 implies that λ is finite and positive for,. Proposition 5.3. Assume that 5.1 holds. Then, the function λ, given in 5.2, is i strictly increasing for all >, ii lim λ =, iii lim λ = and iv λ = for all >.

17 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 17 Proof. i Taking the first derivative in 5.3 and y 5.4, we have that H = h [h]2 h [h ] 2 where the last equality holds ecause = h [h ] 2 [h ] 2 hh = [ϕqh]2 W q W q [h ] 2 h + W q ϕqw q 1. [h ] 2 hh = ϕ 2 qh W q 2 hϕq[ϕqh W q W q ] { } = ϕq ϕqw q 2 hw q + hw q. Since y Remark 4.18 W q is a strictly log-convex function, we have that W q η W q η < W q ς, for any η and ς with < η < ς. W q ς From the aove and integration y parts we can show that and hence W q h < W q ϕqeϕq W q h e ϕqy W q ydy = ϕqw q + ϕqh, + W q ϕqw q 1 < W q + h W q 1 =. h h Hence, we conclude that the function H as in 5.3 is strictly decreasing or equivalently λ is strictly increasing. ii For the case, Remark 4.13 gives =. Then, from 4.1, 5.3 and 5.4 [h]2 lim H = h + W q + h ϕq 5.7 = hw q + ϕqw q h W q + ϕqh W q + = δ 1 W q + ϕqw q δ 1 W q. ϕqδ 1 W q W q + Using 3.5, 3.6 and the fact that φ 1 = ϕq or φ 2 = ϕq see Remark 4.13, it can e verified that lim H = 1/q where in the case = the right-hand side is understood to e infinity, and hence lim λ = lim λ =. For the case <, Remark 4.13 gives >. By Lemma 3 of [11], we know that h attains its unique minimum at and y the continuity of h, lim h = h =. In addition, y 5.4, lim h =

18 18 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI W q >. Therefore, from 5.3, we get that lim H =, and hence lim λ = =. iii From Remark 4.18, we can write ΦqΦ qe Φq h = ϕq ϕq Φq f, where f := and e ϕqy f y + dy, and hence we get the following expressions: [ΦqΦ [h] 2 = [ϕq] 2 q] 2 ϕq Φq 2 e2φq 2ΦqΦ q ϕq Φq eφq f + [ 2 f], [Φq] h 2 Φ q = ϕq ϕq Φq eφq ϕq f + f, W q + h ϕq = Applying these identities in 5.3, it follows that Φ qϕq ϕq Φq eφq f f. where H = ϕqφqφ q ϕq Φq H 1 + ϕq2 [ f] 2 + h f + f, [ ϕq ΦqΦ H 1 := e Φq q h ϕq Φq eφq 2 f 1 ] Φq = ϕq Φq ϕq f 2Φq f f. h By the dominated convergence theorem we have that f, f, and f as. Hence lim H = or equivalently lim λ =. iv Fix >. First let us assume that > or that = and h + =. Then using 4.12 for = λ, we have 5.8 dξ λ ς dς = qλ h ς hς ξ λς, for ς >. For ς, ], y the fact that h ς for ς [, ] see Remark 4.9i we have that dξ λς >. dς On the other hand, applying 5.4 and 4.9 in 5.8, dξ λ ς = 1 qλ [hς] 2 h ς W q ς + hς h ς dς [hς] 2 ϕq = h ς λ 5.9 [hς] 2 λς 1.

19 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 19 Then using the fact that ς λς is strictly increasing as in i, and that h ς > for ς > see Remark 4.9i we have that dξ λς > for < ς < and vanishes at ς =. Now let us assume dς that = and that h + >. Then, y the proof of Lemma 3 in [11], we have that h ζ > for all ζ >. Hence 5.9 implies that dξ λς > for < ς < and vanishes at ς =. The aove implies { dς that = inf ς : dξ } λς. Therefore y 4.14 we otain that λ = for all >. dς Now, y 4.2 and 4.8, we see that 5.1 for all [,. Ψ x = Z q x + δq qw q + h/ϕq h W q x yw q ydy W q x + δ W q x yw q ydy, Remark 5.4. Note that if x = and X is of unounded variation, we immediately otain that Ψ = 1, for all. Hence we otain that V ; K = if K = 1, and the prolem is infeasile otherwise. The proof of the following result is deferred to Appendix A.3. Lemma 5.5. Assume x and in the case X is of unounded variation that x >. Then the function Ψ x defined in 5.1 is strictly decreasing on [, and 5.11 K x := lim Ψ x = Z q x q Φq W q x. By Remark 4.9ii, the limit of 4.1 ecomes [ τ ] 5.12 lim E x e qt ddt =, x. We will denote, for K, v x; K := v x + K. Therefore, using 5.12 and Lemma 5.5 in 4.4 we otain that 5.13 lim v x; K = K K x, for all x >. We are now ready to characterize the solution of 2.3. We define the do-nothing strategy as D = and hence Ut D = X. By 8.9 of [9], 5.13 and Lemma 5.5, we confirm the following convergence results: 5.14 E x [e ] qτ D = K x = lim Ψ x and v D x; K = K K x = lim where τ D := inf{t > : X t < }. v D x; K,

20 2 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI From 2.5 and 5.14, we oserve that, if K K x, then D is feasile for the prolem 2.3 and hence 5.15 V x; K = sup inf vd x; K inf with v D as in 2.4. D Θ vd x; K =, if K [K x, 1], Theorem 5.6. Let x e fixed. Assume 5.1 and one of the following cases: 1 x > and X is of unounded variation; 2 x and X is of ounded variation. Then, v x; K, if K [Ψ x, 1], inf V x; K = V x; K, if K K x, Ψ x,, if K = K x,, if K [, K x. Proof. We will only prove 1 since the other case is similar. Recall inequality 2.5 and that V x; K is defined as in 2.6. i If K [Ψ x, 1], then the threshold strategy at level is feasile for the prolem 2.3 see Section 2, and therefore v x; K V x; K inf V x; K V x; K = v x; K. Here the second inequality holds y 2.5 and the last equality holds ecause the case = is solved y the threshold strategy with in the prolem 2.6 which is equivalent to 2.8. ii If K K x, Ψ x, since Ψ x is continuous and strictly decreasing, y Lemma 5.5, to K x, there exists a unique > such that K Ψ x =. Therefore, ] V x; K inf V x; K V λ x; K = E x [ τ e qt dd t V x; K. Here the first inequality holds y 2.5. The equality follows from Proposition 5.3iv since D is the optimal strategy for 2.6 when = λ. The last inequality follows since the threshold strategy at level is feasile for the prolem 2.3. iii If K = K x, y Lemma 5.5, we have that λk Ψ x for all >. Hence, [ τ ] V x; K inf V x; K inf E x e qt ddt + λk Ψ x. > Here the first inequality follows from 5.15, second y 2.5, and the last one y iv Finally, if K [, K x, then Lemma 5.5 gives lim [K Ψ x ] = K K x <. Hence, we get that [ τ ] V x; K inf V x; K inf E x e qt ddt + λk Ψ x =, > where the second inequality holds y 2.5 and the last equality follows from Proposition 5.3.

21 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 21 Remark 5.7. Consider the case Assumption [ 5.1 is violated. By Remark 4.13, for all, we must τ ] have = and hence V x; K = E x e qt ddt + K Ψ x. If K [Ψ x, 1], then the threshold strategy at level is feasile for the prolem 2.3 see Section 2, and therefore v x; K V x; K inf V x; K V x; K = v x; K. On the other hand, if K [, Ψ x, we otain [ τ ] V x; K inf V x; K = inf E x e qt ddt In sum, we have vx, K, if K [Ψ x, 1], V x; K =, if K [, Ψ x. + K Ψ x =. 6. SPECTRALLY POSITIVE CASE In this section, we solve analogous prolems driven y a spectrally positive Lévy process Y. We assume that its dual process Y = Y has its Laplace exponent ψ Y as in 3.1 so that its right inverse and scale function are given y ϕq and W q, respectively. We also define the drift-changed process X = {X t = Y t δt; t } whose dual X = X has its Laplace exponent ψ as in 2.2, right inverse Φq and scale function W q descried in Section 3. We denote y E x the expectation with respect to the law of the process Y when it starts at x. In addition, for x and < K 1, we define V x; K, v D x; K, V x; K and v x analogously to 2.3, 2.4, 2.6 and 2.7, respectively. We first solve the optimal dividend prolem with terminal payoff/penalty 2.8 with X replaced with Y. Similarly to the spectrally negative Lévy case, we define for the threshold strategy D and the resulting controlled surplus process, which is a refracted spectrally positive Lévy process defined as the unique strong solution to the stochastic differential equation, 6.1 U t := Y t D t := Y t δ Let its ruin time e denoted y t τ := inf{t > : U t < }. 1 {U ds, t. s>} 6.1. Scale functions under a change of measure. For each β, we define the change of measure d P β x 6.2 d P = e βyt x ψ Y βt, x R, t, x Ft

22 22 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI where P x is law of the process Y when it starts at x. It is known that Y is still a spectrally negative Lévy process on Ω, F, P β and the scale function of Y on this proaility space can e written 6.3 W u ψ Y β β x = e βx W u x, Z u ψ Y β β x = 1 + u ψ Y β e βz W u zdz, with u ψ Y β ; see [2, Remark 4]. In particular, 3.1 and 3.3 give q ψ Y Φq = δφq and hence 6.4 W δφq Φq x = e Φqx W q x and Z δφq Φq x = 1 + δφq e Φqz W q zdz Optimal dividend prolem with terminal value. As in the case of spectrally negative Lévy process, we are first interested in solving the prolem 2.5 for the spectrally positive case. For this purpose, first we need to study the optimal dividend prolem with a terminal value for the process Y. Using Theorems 5.i and 6.iii in [1] we have the following result, whose proof is deferred to Appendix A.4. Proposition 6.1. For x,, q, we have 6.5 [ Ψ x := E x e qτ ; τ < ] ZδΦq Φqx Φq x = e, Z δφq Φq where Z δφq Φq x is given in 6.4, τ := inf{t > : U t = } and 6.6 Using 6.5 and 6.6, we have the following result. [ τ ] E x e qt dd t = δ Z q x Z q Ψ x. q Proposition 6.2. For, we have δ [ τ ] 6.7 v x := E x e qt dd q Zq x k x,, if x, t Ψ x = δ q k, e Φqx, if x >, where for x, δ k x, := Ψ x q Zq +. In order to select the optimal arrier, we apply smooth fit. Note that, y 6.7, v is continuous on [, for any choice of. Here, we will study the smoothness of v at x = to propose a candidate

23 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 23 arrier level such that v is C 1, and C 2, when Y is of ounded and unounded variation, respectively. By differentiating 6.7, we see that 6.8 v x = δw x + Φqk x, + δk, W q x, if x <, Φqk, e Φqx, if x >, and for the unounded variation case δw q x [Φq] 2 k x, 6.9 v x = δφqk, [ΦqW q x + W q x], if x <, [Φq] 2 k, e Φqx, if x >, where we recall that, if Y is of unounded variation, W q is C 1 on,. From 6.8 and 6.9, together with 3.5 and 3.6, we have the following result. Lemma 6.3. Suppose > is such that 6.1 k, = 1 Φq, or equivalently e Φq = s, where 6.11 s := 1 Φq ZδΦq Φq δe Φq Z q, >. q Then, the function v is C 1, and C 2, for the case of ounded and unounded variation, respectively. Lemma 6.4. If > 1 Φq δ, then there exists a unique > that satisfies 6.1. q Proof. In order to prove the lemma we will show that s as in 6.11 is strictly increasing and satisfies 6.12 lim s = 1 Φq δ q and lim s =. i Since s = δφqe Φq Z q >, for all >, we have that s is strictly increasing on q,. ii Letting in 6.11, it is easy to see that the first limit of 6.12 holds. iii Note that 6.13 s = δzq qe Φq Z δφq Φq Φq. qφqe Φq δz q

24 24 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Using l Hôpital s rule, 3.7 and that ϕq > Φq, the following limits can e verified: lim lim Z q lim e Φq Z δφq Φq qe Φq Z δφq Φq δz q = lim q[φq] 1 e ϕq Φq e ϕq W q =, δφqe ϕq W q = lim e ϕq Φq ϕq Φq δφq Z Φq δe + ϕq Φq e ϕq W q Φq = lim Hence, it follows that lim s =. e ϕq W q = δφq ψ Y ϕq 1 ϕq Φq, Φq = Φq 1 +. ϕq Φq Now, we let e as in Lemma 6.4 for the case > 1 Φq δ and set it to zero otherwise. q i When > 1 Φq δ q, applying 6.1 in 6.7, with =, we see that v is given y 6.14 v x = δ q Zq x Z δφq Φq x, Φq if x, δ q, Φq if x >. ii When 1 Φq δ q, using 6.7 and ecause k, = δ +, we have q 6.15 v x = δ q e Φqx δ q +, x. Theorem 6.5. The optimal strategy for 2.8 consists of a threshold strategy at level. Proof. In view of 6.14 and 6.15, we confirm that v is sufficiently smooth. Hence, as in the spectrally negative case, in order to verify that D is the optimal strategy over all admissile strategies, it is sufficient to show that the cost function v, given y 6.14 and 6.15, satisfies 4.23 and that v. i Suppose >, and so the threshold level satisfies 6.1. From 6.14 we have that v x = e Z δφq Φq x, if x, e, if x >. Clearly v x < 1 if x >. On the other hand, v x is strictly decreasing on [, ] since x e Φqx is strictly decreasing and x Z δφq Φq x is non-increasing in the interval. This together with v = 1 shows v x 1 if x. Finally we note that using 6.14, 6.11, and 6.1 v = δ q Zq eφq Φq ZδΦq Φq = e Φq s =.

25 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 25 ii Suppose =. Since 1 Φq δ, it follows that, for x, q v x = Φqe Φqx δ q + e Φqx 1. Finally, y 6.15 we otain that v = Constrained de Finetti s prolem for spectrally positive Lévy processes. Now we consider the prolem 2.3 driven y the spectrally positive Lévy process Y. Note that D, is the optimal strategy for 2.6, for any K [, 1]. Let us define := 1 Φq δ q. Following Lemma 6.4, if we have = for [, ]; on the other hand if < then > for all >. Similarly to Section 5, we need to estalish the relationship etween and its corresponding threshold level given y Lemma 6.4. From 6.1 we get that = λ for > where λ = e Φq s, where s is defined in Since s is strictly increasing see the proof of Lemma 6.4 and satisfies 6.12, it follows immediately that λ is also strictly increasing, lim λ = and lim λ = 1 Φq δ q, if =,, if >. Here, the convergence for the case > holds y the fact that lim λ = lim e Φq s = e Φq s =, where the last equality follows ecause 6.1 and Lemma 6.4 imply s =. Note that λ = for all >. Next, we need to show that the function Ψ x, given in 6.5, is strictly decreasing with x > fixed. In case that x =, we see that Ψ = 1 y 6.5. The proof of the following lemma is given in Appendix A.5. Lemma 6.6. Let x > e fixed. Then, the function Ψ x defined in 6.5 is strictly decreasing and satisfies lim Ψ x = e Φqx and lim Ψ x = e ϕqx. Finally, using similar arguments as in Theorem 5.6 noting that we have results analogous to Lemmas 5.3iv and 5.5, we otain the following theorem.

26 26 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Theorem 6.7. Let x > e fixed. Then, v x; K, if K [ Ψ x, 1 ], inf V x; K = V x; K, if K e ϕqx, Ψ x,, if K = e ϕqx,, if K [, e ϕqx. 7. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES In this section, we confirm the otained results through a sequence of numerical examples for oth spectrally negative and positive cases. Throughout this section, we set q = Spectrally negative case. We first consider the spectrally negative case as studied in Sections 4 and 5. Here we assume that X is of the form N t 7.1 X t X = ct +.2B t Z n, t <, where B = {B t : t } is a standard Brownian motion, N = {N t : t } is a Poisson process with arrival rate κ, and Z = {Z n ; n = 1, 2,...} is an i.i.d. sequence of exponential variales with parameter 1 so that Assumption 4.1 is satisfied. Here, the processes B, N, and Z are assumed mutually independent. We refer the reader to [4, 8] for the forms of the corresponding scale functions. We consider the following two parameter sets: Case 1: κ = 1, σ =.2, c = 1.5, δ = 1 Case 2: κ =.1, σ =, c = 5, δ =.1 Here, Case 2 corresponds to the case = where we have = for any choice of as in Remark We first show the optimal solutions for the prolem considered in Section 4 focusing on the case = 1. Figure 1 plots the function ξ as in 4.6 and 4.9. Here, in Case 1, it attains a gloal maximum and the maximizer ecomes y In contrast, in Case 2, it is monotonically decreasing and, y 4.14, we have =. In Figure 2, we plot the optimal value function x V x = v x along with the suoptimal value functions v for the choice of =, /2, 3 /2 for Case 1 and = 2, 4, 6 for Case 2. In oth cases, we confirm that V dominates the suoptimal ones uniformly in x. We now move onto the constrained prolem 2.3 studied in Section 5, focusing on Case 1 with K =.1. Recall that the optimal solutions are given in Theorem 5.6. In the left panel of Figure 3, we plot the function x V x; K = V x + K for various values of ranging from to 2. For x x, x where x and x are such that K x = K and Ψ x = K, respectively, its minimum over the considered gives an approximation of V x; K, indicated y the solid red line in the plot. On the other hand, V x; K equals V x; K = v x; K for x [x, and it is infeasile for x [, x. On n=1

27 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM FIGURE 1. Plots ξ for Case 1 left and Case 2 right. The points at are indicated y squares v 6 v x x FIGURE 2. Plots of x V x solid for Case 1 left and Case 2 right. Suoptimal value functions v dotted are also plotted for the choice of =, /2, 3 /2 for Case 1 and = 2, 4, 6 for Case 2. The points at are indicated y squares and those at in the suoptimal cases are indicated y up- resp. down- pointing triangles when > resp. <. the right panel of Figure 3, we plot, for x x, x, the Lagrange multiplier := arg min V x; K. We oserve that goes to infinity as x x and to zero as x x. In Figure 4, we show the values of V x; K and Lagrange multiplier as functions of x, K. Here, those x, K at which the prolem is infeasile are indicated y dark shades on the z = plane. It is confirmed that V x; K increases as x and K increase, while increases as x, K decrease.

28 28 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Lagrange multiplier x FIGURE 3. Left Plots of x V x; K for =.1,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2 dotted and for = solid, old face for the case K =.1. The two vertical dotted lines indicate the values of x and x such that K x = K and Ψ x = K. On [x, x], the minimum of V x; K over is shown in solid fold-face red line. Right Plots of the Lagrange multiplier on x, x] with the same two vertical lines as in the left plot. value Lagrange multiplier K x K x 1 x, K V x; K x, K FIGURE 4. Plots of V x; K left and the Lagrange multiplier right as functions of x and K Spectrally positive case. Similarly, we confirm the results in Section 6 focusing on the case Y is of the form N t Y t Y = t +.2B t + Z n, for t. Here B and N with κ = 1.5 are the same as in the case of 7.1, and Z is a phase-type random variale that approximates the Weiull distriution with shape parameter 2 and scale parameter 1 see [1] for the parameters of the phase-type distriution. Throughout, we set δ = 1. n=1

29 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM v x FIGURE 5. Plots of x V x along with suoptimal value functions v dotted for the choice of =, /2, 3 /2. The point at is indicated y a square and those at in the suoptimal cases are indicated y up- resp. down- pointing triangles when > resp. <. For the Lagrangian prolem considered in Section 6.2, the optimal threshold is such that 6.1 holds and the value function V x = v is given in Figure 5 plots the optimal value function x V x along with suoptimal value functions v for the choice of =, /2, 3 /2 when = 1. For the constrained case considered in Section 6.3, in Figures 6 and 7, we plot analogous results as what are shown in Figures 3 and 4, where we assume K =.1 for Figure 6. It is confirmed that similar ehaviors of the value function and the Lagrange multiplier can e oserved as in the spectrally negative case. A.1. Proof Lemma 4.8. By , we have A.1 Using this and integration y parts, A.2 APPENDIX A. PROOFS OF AUXILIARY LEMMAS e ϕqy W q ydy = δϕq 1. W q ye ϕqy dy = W q + ϕq W q ye ϕqy dy = W q + δ 1. From here, 4.1 is immediate. Now, y differentiating 3.4 and changing variales, W q x W q x = δ W q x yw q ydy + W q xw q. This implies A.3 δ W q x yw q ydy = W q x W q x δw q xw q.

30 3 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI Lagrange multiplier x FIGURE 6. Left Plots of x V x; K for =.1,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2,..., 1, 2 dotted and for = solid, old face for the case K =.1. The two vertical dotted lines indicate the values of x and x such that exp ϕqx = K and Ψ x = K. On [x, x], the minimum of V x; K over is shown y the solid fold-face red line. Right Plots of the Lagrange multiplier on x, x] with the same two vertical lines as in the left plot value Lagrange multiplier K.2 2 x K x 1 x, K V x; K x, K FIGURE 7. Plots of V x; K left and the Lagrange multiplier right as functions of x and K. Sustituting 3.4 and A.3 in 4.5 and after simplification, we otain A.2. Proof of Lemma 4.2. By integration y parts applied to A.3 A.4 δ W q x yw q ydy = W q x 1 + δw q W q x.

31 OPTIMALITY OF REFRACTION STRATEGIES FOR A CONSTRAINED DIVIDEND PROBLEM 31 On the other hand, y differentiating A.3, we otain A.5 δ W q x yw q ydy = 1 δw q W q x 1 + δw q W q x. Applying A.4 and A.5 in the first equality in 4.2 it follows that, for x >, v x = g 1 δw q W q x δ W q x yw q ydy q W q x δ W q x yw q ydy δw q x. By 4.24, we can write v x = G 1x + G 2 x, where G 1 x := g ϕ qϕqe 1 ϕqx δw q δ qϕ qe 1 ϕqx δϕq G 2 x := g 1 δw q ˆf x δ + q ˆfx δ e ϕqy W q ydy e ϕqy W q ydy ϕ qδe ϕqx, ˆf x yw q ydy ˆf x yw q ydy + δ ˆfx, with ˆf as in Remark Now we note that, y A.1 and A.2, A.6 Comining these, we otain e ϕqy W q ydy = 1 δ W q e ϕqy W q ydy = 1 δϕq G 1 x = g ϕ qϕqe ϕqx δ qϕ qe ϕqx δϕq e ϕqy W q ydy e ϕqy W q ydy, e ϕqy W q ydy. e ϕqy W q ydy ϕ qδe ϕqx = ϕ qe ϕqx δ ξ h qϕqe ϕq ϕ qδe ϕqx =, e ϕqy W q ydy

32 32 M. JUNCA, H. MORENO-FRANCO, J.L. PÉREZ, AND K. YAMAZAKI where in the first equality we used A.6 and the last one follows from 4.6. Hence v x = G 2x. Now, using that ˆf x = A.3. Proof of Lemma We have, y 5.4, + te xtˆµdt and Tonelli s theorem, we have A.7 with d W q d h = α [h] 2, >, α := W q h W q ϕqh W q >, >, where the positivity holds y 5.6. If x, we have that, y 5.1, A.8 Ψ x = Z q x qw q + h/ϕq W q x. h Taking derivative with respect to, y A.7 and the positivity of α, dψ x d Therefore, Ψ x is strictly decreasing on [x,. Suppose < x. By A.7 and 5.1, A.9 dψ x d where for x, = δqw q x W q = qw q x α <. [h] 2 + qδwq x W q W q + h/ϕq h [ ] d W q W q x + δ W q x yw q q + h/ϕq ydy d h = q r; xα, [h] 2 r; x := δwq x h ϕq W q x δ Wx yw q ydy. To prove that dψ x /d < on, x, y the positivity of α, we only need to verify that r; x < for all, x. Note that, y 4.8, δw q x h ϕq = δw q x ϕqe ϕq e ϕqy W q ydy W q.