"After" Math


Last week, EBRI Research Director Jack VanDerhei testified[i] before the House Ways & Means Committee on the subject of “Tax Reform and Tax-Favored Retirement Accounts”, a hearing described as considering “…the current menu of options for retirement savings—both with respect to employer-based defined contribution plans and with respect to IRAs.”  According to Committee Chairman David Camp (R-MI), the hearing was to “…explore whether, as part of comprehensive tax reform, various reform options could achieve the three goals of simplification, efficiency, and increasing retirement and financial security for American families.”

That hearing preceded by just a day Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kurt Conrad’s (D-North Dakota) unveiling of his Fiscal Commission Budget Plan (see link here).   That plan[ii] referenced the original Bowles-Simpson Fiscal Commission’s “Illustrative” Tax Reform option under which the exclusion for employer-provided health insurance would be modified, capping its value for five years and then phasing it out over 20 years, while retirement savings accounts would be consolidated, with a cap on tax-preferred contributions.[iii] 

While the prospects for actual legislation ahead of the November election seem unlikely, it is clear that concerns about the nation’s budget deficit will keep tax reform—and the tax status of workplace benefit programs—front-and-center in the weeks and months to come. 

Appropriately enough, next month EBRI will host its 70th policy forum, titled "’After’ Math: The Impact and Influence of Incentives on Benefit Policy.”  At this semi-annual policy forum, panels of experts will deal with a variety of pertinent and timely issues, including the potential impact of changes to current tax incentives for employee benefits,  and the “true cost” of tax deferrals.   

We’ll also talk about what 401(k)/defined contribution plans are delivering, and what individuals actually do after retirement with respect to their retirement savings, as well as optimal approaches on retirement income designs for defined contribution plans.  We’ll even look around the globe for some potential lessons to be drawn from international comparisons.   

It’s a day of information, interaction, and networking that you won’t want to miss.   

However, seats are limited—reserve your place today.  You can’t afford not to.

A copy of the full Policy Forum agenda, and registration information is online here.

- Nevin E. Adams, JD

[i] A copy of Jack VanDerhei’s written testimony for the House Ways & Means Committee is available online here. 
Video of the testimony is available in two sections, Part 1 and Part 2.
Additional information regarding the Ways & Means hearing is available online here.

[ii] See page 11, online here.

[iii] Last year an EBRI Notes article (July 2011, online here) analyzed the potential impact of those kind of changes on retirement savings.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is the 401(k) Really a ‘Horrible’ Retirement Plan?

Image
  A recent “news” post about a blog post finds some curious “faults” with the 401(k). The news item carried the provocative title “ ‘Rich Dad’ Robert Kiyosaki Reveals Why the 401(k) Is a ‘Horrible’ Retirement Plan .” It originally ran on GoBankingRates.com, but was subsequently picked up in syndication on Yahoo Finance (at least). For the uninitiated, Robert Kiyosaki is one of those “I’ll help you get rich the way I did” types, providing that road map via books (notably “Rich Dad, Poor Dad”) and seminars. He offers comparisons to decisions made by his dad (poor dad) in contrast to those of the father of his best friend (rich dad).  Suffice it to say that his dad worked hard and saved the old-fashioned way—which is NOT his advice to you. That’s included previous pearls of wisdom like “ Why Saving Money is the Wrong Way to Prepare for Retirement .” Apparently rather than saving for retirement, we’re supposed to “look for an investment that will pay for your desired standard of living. Ma
Read more

4 Fiduciary Resolutions for 2024

Image
  A brand new year awaits us – and with the New Year comes an opportunity to assess and reassess – for some when, resolutions for the cessation of bad behaviors and the beginning of better ones are in vogue. Here are some for plan fiduciaries for 2024 – that could benefit plan outcomes for years to come.  See if your target-date options are over-weight(ed)     Flows to target-date funds have continued to be strong – and little wonder, what with their positioning as the qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) of choice for most 401(k)s. That said, the vast majority of those assets are still under the purview of an incredibly small number of firms – nearly all of which (despite marketing brochures to the contrary) appear to share very similar views as to what an appropriate glidepath is supposed to look like – and nearly all of which have embraced the notion that a target-date is little more than a speed bump along the “through” target-date glidepath.    A tar
Read more

Does Your 401(k) Need ‘Guardrails?’

Image
A new WSJ op-ed says that 401(k)s “too often lead employees to make financially harmful mistakes.”  And yes, advisors are (apparently) part of the problem. The “problem”—at least according to the op-ed authors is that, left to their own devices participants are said to be inclined to overindulge in bad investment choices; choices they claim are the result of plan sponsors’ ignorance of how their workforce is actually using the options—an ignorance born of advisors failing to provide that information. Advisors, they comment, who “don’t have any financial incentive to provide such information, or to design plans in ways that would tend to reduce diversification mistakes to begin with.” Now I can’t speak for every advisor, but I know plenty who are actually devoting a fair amount of time and energy to tracking—and sharing, certainly in the aggregate—the asset allocation decisions of the participants in the plan with the plan committee. Beyond that, no small number of par
Read more