Nevin's Data "Points"

Most people view automatic enrollment in a 401(k) as a good thing 1  – but apparently it has a heretofore unappreciated “dark” side. At least that was the focus of a headline in a recent Wall Street Journal article  (subscription required) that asked (and answered) the provocative question: “401(k) or ATM? Automated Retirement Savings Prove Easy to Pluck Prematurely.” That is at least how the Journal chose to position its coverage of a study based on a single firm’s experience with automatic enrollment. That study , according to the Journal , serves to “answer a question that has long concerned employers that put workers into 401(k) plans and give them the option to drop out, rather than requiring them to sign up on their own: Will auto-enrolled workers treat their 401(k)s like automated-teller machines?” Now, I’ve heard a lot of questions over the years from plan sponsors about automatic enrollment – but never that one. Regardless, the Journal says that the study

Delegates to last week’s NAPA DC Fly-In Forum had a lot to learn and say about a wide array of topics – but multiple employer plans (MEPs) dominated the discussion. The reason, as has been noted in previous coverage on NAPA Net, is the Small Business Employees Retirement Enhancement Act, introduced earlier this month  by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), which includes provisions regarding so-called “open” MEPs, a type of employee benefit plan that can be maintained as a single plan in which two or more unrelated employers participate. This is a concept that has received bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, and of which the American Retirement Association has been largely supportive, viewing it as a device that could broaden coverage by encouraging employers to offer a plan. However, under this bill, employers that have 100 or fewer employees who earned at least $5,000 during the preceding year and that participate in a pooled employer plan (PEP) registered with the Labor Depar