Nevin's Data "Points"

There’s no one silver bullet likely to close the nation’s retirement plan coverage gap—but the target is pretty easy to spot. As it turns out, the nation’s retirement plan access coverage gap is almost exclusively found among small businesses, and it’s not hard to imagine why. The failure rate for small businesses is daunting—and those who’ve managed to avoid that fate are doubtless focused on trying to avoid becoming a statistic. Under those circumstances one can well appreciate that offering benefits, much less RETIREMENT benefits, probably seems like a luxury for another time, if not another business. A recent issue brief by Anqi Chen and Alicia Munnell of the Center for Retirement Research (CRR) at Boston College examined the issue, and drawing on previous research [i] cited the following three main barriers: uncertain revenues that make it hard for a firm to commit to a plan; employee preferences for wages and other benefits; [ii] and the cost associated with esta...

I’ve never played the lottery. But there are days… I tell myself it’s because I know how remote the odds are, that the rules are too complicated, that they “feed” on the aspirations of people who should be spending their money on “better” things – and even that I don’t have enough “lucky” numbers to bet on consistently. But those are rationalizations. The simple fact, despite the screaming billboards and nightly news reminders about the size of the latest “mega” jackpot, is that I simply find it inconvenient. Oh, it’s not like I never frequent the convenience stores or even grocery checkouts that these days beg for the cash/credit card that hasn’t yet been put away. I’ve never really regretted walking away from those “temptations.” And yet…     As an industry, we spend a lot of time focused on a wide variety of considerations that impact the likelihood of having a financially satisfying retirement. But what about those who don’t have access to a...

Over the coming weeks, a question that you’re likely to see posed (again and again) about the President’s Executive Order is – “will it work?” “Work” in this case means to expand access to workplace retirement plans, for that is the stated policy of the Trump administration in issuing the order . The answer, of course, will depend in no small part on what emerges as a result. While it’s hard to argue with the underlying principle, and even less with the foundational arguments (“Enhancing workplace retirement plan coverage is critical to ensuring that American workers will be financially prepared to retire” and “Regulatory burdens and complexity can be costly and discourage employers, especially small businesses, from offering workplace retirement plans to their employees”), at this point the order is no more than a directive to the Labor and Treasury Departments to consider and recommend some alternatives. That said, the directives  are reasonably specific – t...

Several weeks back, I was invited to participate in a group conversation on retirement and the future. The group of 15 (they’re listed at the end of the document that summarized the conclusions) that  Politico pulled together was diverse, both in background and philosophies, and included academics, think tanks, advocacy groups, and the Hill. It was conducted under Chatham House rules, which means that while our comments might be shared, they wouldn’t be specifically attributed. That latter point was helpful to the openness of the discussion, where several individuals had opinions that they acknowledged wouldn’t be supported by the groups they represent. The conversation touched on a wide range of topics, everything from the key challenges to the current system, the private sector’s role in addressing these problems, the individual’s role (and responsibility) for securing their own retirement, government’s role and the potential for current congressional proposa...

Have you heard this one? “Only about half of working Americans are covered by a workplace retirement plan.” Sure you have. It’s a statistic that is widely cited and reported, both in the mainstream press and on Capitol Hill. It comes from a reliable, objective source (the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey) and conjures up a compelling need for action by advisors (and others) hoping and working to expand the availability of workplace retirement plans. In reviewing the Census Bureau data, the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) recently noted that , in 2011, 78.5 million workers worked for an employer or union that did not sponsor a retirement plan. That is the “less than half” number cited, and reported, with such vigor. However, when you look at the data underlying that aggregate number, you find it includes: 8.9 million people who were self-employed (and thus arguably are prevented from being covered by their own inaction); 6.2 million who were under the...

At some point in just about every police drama, potential suspects are vetted against the following criteria: Did they have the motive to commit the crime, and did they have the opportunity? Those who lack either are generally quickly dismissed as suspects because it is assumed that, lacking those two essential elements, they simply couldn’t—or wouldn’t—have done the crime. While it’s not generally couched in such terms, the focus on remedying retirement savings shortfalls often turns on those elements as well. Granted, most individuals would concede they have a motive for saving for retirement. After all, how many of us would consciously embrace the notion of a less-than-financially secure retirement, given a choice? Opportunity is another matter. We know that, given the opportunity to save in a workplace retirement plan, most do. However, we also know that, outside those workplace programs—despite a wide-range of available alternatives—the vast majority do not. Not surprisingly...

Sooner or later, at just about every retirement plan conference, you’ll hear someone—and generally more than just one someone—cite the statistic that “only about half of working Americans are covered by a workplace retirement plan.” It’s a data point that is widely and openly presented as fact—not only by those inclined to dismiss the current system as inadequate (or worse), but even by some of its most ardent champions, who see it as a call to action for expanded access to these programs. It’s drawn from the U.S. Census Bureau’s March 2012 Current Population Survey (CPS).(1) But does it tell the full story? A recent EBRI Issue Brief notes that in 2011, 78.5 million workers worked for an employer/union that did not sponsor a retirement plan. Looking specifically at those who did not work for an employer that sponsored a plan, the report notes that: 8.9 million were self-employed (and were thus barred from having a plan by their own inaction). 6.2 million were under the age of 2...