Modernizing the U.S. Retirement System: It Takes a Village
Aug 1, 2018, 00:00 AM
Modernizing the U.S. Retirement System: It Takes a Village
Super Text :
Full Content Date :
August 1, 2018
Full Content Page Count :
Volume Number :
I recently moderated a discussion entitled “Modernizing the U.S.
Retirement System” at a meeting by the American Academy of Actuaries.
The panel consisted of some of the best thinkers in retirement: Ted
Goldman of the American Academy of Actuaries; Stephen Goss of the Social
Security Administration; Mark Iwry of The Brookings Institute, and
former Senior Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury; and Steve Vernon
of the Stanford Center of Longevity.
For them, the challenge is clear: The onus is increasingly on
American workers to secure their retirement future, and many are not up
to the task. Ted Goldman compared it to asking drivers to assemble their
own cars before going to work in the morning — most would simply stare
at the pile of auto parts in confusion. Yet American workers are
expected to manage their retirement plans as if they are financial
professionals.
In addition, the panel concluded, our retirement system has serious
holes around coverage and adequacy. Yet policymakers continue to address
these gaps in only a fragmented way.
The panelists listed nearly two dozen ideas for moving our retirement
system into the future, including reducing defined contribution (DC)
plan leakage, creating emergency savings funds, auto-IRAs, personalized
auto features, risk pooling, retirement income portfolios, and required
minimum distribution reform.
Some of the ideas from the panelists were controversial, but many
were just common sense, such as creating protections and incentives for
employers and providers to offer solutions that help individuals do a
better job of assembling their retirement parts.
How can we do this? Mark Iwry gave the example of how he used rulings
and general information letters starting in 1998 to make employers
comfortable with offering automatic enrollment in DC plans. His efforts
were clearly critical in putting automatic enrollment on the map when it
comes to DC plan design. However, the reality remains that automatic
enrollment was still hampered by considerations such as state wage laws
and lack of a safe harbor; take-up rates remained low despite his
efforts. Then came the Pension Protection Act of 2006. Once plan
sponsors had the protections they needed, adoption soared. Today the
majority of large 401(k) plans have adopted automatic enrollment, and
most with automatic enrollment also have automatic contribution
escalation in place as well. There is no doubt this has led to higher
participation and contribution rates by American workers.
The clear message is that it takes creative solutions as well as a
partnership between the private sector, regulators, and legislators to
develop a holistic approach that will ultimately lead to a retirement
system that does a better job of securing American workers’ financial
future. The dialogue started at the American Academy of Actuaries needs
to continue.
Full Content Product / Source :
EBRI Blog
Access Package :
PUBLIC
Full Content Fielded Links
EBRI Blog
Modernizing the U.S. Retirement System: It Takes a Village
I recently moderated a discussion entitled “Modernizing the U.S.
Retirement System” at a meeting by the American Academy of Actuaries.
The panel consisted of some of the best thinkers in retirement: Ted
Goldman of the American Academy of Actuaries; Stephen Goss of the Social
Security Administration; Mark Iwry of The Brookings Institute, and
former Senior Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury; and Steve Vernon
of the Stanford Center of Longevity.
For them, the challenge is clear: The onus is increasingly on
American workers to secure their retirement future, and many are not up
to the task. Ted Goldman compared it to asking drivers to assemble their
own cars before going to work in the morning — most would simply stare
at the pile of auto parts in confusion. Yet American workers are
expected to manage their retirement plans as if they are financial
professionals.
In addition, the panel concluded, our retirement system has serious
holes around coverage and adequacy. Yet policymakers continue to address
these gaps in only a fragmented way.
The panelists listed nearly two dozen ideas for moving our retirement
system into the future, including reducing defined contribution (DC)
plan leakage, creating emergency savings funds, auto-IRAs, personalized
auto features, risk pooling, retirement income portfolios, and required
minimum distribution reform.
Some of the ideas from the panelists were controversial, but many
were just common sense, such as creating protections and incentives for
employers and providers to offer solutions that help individuals do a
better job of assembling their retirement parts.
How can we do this? Mark Iwry gave the example of how he used rulings
and general information letters starting in 1998 to make employers
comfortable with offering automatic enrollment in DC plans. His efforts
were clearly critical in putting automatic enrollment on the map when it
comes to DC plan design. However, the reality remains that automatic
enrollment was still hampered by considerations such as state wage laws
and lack of a safe harbor; take-up rates remained low despite his
efforts. Then came the Pension Protection Act of 2006. Once plan
sponsors had the protections they needed, adoption soared. Today the
majority of large 401(k) plans have adopted automatic enrollment, and
most with automatic enrollment also have automatic contribution
escalation in place as well. There is no doubt this has led to higher
participation and contribution rates by American workers.
The clear message is that it takes creative solutions as well as a
partnership between the private sector, regulators, and legislators to
develop a holistic approach that will ultimately lead to a retirement
system that does a better job of securing American workers’ financial
future. The dialogue started at the American Academy of Actuaries needs
to continue.