Jefferson National has selected LifeYield, a creator of financial
software, to power a new asset location tool that will help registered
investment advisers (RIAs) and fee-based advisers enhance after-tax outcomes
for their clients. Now under development, the tool is slated to launch in early
2016.
The use of LifeYield’s software in the proprietary tool will
allow advisers to identify the optimal location for assets based on tax efficiency
to maximize the tax advantages of Jefferson National’s Monument Advisor, a
flat-fee, investment only variable annuity (IOVA). According to Morningstar
research, optimal asset location can add 100 to 200 basis points per year in
incremental after-tax returns—without increasing risk.
Laurence Greenberg, president of Jefferson National, cited LifeYield
for its pioneering tax-smart investing solutions. The tool’s aim is to create
real, quantifiable value for RIAs and fee-based advisers, Greenberg said in a
statement.
Mark Hoffman, chief executive of LifeYield, said the tool can
be of real value for advisers in improving client outcomes while also expanding
adviser assets under management.
More information about Jefferson National is on
their website.
By using this site you agree to our network wide Privacy Policy.
It’s commonly known that the nation has a substantial number
of households considered at risk for an uncertain retirement. The Center for
Retirement Research at Boston College (CRR) created a National Retirement Risk
Index, which measures retirement preparedness and found that more than half of
households may be unable to maintain their standard of living in retirement.
Using the retirement index, CRR set out to investigate the
effect, if any, of inheritances on retirement savings. Today’s working
households stand to inherit substantial wealth, the center said in its recently
released brief, “How Do Inheritances Affect the National Retirement Risk Index?”
The question is, would it make a significant difference to Americans in
retirement?
After a discussion and description of the index, the brief
examines the inheritance questions in the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer
Finances to look at the relationship between inheritance and the retirement
status of households in the index.
The central question is how many more households would be
unprepared for retirement without any inheritance. To answer this, the CRR set
out to eliminate inheritance numbers from the data, first by projecting the
value of the inheritances received to age 65 and by calculating the annuity
income at age 65 that is generated by inherited wealth.
The results from the CRR’s methodology, fully described in
the brief, show that inheritance has but a modest effect on at-risk households. Households in the top
and bottom thirds of the income distribution are less affected by taking away
inheritances than those in the middle, according to the brief.
While those in the top third are the most likely to receive
inheritances, they are also the least likely to rely on them for retirement
preparedness because they can turn to many other financial resources. Those in
the bottom third are less likely to receive any inheritance at all. Since those
in the bottom third that do receive an inheritance are already at risk for
retirement insecurity, the inheritance does little to reduce their at-risk
status.
NEXT:
One group could see more of a difference when they inherit wealth.
Middle-income households seem more reliant on inheritances
for retirement security than those above, and are more likely than those below
to actually receive one and rely on it for making the difference in retirement
preparedness.
While inheritance barely moves the needle on retirement
preparedness for the population as a whole, it does have a greater effect on
the recipient population. Middle-income household retirement insecurity grew, from
42.6% to 50%, when the inheritance factor was eliminated, a 7.4 percentage
point change.
CRR’s conclusion is that while inheritances improve the
financial situation of households that do receive them, their impact on the
overall retirement risk status of the population in the index is quite modest. The
result holds true both when removing inheritances from households that have
received them and when expanding the number of households that might receive
them in the future.
When inheritances are removed, the modest impact is based on
the fact that few households are affected, since only about one-fifth of
households have actually received one. Then, too, those that do receive an
inheritance reap a relatively small amount compared with the total retirement
income needs of the household. Most households receiving an inheritance were already well
above the index’s “at risk” cutoff, so removing the inheritance is not enough
to put them at risk.
In the case of increasing inheritances in the future, the
effect is modest because only one-fifth of households receive them; the amounts
are relatively small; and many of the additional households assigned an
inheritance were already “not at risk” for retirement, so giving them more
money obviously does not affect that status.
The bottom line, according to the report’s conclusion, is
that, while anything that boosts households’ assets is beneficial, inheritances
are unlikely to play a significant role in changing retirement readiness.
“How Do Inheritances Affect the National
Retirement Risk Index?” can be accessed from CRR’s website.