Americans Support Maintaining Retirement Plan Tax Incentives

More than eight in 10 U.S. households believe the current tax incentives to encourage retirement saving should be preserved, according to research from the Investment Company Institute (ICI).

Specifically, the study found 85% of all U.S. households disagreed when asked whether the tax advantages of DC accounts should be eliminated. Eighty-three percent opposed any reduction in workers’ account contribution limits.   

Among households owning defined contribution (DC) accounts or individual retirement accounts (IRAs), nearly nine in 10 disagreed with eliminating or reducing the tax incentives.  

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

A vast majority of households agree that preserving the current retirement savings incentives should be a national priority. Eighty-eight percent of households owning DC accounts or IRAs agree with this policy priority, while 76% of households without DC accounts or IRAs agree.  

The ICI study—”America’s Commitment to Retirement Security: Investor Attitudes and Actions”—found that such agreement was consistently high across various demographic and financial characteristics.

 

Americans Have Confidence in DC Plan System 

The results of ICI’s study also revealed a number of key findings about U.S. households and DC-owning households. An overwhelming majority of DC-owning households find these plans promote retirement saving. Nine in 10 households with DC accounts agreed that these plans helped them think about the long term and made it easier for them to save. More than 80% of DC-owning households said the immediate tax savings from their retirement plans were a big incentive to contribute.  

Households continue to appreciate the key features—such as flexibility and participant control—of DC plans. In addition, households’ views on policy changes revealed a preference for preserving retirement account features and flexibility. Eighty-seven percent of households opposed the notion of not allowing individuals to make investment decisions in their DC accounts, and nearly eight in 10 disagreed with the idea of replacing all retirement accounts with a government bond.  

Investors greatly value the ability to choose and control their investments. Nearly all households with DC accounts agreed that it was important to have choice in, and control of, the investment options in their DC plans. Seventy-nine percent said their plan offers a good lineup of investment options.  

Households generally continue to have positive attitudes toward the 401(k) system: In 2011, 65% of all U.S. households had favorable impressions of 401(k) and similar plan accounts, compared with 64% in 2010. Nearly three-quarters of households expressed confidence DC plan accounts could help participants meet their retirement goals.  

The research is based on data collected in a survey of 3,000 U.S. households in November and December 2011.

 

DC Participants Continued Saving 

The ICI research also provides the results of a survey of DC plan recordkeepers covering nearly 24 million DC accounts during the first three quarters of 2011, and found from January through September 2011, DC plan participants continued to contribute to their 401(k) accounts. Only 2.2% of DC plan participants stopped contributions during these nine months, compared with 3.4% of participants during the comparable time period a year earlier.  

DC plan participants generally did not tap their accounts. Only 2.8% of DC plan participants took withdrawals during these nine months, with only 1.4% taking hardship withdrawals—a pace similar to the same time frame a year earlier.  

Loan activity was similar to the level observed last year. At the end of September 2011, the survey data indicated 18.4% of DC plan participants had loans outstanding, compared with 18.2% of participants at year-end 2010.  

The research report is available at http://www.ici.org/pdf/ppr_12_retir_sec_update.pdf.

 

Investment Consultants Recommend Custom TDFs

Over two-thirds (69%) of investment consultants surveyed by PIMCO either support client interest or actively promote creating custom target-date strategies.

 

Others (8%) base their views on whether custom is appropriate for the situation based on specific client factors. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of firms believe it makes sense for plan sponsors with $500 million or less in plan assets to consider creating their own custom strategies. Only 8% of firms believe $1 billion or more in plan assets is needed for custom strategies.  

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Over two-thirds (71%) of consultants believe that a custom approach to target-date funds would improve current packaged products. Less than one-quarter (21%) believe there is plenty of choice among current packaged target-date funds.  

Consultants believe the top three reasons not to implement custom strategies are difficulty of operational setup, time required to implement and fear of liability, insufficient asset size and asset allocation setup and oversight is too demanding.  

In order of importance, consultants report that plan sponsors consider these factors as they evaluate target-date or target-risk strategies: glide path structure, fees, active vs. passive, breadth of underlying investment and performance. Consultants report the following as the most common approaches to benchmark target-date or target-risk strategies: peer group comparison, investment manager index composite and consultant-created index composite. 

 

 

(Cont...)

An increasing percentage of consultants (65%) believe that tactical asset allocation is a critical to somewhat important component of glide path management. Only about a third (35%) of firms said that tactical asset allocation is not important. 

The majority of consultants (78%) believe that investing in Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) is the best risk mitigation approach within asset allocation strategies. Nearly two-thirds of consultants (64%) recommend reducing exposure to assets with highly uncertain outcomes.  

Almost two-thirds (65%) of consultants feel that current glide paths are somewhat to highly appropriate, whereas over one-third (35%) believe that current glide paths are somewhat to highly inappropriate (i.e., too aggressive).   

Over three-quarters (78%) of consultants believe that the allocation to risk assets (e.g., equities) for those at retirement age (e.g., 65) should not exceed 40%. Nearly one-third of consultants (32%) believe that the glide path should reach its lowest risk allocation (e.g., equities) between the ages of 71 and 75. Just over a quarter (26%) of consultants believe the lowest risk should be reached earlier, between ages 66 and 70. Notably, 16% of consultants cited other factors, such as demographics and retirement age, as driving factors.  

There is general consensus among consultants when it comes to loss tolerance for participants at different ages. Almost all consultants cited a loss tolerance of more than 30% at age 25, up to 30% at age 35, up to 20% at age 45, up to 10% at age 55, and between 0% and 5% at the age of 65. 

 

(Cont...)

Almost two-thirds (64%) of firms believe that managed accounts should be an opt-in asset allocation choice only, whereas only 15% believe that managed accounts should be an opt-out investment default (plus opt-in choice). Notably, five firms (13%) believe managed accounts have no role in a  defined contribution (DC) plan.  

The majority of consultants believe that active management makes sense for all asset classes except large-cap U.S. equities and TIPS. Consultants report that the most important asset classes to actively manage are non-U.S. bonds, emerging-market equities and global asset allocation strategies.  

Nearly all (90%) consultants believe that lower cost is the most common factor driving interest in passive investing followed by legal concerns (57%) and communication simplicity (47%).  

Nearly all firms (97%) recommend that clients offer a target-date or target-risk investment tier, and 92% suggest that a core fund tier (with both active and passive investment choices) be provided. Sixty-eight percent suggest a brokerage window, with the majority recommending mutual funds only.

 

(Cont...)

Investment management firms believe that emerging-markets equity (67%), followed by commodities (60%) and then absolute return (including unconstrained equity and fixed income) (57%) would bring the most value as added asset classes within the core or as an addition to an asset allocation strategy.  

Over half (52%) of consultants believe that adding global fixed income strategies may enhance plan sponsors’ DC equity offerings. Nearly half (48%) believe that adding global equity and non-U.S. (emerging market) strategies may enhance DC equity offerings, while close to half (45%) suggest that combining equity styles (value and growth) may help. Nearly one-third of consultants (29%) suggest adding a global unconstrained strategy.  

The majority of consultant firms (72%) believe that over the next two years it is somewhat likely to highly likely that at least some clients will add a retirement income investment option to their DC plans. Twenty-eight percent believe it is unlikely. Consultants said that retirement income products most likely to attract client interest are stable value, diversified income and a systematic withdrawal program. Consultants’ primary concerns with offering in-plan annuity products include transparency, insurance company default risk, cost and portability.   

The PIMCO DC Practice "2012 Defined Contribution Consulting Support and Trends Survey" captures data, trends and opinions from 39 consulting firms across the U.S., which serve over 3,600 plan sponsors with aggregate DC assets of more than $1.8 trillion as of December 31, 2011.  

For survey highlights or other PIMCO DC publications, call 888-845-5012 or e-mail pimcodcpractice@pimco.com.

 

«