Amid feelings of guilt over not investing enough (a mere 23% feel “proud” of how they handled their money this year), Americans know they need to do more investing and saving for the future, according to the latest Merrill Edge Report.
Of the 1,046 mass affluent Americans (individuals with
$50,000 to $250,000 in investable assets) surveyed for Bank of America’s latest Merrill
Edge Report, more than half (51%) did not save for retirement at all in
2014. Only half (50%) of respondents said they are “content” with the
financial decisions they made.
“Many mass affluent Americans feel they didn’t do enough
this year to put themselves in a good place for the financial future they
desire,” says Aron Levine, head of preferred banking and Merrill Edge at Bank
of America Corporation. “The good news is investors of all ages are rethinking
their priorities and plan to make retirement a top goal in 2015.”
Nearly six out of 10 (59%) respondents say they are
making retirement savings and investing a goal for the upcoming year. This is a
more popular goal than losing weight, which was cited by 42% of
respondents.
Feelings of guilt over not investing outpaced other year-end
regrets including poor eating and drinking choices, not sharing enough time
with loved ones, or spending too much money. However, when asked
about the role finances play in their day-to-day decisions, respondents revealed
these other daily choices merit more of their attention.
While long-term finances are taken into
consideration by most respondents when conducting routine financial activities
such as paying bills (73%) and receiving extra funds (66%), less
than half (47%) make the same connection between daily purchases such as
groceries and their long-term financial goals.
Most do not believe other spending activities
will impact their long-term financial goals, instead believing that spending on
entertainment (33%), eating at restaurants (37%) and paying for
gas (38%) makes a difference for their goals.
The study also found a distinction between Millennials and
older generations. Millennials are the most focused on their investments, with
33% reporting that among a number of other common tasks, they spend the
most time each week on their investments. In comparison, only 20% of Gen
Xers and 17% of Baby Boomers report the same. Importantly, 40% of Gen
Xers say budgeting is a top focus among common financial activities, and 40% of
Baby Boomers cite the grocery list.
“Millennials, in particular, feel they are held back from
investing and saving enough for retirement because of debts from unpaid student
loans,” Levine says.
The survey found that 75% of Millennials have student
debt, and 46% admit to putting off retirement savings and investing
until they have paid off outstanding student loans. However, more than half (51%) of Millennials were able to pay down their debt in 2014.
Levine says, "With some uncertainty still surrounding the economy and the
job market, the younger generation is taking matters into their own hands by
making investing and saving a top priority."
By using this site you agree to our network wide Privacy Policy.
However, relatively few employers use auto-enrollment, and
employers tend to automatically enroll employees at small deferral rates, noted
Natalie Wyatt, senior sales representative with Innovest. In addition, even
fewer employers automatically escalate participants’ deferral rates once they
have been opted into the plan.
In a Conversations That Matter session at the 2014 American
Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries (ASPPA) Annual Conference, led
by Wyatt and Jen Gibbs Swets, senior manager at Dixon Hughes Goodman LLP,
conference attendees discussed strategies for increasing participants’ savings.
There are plan design-based strategies, which include
auto-enrollment, auto-escalation and company match contributions—discretionary,
fixed or safe harbor. The majority of attendees agreed that the default
deferral rate for automatic contribution should be the rate at which
participants get the full match contribution, if there is one. If plan sponsors
start at a lower rate than this, they should use auto-escalation to get
employees at least up to the maximum rate that will be matched.
An attendee suggested using
re-enrollment of all employees instead of just automatically enrolling
only new employees, and doing so annually or periodically to show how important
it is to invest in the retirement plan. Each re-enrollment should drive more
participants into the plan.
Another
attendee noted that auto-escalation is usually tied to auto-enrollment, but
employees that were not auto-enrolled may want to auto-escalate and should be
encouraged to opt-in to auto-escalation.
“Stretching” the match formula is another way to spur
increased employee savings, according to Wyatt and Gibbs Swets. For example,
instead of offering a 50% match of up to 6% of deferrals, offer a 25% match of
up to 12% of deferrals. The participant will have to kick in more savings to
get the match, but the employer will not have to increase the amount it
contributes.
An attendee suggested that plan sponsors implementing a
stretch match include communications to employees that show their projected
account balance at different ages. The messaging should compare the current
plan design along with their projected account balance at different ages with
the new plan design to show how this is a positive change. “This can convince
them to save more or sign up for auto escalate,” he said.
There are several reasons plan sponsors
are hesitant to use automatic plan features for increasing employees’
savings. With auto-enrollment and auto-escalation, plan administration fees may
go up as the number of participants or the assets in the plan increase. Also,
plan sponsors may have to kick in more matching contributions as more employees
enroll in the plan. These reasons are particularly bothersome to plan sponsors
in industries in which there is high employee turnover and a plan can end up
with many small terminated participant balances, an attendee mentioned. Wyatt
stressed that auto-enrollment is not for every plan; plan sponsors have to
consider what is best for their plan.
Many plan sponsors are concerned with what happens if an
error occurs in the administration of auto-enrollment—if a participant is
missed, the employer will have to contribute the amount of deferral, match and
earnings the participant would have made and accrued. Attendees of the
conference session agreed that immediate eligibility is the simplest way to
avoid missing an eligible employee, and if using set entry dates—first of the
month or first of the quarter following eligibility—there must be a person responsible
for monitoring who is eligible.
The issue of who takes responsibility for getting employees
into the plan when using auto-enrollment is also a concern for plan sponsors.
It could be the responsibility of the payroll administrator, a third-party administrator
or recordkeeper. One attendee who works for a recordkeeper says it provides a
report of employees eligible for auto enrollment or auto escalation to the plan
sponsor and the plan sponsor implements it through payroll.
Aside
from plan design-based strategies for increasing participants’ savings, there
are service-based strategies.
One attendee suggested that participant communications
should focus on retirement income. Plan participants should be provided with
retirement income projections, and a best practice is to provide a projection
that takes into account a participant’s income and place of residence.
Conference attendees discussed how retirement readiness means different things
depending on an employee’s state of residence, standard of living and planned
activities for retirement.
A gap analysis is another way to get plan participants
focused on retirement income. One attendee suggested this should be followed up
with a one-on-one discussion with an adviser. And, the adviser should be
on-site at the place of business of the plan sponsor because “if you just
provide a number for participants to call for a follow up, they won’t
respond.” A discussion is needed to let participants know why focusing on
retirement income is important, and according to one attendee, participants
should be informed about how health care costs will affect their retirement.
One attendee mentioned the importance of general financial
education. “If an employee can’t manage his finances and pay his bills, then he
can’t afford to save,” she said. Education that will help them budget and
manage debt will help them “find” money to save.
Wyatt noted that targeted education can be effective. Plan
sponsors should hold meetings for different generations and genders to discuss
issues they are dealing with currently. An attendee noted that getting them to
take some kind of action at the meeting—joining the plan or increasing their
deferral rate—is important because “the impact of the meeting will be gone
later.”
An attendee asked how to avoid violating employees' confidentiality, for example, if the plan sponsor wants to target all employees
who are not saving. Another attendee suggested providing employees with a video
to view on their own. Wyatt said a webcast or a postcard with a tear off for
enrolling or increasing savings would honor confidentiality with a targeted
message.