Employees Using ESPPs Wisely, Fidelity Says

The investment firm says that employee stock purchase programs (ESPPs) can significantly boost workers’ savings.

Having taken a deep dive into the trading activity of 365,000 workers who purchase company stock through an employee stock purchase program (ESPP) over the past three years, Fidelity Investments concluded that many sold their shares at a profit.

Those most likely to sell their shares are those who got a significant discount on the price and those under 40, Fidelity says.

“Company stock plans are increasingly viewed as a top employee benefit and can play an important role in an employee’s overall financial health,” says Mark Haggerty, head of stock plan services at Fidelity. “Employees often use these plans as a savings vehicle alongside their 401(k), but money from an ESPP can be used to address short-term expenses and financial needs—and help workers avoid the need to tap their 401(k).”

In the past three years, 50% of workers in an ESPP sold all of their shares. Plans that offer stock at a 15% discount have twice the participation rates than plans with lower discounts.

Overall, older employees are more inclined to hold onto their company stock. However, the percentage of workers between the ages of 50 and 60 who sold all of their company stock increased from 41% in 2014 to 44% in 2015. Likewise, among those age 60 and older, the percentage who sold all of their stock increased from 34% in 2014 to 38% in 2015.

Fidelity also found that the more that employees contribute to their ESPP, the more likely they are to sell their shares; among workers who contributed $10,000 or more to their ESPP each year, 57% sold all of their shares in 2015, up from 52% in 2014.

Fidelity also asked survey respondents what they used the proceeds for. The most common was paying down debt (34%); followed by reinvesting the money, either directly in a mutual fund or through their retirement savings account (19%); home improvement (17%); and establishing an emergency fund (11%).

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

JP Morgan 401(k) Target of Third ERISA Challenge

All three lawsuits filed in New York district court argue the company improperly favored its own investment options within the retirement plan offered to workers; the firm flatly denies the underlying allegations. 

The 401(k) retirement plan offered to employees of JP Morgan Chase Bank is now the target of a third Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuit.

This challenge has also been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, and argues like the first two lawsuits that the firm loaded the investment menu of the retirement plan with its own proprietary products and those of its business partner, BlackRock—to promote the financial interest of both entities rather than that of the plan participants.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

The text of the suit offers a detailed look at the investment menu offered to JP Morgan employees, as well as the way fees for the plan have been assessed during recent years. Plaintiffs assert that various conflicts of interest were permitted to exist within the plan ecosystem, and that the plan’s fiduciaries breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence by continuing to select and retain “unduly expensive core funds and target-date funds.”

Plaintiffs argue that, “in selecting and maintaining investment options that generated significant revenue for JPMorgan Chase or its affiliates or BlackRock, the [plan fiduciaries] acted in transactions involving the plan on behalf of a party (or represent a party) whose interests are adverse to the interests of the plan or the interests of its participants or beneficiaries.” Accordingly, the plaintiffs allege that the plan officials’ “imprudent, disloyal, self-interested and otherwise conflicted decisions” violated ERISA’s prohibited transaction provisions.

The full text of the lawsuit is available here

«