Pets, teachers and colleagues join spouses and significant
others on gift lists again this year, with spending on dining and jewelry
expected to reach into the billions of dollars, according to the National
Retail Federation’s 2014 Valentine’s Day spending survey.
Men are the big spenders on Valentine’s Day. Men are projected
to spend $108.38 on gifts for their significant others, twice as much as women,
who will spend $49.41 on their special someone. But Valentine’s Day isn’t just
for couples. People show their appreciation for family members (59%) friends (22%)
teachers (20%) and colleagues (12%). And like every holiday, Americans won’t
forget about their pets: 19% will buy gifts for their furry friends, spending
an average of $5.51.
The number of celebrants is forecast to tick down, with 54%
of American consumers celebrating with their loved ones this year, compared with
60% in 2013. The average person plans to spend a bit more this year: $133.91
for candy, cards, gifts, dinner and more, just slightly above last year’s
$130.97. Total spending is expected to reach $17.3 billion.
The main purchase is candy (49%), followed by flowers (37%).
More than half those marking the holiday will send cards (51%). About one in
five (19%) will treat their significant other to something sparkly. Jewelry
spending will total $3.9 billion. More than a third (37%) will celebrate with
an evening out, spending an estimated total of $3.5 billion. Others will give
clothing (16%) or gift cards (14%).
About a quarter of Valentine’s Day shopping takes place
online (26%), almost the same number as last year. Online shopping is in line
with the trend of cautious spending: 24% will research products or compare
prices on their smartphones and 32% on their tablets.
By using this site you agree to our network wide Privacy Policy.
According to Prudential Group Insurance, a business of
Prudential Financial Inc., at least 60% of men and 80% of women will need to
pay for long-term care at some point in their lifetime, and the related expense
is likely to damage retirement savings and independence.
Three factors in particular are pressuring the financial
wellness of employees and widening insurance coverage gaps, says Robert Pokorski,
vice president and medical director for Prudential Individual Life Insurance,
particularly in the event of a critical illness.
First, most households have insufficient savings available to
meet higher out-of-pocket expenses, Pokorski says. In fact, about half of U.S.
households have savings less than $10,000. Moreover, nearly half of households
report that, if needed, they would not be able to come up with $2,000 in cash
within 30 days. And while some employees may be covered by disability insurance,
the benefit received is usually only a portion of the employee’s income, making
cash outlays in the event of a critical illness difficult for the nearly 70% of
Americans that Prudential says are living paycheck to paycheck.
Next, health care costs are expected to continue to increase
faster than inflation for some time to come. On Prudential’s assessment, health
expenditures are expected to grow at 5.3% through 2020, whereas inflation is projected
at 2.1% over the same period. That will put even more strain on American
workers who are already struggling to save effectively for retirement,
Prudential says.
And
finally, in response to rising health care costs, many employers have been
forced to shift more responsibility for health care expenses to employees. So even
though employers paid 20% more towards their employees’ health insurance in 2010
than they did in 2005, workers paid significantly more (47%) during the same
time frame, while wages only increased 18%.
Those figures have significant implications not just for
employees and their families, but also for the financial professionals tasked with
advising workers on such matters, says Robert Patience, vice president of voluntary
benefits for Prudential Insurance Group.
Patience says several of Prudential Financial Inc.’s
life-insurance businesses have recently released products that can deliver
advanced death benefits and cash support for both medical and nonmedical costs
associated with short- and long-term care, both on an individual basis and
through workplace arrangements.
He pushed one new style of product in particular, critical
care insurance, as a means for large employers and advisers to offer an
affordable-but-effective benefit that helps their employees deal with the potentially
catastrophic financial impact of illnesses such as cancer, heart attack,
stroke, Alzheimer’s and various others.
The products take a fundamentally different approach to
benefit delivery than traditional long-term care arrangements, Patience says,
which may be more attractive to advisers and workers than more traditional long-term
care insurance. Many advisers shy away from offering long-term care solutions
simply due to their expense and complexity, but that could change as the U.S.
population ages and demand for care grows (see “Will
Advisers Add Long-Term Care to Offerings?”).
The new types of solutions, Patience explains, pay a lump
sum upon the diagnosis of a specific covered illness or condition, which can be
used for any purpose—not just for medical bills. Patience says the critical care
offerings are far more affordable than traditional long-term care options,
which can assess thousands of dollars in annual premiums for even modest
coverage. With the critical care products, Patience says, the average worker
pays closer to $250 a year for around $15,000 in cash coverage.
“That’s
going to boil down to a very affordable per-paycheck premium,” Patience says,
which should in turn mean better uptake by participants.