Products May 10, 2021

ShareBuilder 401k Promotes Value of 401(k)s During Pandemic

The company is waiving setup fees for 401(k) plans through May 21.

Reported by

ShareBuilder 401k notes that 401(k)s have recovered from the market crashes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and gone on to perform incredibly well over the past year.

The firm also notes that 401(k) plans offer additional benefits for both participants and plan sponsors beyond retirement savings, including tax benefits and protection from bankruptcy. Federal law protects most employee retirement plan balances from creditors if an employee has to file for bankruptcy, the company notes. And plan sponsors that were able to continue making tax-deferred contributions to their 401(k) plans also benefited from a smaller annual tax bill in 2020.

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

However, according to ShareBuilder 401k, it is estimated that less than 10% of businesses in the United States with one to 100 employees have a 401(k), with most business owners saying they thought their business was too small or that plans may be expensive as top reasons for not starting a plan.

To help more businesses start an affordable plan, ShareBuilder 401k is waiving setup pricing on all its 401(k) plans from May 3 through May 21. These charges normally run between $150 for a self-employed business owner opening a Solo 401(k) and $495 to $995 for businesses with multiple employees. In addition, ShareBuilder 401k notes that companies with one to 100 employees can receive up to $5,000 in tax credits for plan costs each year when they start their first plan for the first three years of the plan.

“While most people think of 401(k)s as purely retirement savings, the pandemic has revealed some other important features that can help businesses and individuals navigate during times of crisis,” says Stuart Robertson, president and CEO of ShareBuilder 401k.

More information is available at https://www.sharebuilder401k.com/.

Compliance May 10, 2021

Congressional Chairs Ask the GAO to Review TDFs

They say the expenses and risk allocations in target-date funds vary considerably.

Reported by


Senator Patty Murray, D-Washington, chairwoman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and House Representative Bobby Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, have sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), requesting it conduct a review of target-date funds (TDFs).

They say that while TDFs are billed as offering participants retirement security by placing their assets in an age-appropriate glide path that grows more conservative as they approach retirement, the funds might actually be placing some participants at risk. Specifically, they say expenses and risk allocations vary considerably among funds.

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

“The millions of families who trust their financial futures to target-date funds need to know these programs are working as advertised and providing the retirement security promised,” Murray and Scott wrote in their letter. They noted that TDFs are often used as the qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) in a plan with automatic enrollment, and, as such, their assets have swelled to more than $1.5 trillion.

Their letter continued: “Retirement experts have raised concerns that the performance of TDFs and level of risk exposure can vary widely—even for those close to retirement.” They also say some TDFs may invest in alternative asset classes, including private equity, but little is known about these approaches.

Murray and Scott asked the GAO to look into 10 aspects of TDFs. First, they ask, what percentage of total defined contribution (DC) plan assets are invested in TDFs, as well as what percentage of participants are offered and participate in TDFs?

Second, for participants invested in TDFs who are approaching retirement, to what extent have they been affected by market fluctuations as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic—and how much variation is there in the performance of TDFs of the same vintage?

Third, do investors defaulted into TDFs reassess their investments, and, if so, how often?

Fourth, how does the asset allocation and fee structure vary across TDFs used as QDIAs? Along this line, they also ask, how do TDF fee structures compare with other investment products?

Fifth, how are TDFs marketed and advertised?

Sixth, what percentage of plan sponsors select off-the-shelf TDFs and what percentage turn to custom TDFs? Does one or the other deliver different performance?

Seventh, what kinds of alternative investments do TDFs invest in?

Eighth, has the Department of Labor (DOL) taken steps to help sponsors select appropriate TDFs for their plan and to help educate participants about these funds?

Ninth, when a plan does not have auto-enrollment but has a TDF in its investment lineup, what percentage of participants select the TDF?

Lastly, are there legislative or regulatory measures that could protect plan participants?

«