State-Run IRAs May Not Be the Best Solution for Low-Income Earners

Social Security may be enough to cover their retirement needs, while the accumulation of personal savings can jeopardize other key safety net benefits.

Around the country, more than half of state governments are pushing to establish automatically enrolled individual retirement accounts (IRAs) for low-income workers, who most likely are not being offered a retirement plan at their workplace, according to new research from the American Enterprise Institute. 

The state plans have initial deferral rates ranging between 3% and 6%, with some pairing that with automatic deferral escalation up to an 8% ceiling. While the intention is to help these people have a better quality of life in retirement, researchers observe that Social Security pays lower-wage workers much higher relative benefits compared with the more richly paid. The lower-paid also pay less taxes and are more likely to receive disability-related income and survivor benefits.

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

The Institute notes that Census Bureau data shows that only 8.8% of Americans aged 65 and older had incomes below the poverty line, which the Institute attributes to “Social Security’s progressive benefit formula, which pays more generous benefits to low earners.” For instance, for a person earning an average wage of $12,000 a year, Social Security would replace 90% of those earnings. “It is not clear why a worker with poverty-level earnings would place a great emphasis on saving for retirement versus other potentially more pressing needs.”

Additionally, there is the danger that low-income workers who are automatically enrolled into an IRA will seek out loans with high interest rates and increase their credit card debt, the Institute says. “While auto enrollment likely would result in [these] workers reaching retirement with greater retirement-specific assets, those workers may also retire holding greater debts,” the Institute says.

Finally, automatically enrolling low-income workers can easily make them ineligible for means-tested government benefits, such as Medicaid, Temporary Aid for Needy Families, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, Section 8 housing assistance and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. “Even at low contribution rates and modest investment returns, it would not take many years for low-income, auto-IRA participants to bump up against common asset thresholds,” the Institute says.

In conclusion, the Institute says, “Many low-income workers may be rational in not saving substantial amounts for retirement over and above what Social Security will provide.”

American Enterprise Institute’s full report, “How Hard Should We Push the Poor to Save for Retirement?”, can be downloaded here.

Research Finds Benefit of Offering Longevity Annuities in DC Plans

The researchers conclude that “including well-designed LIA defaults in DC plans yields quite positive consequences for …workers.”

Research finds that defined contribution (DC) retirement plan participants can gain retirement wealth from the offering of a longevity annuity within their plans.

In 2014, the Treasury Department issued final rules easing required minimum distribution (RMD) requirements that have made it difficult for retirees to purchase and hold longevity annuity products without jeopardizing the qualified status of their retirement accounts.  Longevity income annuities are deferred life annuities that start payouts on or before age 85.

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

Researchers from the finance department at Goethe University and from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania developed a model to quantify the impact of the availability of longevity annuity contracts for a range of retiree types. They first found that introducing a longevity income annuity (LIA) into the DC plan investment menu is attractive to the majority of plan participants. Overall, older individuals would commit 8% to 15% of plan balances at age 65 to an LIA that begins payouts at age 85.

When participants can select their own optimal annuitization rates, welfare increases by 5% to 20% of average retirement plan accruals as of age 66 compared to not having access to LIAs. If plan sponsors defaulted participants into an LIA using 10% of their retirement age plan assets, this would only slightly reduce the participants well-being in retirement compared to the optimum, the researchers found.

According to the research paper, results are less positive for those with higher mortality than the average. Using a default rule for these individuals generates lower retirement welfare since annuity prices based on average mortality rates are too high. However, converting assets into an LIA only for those with balances greater than $65,000 overcomes this problem.

The researchers conclude that “including well-designed LIA defaults in DC plans yields quite positive consequences for …workers.” They say their findings also apply to individual retirement account (IRA) payout designs.

«