EBRI issue brief最新文献

LATEST SCF DATA: This Issue Brief assesses the current status of Americans' savings for retirement by examining the incidence of individual account plans among families, as well as the average amount of assets accumulated in these accounts. The 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), the Federal Reserve Board's triennial survey of wealth, is the basis for this study, as it is a leading source of data on Americans' wealth, provides detailed information on retirement plan incidence and account balances among families, and is the latest available. ACCOUNTING FOR THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN: While 2007 SCF is the most comprehensive and current survey of Americans' finances, its timing was unfortunate due to the significant downturn in the economy in 2008 just after the survey was released. To account for that change, this analysis provides estimates of the changes in asset values from the end of 2007 to mid-June 2009 for individual account plan balances. The account balances of the defined contribution plans and IRAs are adjusted based on the asset allocation reported within the plans by using equity market returns and bond market returns from January 1, 2008, to June 19, 2009. MEDIAN ASSET LEVELS FOR DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS: Among all families with a defined contribution plan in 2007, the median (mid-point) plan balance was $31,800, up 16 percent from 2004. According to EBRI estimates, this dropped 16.4 percent (to $26,578) from year-end 2007 to mid-June 2009. Losses were higher for families with more than $100,000 a year in income (down 22 percent) or having a net worth in the top 10 percent (down 28 percent). MEDIAN ASSET LEVELS FOR IRA/KEOGH PLANS: Among all families with an IRA/Keogh plan, the median value of their plan was $34,000 in 2007, up 3 percent from 2004. EBRI estimates this median value dropped 15 percent (to $28,955) from year-end 2007 to mid-June 2009. LESS THAN HALF OF ALL FAMILIES HAVE A RETIREMENT PLAN THROUGH A CURRENT JOB: In 2007, 40.6 percent of families included a participant in an employment-based retirement plan (either a defined benefit or defined contribution plan) from a current job. This was up from 38.8 percent in 1992, but virtually unchanged from 40.3 percent in 2004. A significant shift in the plan type occurred from 1992 to 2007, with the percentage of families with a plan having only a defined benefit plan decreasing from 40.0 percent to 17.4 percent. TWO-THIRDS OF ALL FAMILIES HAVE AN IRA/KEOGH OR RETIREMENT PLAN THROUGH PAST AND CURRENT JOBS: In 2007, 66.2 percent of families had a participant in a current or previous employer's retirement plan or an IRA/Keogh, up slightly from 2004 (65.4 percent). IRA/KEOGH OWNERSHIP RISING: The percentage of families that owned either an individual retirement account or a Keogh plan increased in 2007 to 30.6 percent from 29.1 percent in 2004. IRA OWNERSHIP, ASSETS: While regular IRAs account for the largest percentage of IRA ownership, rollover IRAs had a larger share of as

PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR HEALTH REFORM: Findings from the 2009 Health Confidence Survey--the 12th annual HCS--indicate that Americans have already formed strong opinions regarding various aspects of health reform, even before details have been released regarding various key factors. These issues include health insurance market reform, the availability of a public plan option, mandates on employers and individuals, subsidized coverage for the low-income population, changes to the tax treatment of job-based health benefits, and regulatory oversight of health care. These opinions may change as details surface, especially as they concern financing options. In the absence of such details, the 2009 HCS finds generally strong support for the concepts of health reform options that are currently on the table. U.S. HEALTH SYSTEM GETS POOR MARKS, BUT SO DOES A MAJOR OVERHAUL: A majority rate the nation's health care system as fair (30 percent) or poor (29 percent). Only a small minority rate it excellent (6 percent) or very good (10 percent). While 14 percent of Americans think the health care system needs a major overhaul, 51 percent agree with the statement "there are some good things about our health care system, but major changes are needed." NATIONAL HEALTH PLAN ELEMENTS RATED HIGHLY: Between 68 percent and 88 percent of Americans either strongly or somewhat support health reform ideas such as national health plans, a public plan option, guaranteed issue, expansion of Medicare and Medicaid, and employer and individual mandates. MIXED REACTION TO HEALTH BENEFITS TAX CAP: Reaction to capping the current tax exclusion of employment-based health benefits is mixed. Nearly one-half of Americans (47 percent) would switch to a lower-cost plan if the tax exclusion were capped, 38 percent would stay on their current plan and pay the additional taxes, and 9 percent don't know. CONTINUED FAITH IN EMPLOYMENT-BASED BENEFITS, BUT DOUBTS ON AFFORDABILITY: Individuals with employment-based health benefits are confident that employers will continue to offer such benefits. They are much less confident that they would be able to afford coverage on their own, even if employers gave them the money they currently spend on health benefits. However, were employers to stop offering coverage, respondents report that they are likely to purchase it on their own. RISING HEALTH COSTS HURTING FAMILY FINANCES: Those experiencing health cost increases tend to say these increases have negatively affected their household finances. In particular, they indicate that increased health care costs have resulted in a decrease in contributions to a retirement plan (32 percent) and other savings (53 percent) and in difficulty paying for basic necessities (29 percent) and other bills (37 percent). COSTS ALSO AFFECTING HEALTH CARE USE: Many consumers report they are changing the way they use the health care system in response to rising health care costs. Roughly 80 percent of those with higher out-

EBRI/ICI 401(K) DATABASE: The annual EBRI/ICI 401(k) database update report is based on large cross-sections of 401(k) plan participants. Whereas the cross-sections cover participants with a wide range of participation experience in 401(k) plans, meaningful analysis of the potential for 401(k) participants to accumulate retirement assets over time must examine how a consistent group of participants' accounts have performed over the long term. Looking at consistent participants in the EBRI/ICI 401(k) database over the eight-year period from 1999 to 2007: The average 401(k) account balance increased at an annual growth rate of 9.5 percent over the period, to $137,430 at year-end 2007. The median 401(k) account balance (half above, half below) increased at an annual growth rate of 15.2 percent over the period, to $76,946 at year-end 2007. ANALYSIS OF A CONSISTENT GROUP OF 401(K) PARTICIPANTS HIGHLIGHTS THE ACCUMULATION POTENTIAL OF 401(K) PLANS. At year-end 2007, the average account balance among consistent participants was double the average account balance among all participants in the EBRI/ICI 401(k) database. The consistent group's median balance was more than four times larger than the median balance across all participants at year-end 2007. YOUNGER PARTICIPANTS OR THOSE WITH SMALLER INITIAL BALANCES EXPERIENCED HIGHER GROWTH IN ACCOUNT BALANCES COMPARED WITH OLDER PARTICIPANTS OR THOSE WITH LARGER INITIAL BALANCES. Among the consistent group, individual participant experience is influenced by three primary factors that impact account balances: contributions, investment returns, and withdrawal and loan activity. For example, the average account balance of participants in their 20s was heavily influenced by the relative size of contributions to the account balances and increased at an average growth rate of 36.0 percent per year between year-end 1999 and year-end 2007. 401(K) PARTICIPANTS TEND TO CONCENTRATE THEIR ACCOUNTS IN EQUITY SECURITIES. The asset allocation of the 2.4 million 401(k) participants in the consistent group was broadly similar to the asset allocation of the 21.8 million participants in the entire year-end 2007 EBRI/ICI 401(k) database. On average, about two-thirds of 401(k) participants' assets were invested in equities, through equity funds, the equity portion of balanced funds, and company stock.

HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE: This Issue Brief examines issues related to managed competition and the use of a health insurance exchange for the purpose of addressing cost, quality, and access to health care services. It discusses issues that must be addressed when designing an exchange in order to reform the health insurance market and also examines state efforts at health reform that use an exchange. RISK VS. PRICE COMPETITION: The basic component of managed competition is the creation an organized marketplace that brings together health insurers and consumers (either as individuals or through their employers). The sponsor of the exchange would set "rules of engagement" for participating insurers and offer consumers a menu of choices among different plans. Ultimately, the goal of a health insurance exchange is to shift the market from competition based on risk to competition based on price and quality. ADVERSE SELECTION AND AFFORDABILITY: Among the issues that need to be addressed if an exchange that uses managed competition has a realistic chance of reducing costs, improving quality, and expanding coverage: Everyone needs to be in the risk pool, with individuals required to purchase insurance or face significant financial consequences; effective risk adjustment is essential to eliminate risk selection as an insurance business model--forcing competition on costs and quality; the insurance benefit must be specific and clear--without standards governing cost sharing, covered services, and network coverage there is no way to assess whether a requirement to purchase or issue coverage has been met; and subsidies would be necessary for low-income individuals to purchase insurance. THE PUBLIC PLAN OPTION: The public plan option is shaping up to be one of the most contentious issues in the health reform debate. Proponents also believe of a public plan is necessary to drive private insurers toward true competition. Opponents view it as a step toward government-run health care and are wary of cost shifting from the public plan to private insurers. FUTURE OF EMPLOYMENT-BASED COVERAGE: The availability of a health insurance exchange may have implications for the future of the employment-based health benefits system and raises major questions for workers. Will employers provide a fixed contribution for the purchase of insurance through an exchange? Would that be large enough to purchase coverage? Would it be flat or vary by such factors as worker health status, age, and/or marital status or the presence of children? Would it be taxed? For both employers and workers, the implications are enormous.

This analysis explores (1) whether plan demographic characteristics would affect individual participant contribution rates and target-date fund investments and (2) equity glide paths for participants in relation to plan demographics by considering target replacement income and its success rate. PLAN DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS IN PARTICIPANT CONTRIBUTION RATES: This study finds empirical evidence that 401(k) plan participants' contribution rates differ by plan demographics based on participants' income and/or tenure. In particular, participants in 401(k) plans dominated by those with low income and short tenure tend to contribute less than those in plans dominated by participants with high income and long tenure. Future research will explore how participant contribution behavior may also be influenced by incentives provided by employers through matching formulae. PLAN DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS IN TARGET-DATE FUND INVESTMENTS: The study also finds empirical evidence that participants' investments in target-date funds with different equity allocations differ by plan demographics based on participants' income and/or tenure. In particular, target-date fund users with 90 percent or more of their account balances in target-date funds who are in 401(k) plans dominated by low-income and short-tenure participants tend to hold target-date funds with lower equity allocations, compared with their counterparts in plans dominated by high-income and long-tenure participants. Future research will focus on the extent to which these characteristics might influence the selection of target-date funds by plan sponsors. EQUITY GLIDE PATHS: Several stylized equity glide paths as well as alternative asset allocations are compared for participants at various starting ages to demonstrate the interaction between plan demographics and equity glide paths/asset allocations in terms of success rates in meeting various replacement income targets. The equity glide path/asset allocation providing the highest success rate at a particular replacement rate target will vary with the assumed starting date of the participant (see Figure 17). Given the highly stylized nature of the simulations in this Issue Brief it is important to note that the results are not intended to provide a single equity glide path solution in relation to plan demographics. Instead, they serve as a framework to be considered when plan sponsors make a selection concerning which target-date funds to include in their plan. IMPORTANCE OF PARTICIPANT CONTRIBUTION RATES: This analysis finds that although target-date funds with different equity glide paths affect the retirement income replacement success rate, participant contribution rates corresponding to different plan demographic characteristics have a stronger impact. AUTO FEATURES OF THE PPA: This Issue Brief provides a stylized study using observed contribution rates as of the 2007 plan year. However, with the passage of the Pension Protection Act of 20

RECORD LOW CONFIDENCE LEVELS: Workers who say they are very confident about having enough money for a comfortable retirement this year hit the lowest level in 2009 (13 percent) since the Retirement Confidence Survey started asking the question in 1993, continuing a two-year decline. Retirees also posted a new low in confidence about having a financially secure retirement, with only 20 percent now saying they are very confident (down from 41 percent in 2007). THE ECONOMY, INFLATION, COST OF LIVING ARE THE BIG CONCERNS: Not surprisingly, workers overall who have lost confidence over the past year about affording a comfortable retirement most often cite the recent economic uncertainty, inflation, and the cost of living as primary factors. In addition, certain negative experiences, such as job loss or a pay cut, loss of retirement savings, or an increase in debt, almost always contribute to loss of confidence among those who experience them. RETIREMENT EXPECTATIONS DELAYED: Workers apparently expect to work longer because of the economic downturn: 28 percent of workers in the 2009 RCS say the age at which they expect to retire has changed in the past year. Of those, the vast majority (89 percent) say that they have postponed retirement with the intention of increasing their financial security. Nevertheless, the median (mid-point) worker expects to retire at age 65, with 21 percent planning to push on into their 70s. The median retiree actually retired at age 62, and 47 percent of retirees say they retired sooner than planned. WORKING IN RETIREMENT: More workers are also planning to supplement their income in retirement by working for pay. The percentage of workers planning to work after they retire has increased to 72 percent in 2009 (up from 66 percent in 2007). This compares with 34 percent of retirees who report they actually worked for pay at some time during their retirement. GREATER WORRY ABOUT BASIC AND HEALTH EXPENSES: Workers who say they very confident in having enough money to take care of basic expenses in retirement dropped to 25 percent in 2009 (down from 40 percent in 2007), while only 13 percent feel very confident about having enough to pay for medical expenses (down from 20 percent in 2007. Among retirees, only a quarter (25 percent, down from 41 percent in 2007) feel very confident about covering their health expenses. HOW WORKERS ARE RESPONDING: Among workers who have lost confidence in their ability to secure a comfortable retirement, most (81 percent) say they have reduced their expenses, while others are changing the way they invest their money (43 percent), working more hours or a second job (38 percent), saving more money (25 percent), and seeking advice from a financial professional (25 percent). Among all workers, 75 percent say they and/or their spouse have saved money for retirement, one of the highest levels ever measured by the RCS. IGNORANCE STILL A MAJOR FACTOR: Many workers still do not have a good idea of how

WHAT THEY ARE: Target-date funds (also called "life-cycle" funds) are a type of mutual fund that automatically rebalances its asset allocation following a predetermined pattern over time. They typically rebalance to more conservative and income-producing assets as the participant's target date of retirement approaches. WHY THEY'RE IMPORTANT AND GROWING: Of the 401(k) plan participants in the EBRI/ICI 401(k) database who were found to be in plans that offeredtarget-date funds, 37 percent had at least some fraction of their account in target-date funds in 2007. Target-date funds held about 7 percent of total assets in 401(k) plans and the use of these funds is expected to increase in the future. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 made it easier for plan sponsors to automatically enroll new workers in a 401(k) plan, and target-date funds were one of the types of approved funds specified for a "default" investment if the participant does not elect a choice. BRI/ICI 401(K) DATABASE: This study uses the unique richness of the data in the EBRI/ICI Participant-Directed Retirement Plan Data Collection Project, which has almost 22 million participants, to examine the choices and characteristics of participants whose plans offer target-date funds. EFFECT OF AGE, SALARY, JOB TENURE, AND ACCOUNT BALANCE: Younger workers are significantly more likely to invest in target-date funds than are older workers: Almost 44 percent of participants under age 30 had assets in a target-date fund, compared with 27 percent of those 60 or older. Target-date funds appeal to those with lower incomes, little time on the job, and with few assets. On average, target-date fund investors are about 2.5 years younger than those who do not invest in target-date funds, have about 3.5 years less tenure, make about $11,000 less in salary, have $25,000 less in their account, and are in smaller plans. EFFECT OF AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT: While the EBRI/ICI database does not contain specific information on whether a 401(k) plan had automatic enrollment, this analysis was able to proxy for those who could be identified as automatically enrolled. The data show that workers who were considered to be automatically enrolled in their employer's 401(k) plan are significantly more likely to invest all their assets in a target-date fund than those who voluntarily joined, and were also less likely to have extreme all-or-nothing asset allocations to equities. EQUITY ALLOCATIONS AND FUND FAMILIES: One of the major questions surrounding target-date funds is the equity allocations that these funds use over time (the so-called "glide path") as a participant's retirement target date approaches. The glide paths of different target-date funds have significantly different shapes and starting/ending equity allocations. As of 2007, the equity allocation ranges from about 80-90 percent for 2040 funds (for workers about 30 years away from retirement), and from 26-66 percent for 2010 funds (for workers one year aw

401(K) LOSSES FROM THE ECONOMIC CRISIS: During 2008, major U.S. equity indexes were sharply negative, with the S&P 500 Index losing 37.0 percent for the year, which translated into corresponding losses in 401(k) retirement plan assets. But how individual 401(k) participants are affected by the crisis is largely determined by their account balance, age, and job tenure. IMPACT VARIES BY ACCOUNT BALANCE: This Issue Brief estimates changes in average 401(k) balances from Jan. 1, 2008, to Jan. 20, 2009, using the EBRI/ICI 401(k) database of more than 21 million participants. Not surprisingly, how the recent financial market losses affect individual 401(k) account balances is strongly affected by the size of a participant's account balance. Those with low account balances relative to contributions experienced minimal investment losses that were typically more than made up by contributions: Those with less than $10,000 in account balances had an average growth of 40 percent during 2008, since contributions had a bigger impact than investment losses. However, those with more than $200,000 in account balances had an average loss of more than 25 percent. IMPACT VARIES BY AGE AND JOB TENURE: 401(k) participants on the verge of retirement (ages 56-65) had average changes during this period that varied between a positive 1 percent for short-tenure individuals (one to four years with the current employer) to more than a 25 percent loss for those with long tenure (with more than 20 years). SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM: While much of the focus has been on market fluctuations in the last year, investing for retirement security is (or should be) a long-term proposition. When a consistent sample of 2.2 million participants who had been with the same 401(k) plan sponsor for the seven years from 1999-2006 was analyzed, the average estimated growth rates for the period from Jan. 1, 2000 through Jan. 20, 2009, ranged from +29 percent for long-tenure older participants to more than +500 percent for short-tenure younger participants. RECOVERY TIME AND FUTURE STOCK MARKET PERFORMANCE: This analysis also calculates how long it might take for end-of-year 2008 401(k) balances to recover to their beginning-of-year 2008 levels, before the sharp stock market declines. Because future performance is unknown, this analysis provides a range of equity returns: At a 5 percent equity rate-of-return assumption, those with longest tenure with their current employer would need nearly two years at the median to recover, but approximately five years at the 90th percentile. If the equity rate of return is assumed to drop to zero for the next few years, this recovery time increases to approximately 2.5 years at the median and nine to 10 years at the 90th percentile. NEAR-ELDERLY WITH VERY HIGH EQUITY EXPOSURE: Estimates from the EBRI/ICI 401(k) database show that many participants near retirement had exceptionally high exposure to equities: Nearly 1 in 4 between ages 56-65 had more than 90

HEALTH CARE TAX CAP: With health reform a major priority of the new 111th Congress and President Barack Obama, this Issue Briefexamines the administrative and implementation issues that arise from one of the major reform proposals: Capping the exclusion of employment-based health coverage from workers' taxable income.

Current tax treatment: The amount that employers contribute toward workers' health coverage is generally excluded, without limit, from workers' taxable income. In addition, workers whose employers sponsor flexible spending accounts are able to pay out-of-pocket expenses with pretax dollars. Employers can also make available a premium conversion arrangement, which allows workers to pay their share of the premium for employment-based coverage with pretax dollars.

Tax cap recommendations: In 2005, a presidential advisory board concluded that limiting the amount of tax-preferred health coverage could lower overall private-sector health spending. The panel recommended a cap on the amount of employment-based health coverage individuals can exclude from their income tax, as a way to reduce health spending. In his 2008 "Call to Action" for health care reform, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, states that "Congress should explore ways to restructure the current tax incentives to encourage more efficient spending on health and to target our tax dollars more effectively and fairly."

Implementing a tax cap: While a tax cap on health coverage sounds simple, for many employers, it could be difficult to administer and results would vary by employer based on the type of health benefit plan, the size and demographics of their work force, and even where the workers live. The change would be especially difficult for self-insured employers that do not pay insurance premiums, since they would have to set the "premium equivalent" for each worker. This would not only be costly for employers, depending upon the requirements set out by law, but could also create fairness and tax issues for many affected workers.

Administrative costs: For self-insured employers, calculating insurance premium costs under a tax cap could be done fairly easily using the COBRA premium. However, whether self-insured employers would be able to use the least costly method to determine the value of coverage would have to be determined by law and/or regulations. THE SEC. 89 EXPERIENCE: Sec. 89 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which attempted to make employee benefits more standard and fair, became so controversial that it was repealed by Congress in 1989--in part because the regulations created regulatory burdens that were so complicated and costly as to be unworkable. Similarly, valuation calculations under a health coverage tax cap could become overly burdensome if the lessons from Sec. 89 are not heeded.