MyRA won't close the nest egg gap. Maybe the states can
10:39am EST, February 4, 2014
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for
Reuters.)
By Mark
Miller
CHICAGO (Reuters) - If states are the laboratories of democracy, they need to
start some retirement savings experiments - quick. About half of Americans
haven't been able to create nest eggs at all, and the labs working the problem
in Washington haven't found solutions.
That's my take on MyRA, the retirement saving program President Barack Obama
announced during his State of the Union address last week. MyRA - My IRA, if you
will - aims to help workers at companies that don't have retirement plans set
aside small amounts from their paychecks in a savings bond-like product.
MyRA probably is the best that gridlocked Washington can do to address the
yawning retirement savings gap. Obama was able to put it in motion through an
executive order.
But it's small-bore. MyRA won't have automatic enrollment, which would boost
participation dramatically. Employer participation will be voluntary. And
contributions can be invested only in low-return Treasuries. Accounts can be
opened with an initial investment as low as $25, and subsequent investments as
little as $5.
Outside of Washington, people are thinking bigger. Plans have been floated in
13 states for government-sponsored retirement plans aimed at offering savings
plans to more workers, although California is the only state where legislation
has been approved.
"States really can be the laboratories of what can work," said David John,
senior strategic policy adviser at AARP's Public Policy Institute. John was
commenting during a panel discussion last week on what states might do to boost
retirement saving at the annual policy conference of the National Academy of
Social Insurance (NASI), a respected non-profit research group that pulls
together many of the nation's top experts on retirement policy. Experts
discussed plans under consideration in California, Washington state and
Illinois.
The California plan is called the Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program -
a government-sponsored retirement savings plan that would be offered to
employees of every California company that doesn't have one of its own. State
officials are conducting a feasibility study to resolve questions about how it
would be treated under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and
the Internal Revenue Service code. If regulatory issues can't be resolved, the
plan won't go forward.
Employees would be enrolled automatically, with an opt-out provision, and
contribute through payroll deductions to individual accounts. The plan's
investments would be professionally managed, and would be geared to produce
returns tied to Treasury bond rates; the guaranteed minimum would be 3 percent
annually.
The accounts would be portable, following workers from job to job. At
retirement, the individual account could be converted to a pension-style
annuity.
Like MyRA, the California plan takes aim at the smallest end of the
retirement savings market - one that financial services companies don't want to
serve. The idea is to get employers who don't have retirement plans to offer a
payroll deduction option.
Savings shortfalls are most acute for workers in small companies. The U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics says just 49 percent of workers at companies with 100
or fewer workers have access to a retirement plan. Part-time, independent and
low-income workers also have difficulty accumulating savings, as do minority
workers: A recent report from the National Institute on Retirement Security
(NIRS) found that two-thirds or more of black and Latino households have no
retirement savings.
Those numbers are reflected in California, which ranks near the bottom
nationally for retirement coverage, according to NIRS data. Only one in five
full-time low-wage workers has access to a workplace plan; overall worker access
is 44 percent, compared with 51 percent nationally.
"California is the biggest, and probably the wealthiest state, but it has a
bifurcated economy," says Nari Rhee, manager of research at NIRI. "It has some
of the lowest levels of benefits for retirement and healthcare."
Retirement inequality is a problem we're going to have to confront, one way
or the other.
Data from the Investment Company Institute shows that near-retirement
households with annual incomes over $200,000 had saved an average of $885,000 in
2010, compared with just $49,600 for households with incomes ranging from
$30,000 to $45,000. And 45 percent of working-age households own no retirement
account assets whatever, according to the National Institute on Retirement
Security.
These are the seniors who will be entirely reliant on Social Security and
state programs such as Medicaid, food stamps and housing. "This will come back
and cause severe problems for national and state and local government in the
years ahead," says John. "As people retire on less than optimal assets, there
will be increasing demand for local services."
The launch of MyRA overshadowed a bigger idea from Senator Tom Harkin
(D-Iowa), who chairs the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pension
Committee. Last week he introduced the USA Retirement Fund Act, which would
establish something akin to a national 401(k) plan offering a range of low-cost
investments that would be converted into an income stream at retirement, like a
defined-benefit pension plan.
Employers with 10 or more workers would be required to offer it - although
they wouldn't have to make matching contributions. The self-employed could
participate, too. And the Harkin plan would automatically enroll workers at a
substantial 6 percent contribution rate (with an opt-out provision).
Harkin and Senator Mark Begich (D-Alaska) have introduced another bill that
would have a big impact on retirement security for middle- and lower-income
Americans: an expansion of Social Security benefits. Their legislation would
increase annual cost-of-living adjustments, rather than cutting them, as would
happen if we adopt a "chained CPI" inflation yardstick, as has been proposed by
Obama and others.
The bill also would change benefit formulas to increase benefits for lower-
and middle-income seniors by about $70 monthly. The bill also lifts the cap on
income subject to payroll taxes, currently set at $117,900.
Bold ideas like that have small odds of moving forward in gridlocked
Washington, but they need to be part of the debate, noted Michael Lind,
co-founder of the New America Foundation and another speaker at the NASI
conference.
That's "not just because we have a retirement crisis but because it would be
a good thing to do," he said. "Expanding Social Security should no longer be
considered a lunatic fringe idea."