Retirement planning

Automatic enrollment into 401(k) plans is having the greatest impact on younger, lower-income workers, Fidelity Investments reported Tuesday.

Despite the volatile markets of late 2008 and early 2009, investor participation remains fairly stable, according to a review of retirement markets by Dublin-based Research and Markets.

Whereas in previous recessions, companies that suspended 401(k) matches always brought them back, this time around, consultants to defined contribution plans tell the Associated Press, companies are thinking about doing away with the matches forever or reducing them drastically from the typical 50 cents match for the first 6% an employee puts in.

One of President Obama’s proposed financial reforms would require employers that do not offer a 401(k) to automatically enroll their employees into an IRA. If implemented, it would give the biggest boost to the retirement savings industry since the creation of the 401(k) in 1980, enrolling 40 million new investors, and attract more than $100 billion within five years, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Diminishing employment opportunities notwithstanding, 9.5 million retired Americans are considering returning to work at least part-time, according to a study by Charles Schwab. Also, 32% of currently employed Americans expect to hold onto their jobs and delay retirement.

Returns on target-date funds continue to disappoint, with the five largest 2010 funds trailing the S&P 500 by 11 percentage points since the market’s March 9 low. They are up an average of 25% since that date, well below the benchmark index’s 36% rise, The Wall Street Journal reports.

As the economic slump curbs retirement savings and the government considers imposing curbs on target-date funds, Great-West Retirement Services is trying out what its president is calling "the next generation" of target-date funds.

It won't be easy in the aftermath of a global recession, but with the right mixture of transparency and expertise, wealth managers will be able to regain their status as trusted advisers.

Noting that one-quarter of employers have either already cut or plan to cut their 401(k) match, financial advisers are reminding investors of the importance of saving for retirement.

Advisers to 401(k) plans recently have revisited the wisdom of offering annuities, in light of last year’s severe market downturn. But group annuities are being criticized for subjecting investors to lockup periods of five years or longer and a variety of additional fees.

Regulatory leaders are questioning whether changes need to be made to target-date funds after several 2010 funds reported huge losses last year, but mutual fund industry leaders say these concerns are overblown.

Banking companies will be hard-pressed to repeat a banner 2008 in terms of sales of fixed annuities. Fixed annuities were popular late last year and early this year, but with interest rates falling and the markets in a fingers-crossed recovery, executives and analysts expect demand for these products to start tapering off.

In today’s unpredictable market, even the “safest” investments such as stable-value funds carry considerable risks that plan sponsors and participants might not be aware of, cautions Watson Wyatt. Thus, the consultant urges plan sponsors and investors to review their holdings.

With births declining and medical advances extending life spans, the population of people age 65 and older in the U.S. will rise from 13% today to 20% by 2030 and 26% by 2050, the Census Bureau announced Tuesday.

Financial Engines has launched a Retirement Checkup service for near-retirees age 50 and older that finds the outlook is not as grim as people might think. Only modest increases in savings and a slight delay in retirement can put near-retirees back on track.

WASHINGTON - With 47% of 401(k) plans now using automatic enrollment, the programs have helped get millions of new workers enrolled to start saving early for retirement, but industry experts say the automatic nature of these plans needs to extend to helping "hands-off" investors when they change jobs.

At the hearing on target-date funds that the Department of Labor and the Securities and Exchange Commission held in Washington last Thursday, the focus was on better disclosure of holdings.

Nearly one-quarter, or 23%, of employers have eliminated 401(k) matches, according to a study by CFO Research Services for Charles Schwab. And 35% don’t expect to reverse the elimination, according to a separate survey by Watson Wyatt.

At the hearing on target-date funds Thursday, target-date fund managers, along with the Investment Company Institute, asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to butt out of asset management.ICI General Counsel Karrie McMillan said interfering in the mix of assets would be unprecedented: “In the 70-year history of mutual fund regulation, the government has never regulated the investment choices of mutual funds. Nor should it start now.”“We strongly oppose any efforts to regulate the glide paths or other aspects of the investment design or construction of target-date funds,” concurred John Ameriks, a Vanguard principal.Fund executives also said they were opposed to labeling target-date funds conservative, moderate or aggressive, based on the mandate of their glide path and current holdings.But SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro countered that target-date fund losses last year ranged from minus 3.6% to minus 41%, with an average loss of 25%. “These varying results should cause all of us to pause and consider whether regulatory changes, industry reforms or other revisions are needed with respect to target date funds.”Financial planners who testified Thursday tended to agree with the SEC that a target-date fund’s name should give some indication of its level of equity and other risk exposure. “The name of each fund must bear some relationship to the way the fund is managed, that is, its glide path,” said Joseph Nagengast of Target Date Analytics, which provides benchmarks for target-date funds. “If a fund labeled 2010 is really targeted to land at 2040, it should be relabeled as a 2040 fund.”

A significant number of older workers 50 or older, 44%, have decided to delay their retirement age, and 34% overall have upped their target date for leaving the workforce, Watson Wyatt found in a February survey of 2,200 employees. By comparison, only 25% of those under age 40 have changed their plans for years in the workforce.Nonetheless, among all workers 65 is still the average age at which they expect to retire.Among the older workers, when asked what factors have impacted their decision to delay retirement, 76% said declining 401(k) balances, followed by 63% citing high healthcare costs and 62% pointing to high costs of living.“The economic crisis has affected many workers’ retirement plans and nest eggs, but those nearest to retirement have been especially hard hit,” said Dvid Speier, senior retirement consultant at Watson Wyatt. “Older workers do not have the time to offset declining retirement account values, either by recouping their investment losses or significantly increasing their savings rate. For many, the only choice is to delay retirement.”With older workers remaining on the job longer, that could present hiring issues for employers along with higher benefits costs, noted Lisa Canafax, another senior retirement consultant at Watson Wyatt. For that reason, employers might want to reconsider defined benefit plans.