Showing posts with label Tax Reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tax Reform. Show all posts

Monday, November 14, 2016

Will he or won't he....put the Kibosh on the DOL Fiduciary Rule - Trump I mean

Of all of the words in the English language that I never thought would appear on my blog, the name; Donald Trump would be at the top of that list.  Yet, here it is!!!   The following is a post where I will discuss my initial thoughts of a republican congress and a Donald Trump presidency as related to the retirement plan industry and retirement policy.  This falls into two categories.  First, will this now party-aligned legislative body pass retirement legislation (almost certainly, yes) AND will this new regime seek to unwind any of the previous regime's legislation and regulation.....again, almost certainly yes. 

Regarding the first part, tax reform is almost a veritable certainty to occur in the first couple of years of the Trump presidency.  With that will occur other tax policy initiatives and some of the one's related to retirement and pension reform have been kicking around for a while.  Will it be the most recent one, The Retirement Enhancement and Savings Act of 2016  or something similar?  My guess is yes.  This calls for a re-imagining of the rules around Multiple Employer Plans (MEPs) into something new called Pooled Employer Plans or PEPs.  This concept is similar to what the industry has been tauting for years as Open MEPs.  Here is a link to the full mark-up from the Senate Finance Committee. RESA 2016 Full Description.

Regarding the new Department of Labor (DOL) Fiduciary Rules.  I've seen/read a lot in the last few days about how this regime is going to squash these rules since they aren't friendly to the financial services industry which is largely aligned with the republican side of the debate.  However, killing a regulation once it's enacted is very difficult to do, it's not like the DOL (assuming new leadership) could just pull it, nor could they subject it to changes without a review and comment period.  This would take us well beyond the upcoming implementation date of April 10. 

So if they were to do this, it would have to be done with an overriding interim regulation or some longer term solution where it gets scrapped as an add-on to a future piece of legislation or just simply delaying implementation of it past April 10th as something to deal with later on.  One thing I find  interesting, is that Trump himself has never spoken about it publicly and his website is silent on the matter altogether.  So whether it is a high priority of the new administration or not remains to be seen, but even if it is a high priority, my expectation is that April will come and go and this new DOL rule will be enforceable at that time BY the private sector. 

For how long after.......time will tell.

- Jason Grantz, QPA, AIFA



 


.

Monday, December 15, 2014

Hatch's remarks on Pension Reform - Financial Services Roundtable:

Really interesting read on where the thinking in this area is, the whole speech can be found in this article -->

http://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2014/12/15/hatch-outlines-pension-reform-retirement-savings/#.VI9NpHuEzaV

Here are the parts on private Pension Reform:

"....The good news is that the private employer-based retirement savings system in the United States – particularly 401(k) plans and Individual Retirement Accounts, or IRAs – has become the greatest wealth creator for the middle class in history and represents truly shared prosperity.

The bad news is that the retirement of the baby boom generation is putting enormous pressure on public programs like Social Security and Medicare.

And, as part of the unending effort on Capitol Hill to find more revenue to pay for increased spending, some have proposed reducing the allowed contributions to 401(k) plans and IRAs.

That, in my view, would be both short-sighted and foolish. - GREAT LINE!!!

Some in Congress seem to have forgotten that this is well-covered territory.  Indeed, Congress has already examined this issue and made the policy call decidedly against contribution reductions.
In 2001, Congress increased the limits for contributions to 401(k) plans and IRAs.
Congress also added a catch-up contribution feature that allows workers to contribute several thousand dollars more per year beginning in their 50s, an age when many workers finally get serious about saving.



One thing we have learned over the years is that the key to successful retirement savings is participation by employees in a plan at work, and the key to convincing employers to sponsor a plan at work is a healthy contribution limit.


Since 2000, the year before Congress raised the contribution limits, retirement assets in defined contribution plans have grown from around $3 trillion to nearly $6 trillion, despite the market downturn in 2008.  Assets in IRAs have grown from $2.6 trillion to $6.5 trillion.

In fact, increased contribution limits worked so well that, in 2006, Congress made those provisions permanent, and the vote to make them permanent was overwhelming:  in the Senate, the vote was 93 to 5.

We have spent a lot of time in recent years defending the gains we have achieved in the 401(k) system.  But in 2015 we can, and in my opinion should, go on offense. Toward that end, we must encourage employers who don’t sponsor plans to set them up.  That’s why last year I introduced legislation to create the Starter 401(k), a plan designed for small or start-up businesses that are not in a position to contribute to a plan but still want to help their employees save.

A Starter 401(k) is a new kind of plan that does not come with all the administrative burdens or expenses of a traditional 401(k) plan.  The plan allows employees to contribute between $8,000 and $10,000 per year, which is a little bit less than what would be allowed under a traditional 401(k), but much more than an IRA.



I believe the Starter 401(k) plan in my legislation could help to revolutionize retirement savings for employees of small businesses throughout the country.  My bill also allows unrelated small employers to pool their assets in a single 401(k) plan to achieve better investment outcomes, lower costs, and easier administration.  This idea, which is called an “Open MEP” is one that many on both sides of the aisle in Congress support.  It’s an idea whose time has come.


Of course, we cannot talk about retirement savings without discussing the importance of lifetime income.  We have fought for years to enact policies that will encourage greater savings and investment.  But, I don’t think our efforts will provide much to comfort those whose retirement assets run out before the end of their lives.

That’s why the legislation I introduced last year encourages the purchase of fixed annuity contracts for retirement.  In fact, the bill is called the Secure Annuities for Employee Retirement Act, or the SAFE Retirement Act.
Why life insurance annuity contracts?  Well, lifetime income is a form of life insurance.  Most people tend to think of life insurance as insurance against the risk of living an unexpectedly short life.  And that is certainly true.  But life insurance also includes insurance for the possibility that someone might live an unexpectedly long life.

We call that form of life insurance a life annuity and it only makes sense to encourage the use of annuities to provide retirement security.

My legislation encourages the use of annuities in 401(k) plans.  First, we remove obstacles to adding annuity-purchase options to 401(k) plans and, second, we provide employers a liability safe-harbor.  That way, employers are encouraged to add annuity options to their plans and employees are encouraged to use them......"

Senator Hatch goes on a bit about public pension reform as well, but key takeaways from this.  There's a strong advocate for the proliferation of the 401(k) and future versions of it in Congress now, who's thinking smartly and creatively about ways to expand coverage, reduce barriers to usage and protect participants.  That's leadership that I can get behind.  Let's hope that these measures make it through and become law.

- Jason Grantz

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

State of the Union - Mostly good, with a mix of ignorance



If you watched last night’s State of the Union speech by President Obama, you were probably moved by the President's passion and eloquence and also excited by his remarks surrounding the minimum wage increase, energy independence and support for small business.  However, upon a closer observation the president had a few choice (albeit ignorant) words regarding the state of the private retirement system.

I'm not sure that I was horrified to hear what he said, but I was dismayed to say the lest.  The President claimed that only the wealthiest Americans were benefiting from tax incentives for the employer-based retirement system, calling them, “upside down retirement tax incentives.”
Plainly stated, he is wrong.  He has incorrect facts, wrong data or wrong data interpretation.  So here are some truths:

  •  80% of 401(k) plan participants are middle class Americans making less than $100,000. 
  • Households making more than $200,000 (the wealthiest Americans) only get 17% of the tax benefits from 401(k) plans, while middle income households enjoy the majority of such tax benefits.”
It's a shame that he chose to taint a moment like this where he discussed expanding coverage by creating a payroll deduct IRA with a subtle, yet slanted attack on the current private system.  So, while we agree that expanding coverage with new and different vehicles is a good idea, it cannot be at the expense of undermining the current retirement plan system.
Last year, yours truly attend a Fly-In to Washington D.C. where we met with various congress people about this issue.  That experience coupled with ongoing negative press and now the State of the Union, it has become apparent to me that there are those in Washington who still do not understand that the retirement savings tax incentive is not a permanent write-off like most other tax breaks – it is a deferral.  A dollar deferred today is a dollar taxed tomorrow.  
There's a great website where it will help you facilitate an email to your Congressmen and women, telling them to stay away from our 401(k)s!  Go to SaveMy401k.com today.  It's very easy.


Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Tax Reform, Hatch and Starter 401(k)'s

On a morning where I read one of the scariest ideas I've seen come from Congress in my adult life, the so-called "Blank Slate" idea on Tax Reform from Senator's Baucus and Hatch which more/less calls for a complete "Do Over" on U.S. taxes, I also saw the separate ideas put forth by Senator Hatch in his introduction of the SAFE Retirement Act of 2013.  

Some thoughts on each of these.

The Blank Slate -  linked here
http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/06272013%20Call%20for%20Input%20on%20Tax%20Reform1.pdf

The general idea is that the U.S. Tax code is broken, it is riddled with exclusions, deductions and credits and caters to special interests.  It needs to be fixed, and needs to be simplified and clear out all of the unproductive provisions.  They say that their goal is to: (1) help grow the economy (applause!), (2) make the tax code fairer (whatever that means.....), or (why not AND?!) (3) effectively promote other important policy objectives.

They put out a bunch of noise about percentages, blah blah blah.   Here's what frightens me.

Blank Slate means the elimination of ALL special provisions, exclusions, deductions and credits and then add back in only the one that meets one of the above 3 goals.  This do over approach will almost certainly hurt lots of individual tax payers and because of #3, will almost certainly allow for all of the Special Interests to get back what they want in the name of "promoting other important policy objectives", Who's policy are they talking about?  I'm guessing that it is isn't mine.......Oh yeah, since this is a 401(k) blog, 401(k) Elective Deferrals are 'exclusions, deductions and credits', thus would be eliminated and may or may not be added back......

As I started to consider taking all of my money out of the bank and stuffing it in my mattress, I saw this other idea come across my desk, and it is a peach.  Truly, a lot of good ideas in this one and it came from, wait for it......Senator Hatch, one of the co-authors of the aforementioned Blank Slate!!! 

SAFE RETIREMENT ACT OF 2013- His introduction linked here.

 http://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/7644a3b9-be99-4e6f-bb2f-4f691bf50640/Hatch%20Floor%20Statement%20SAFE%20Retirement%20Act.pdf

The provisions of this submitted legislation would have mainly positive benefits to the Retirement Plan industry, would allow for greater coverage and greater savings levels.  In general, I'm in favor of these provisions listed below:

The bill would:
• create a new safe harbor deferral-only “Starter 401(k)” plan with automatic enrollment and an $8,000 deferral limit (plus a catch-up for those age 50 and over) for employers that do not have another retirement plan

• allow employers to adopt a qualified retirement plan on or before the due date, with extensions, of the employer’s tax return

• allow employers to replace SIMPLE retirement accounts with a safe harbor 401(k) plan during the year

• remove the arbitrary 10% auto-escalation limit on elective deferrals under the existing automatic enrollment safe harbor

• permit required interim amendments to qualified retirement plans to be made in conjunction with the plans’ restatement cycle

• allow plan sponsors to make electronic delivery of retirement plan documents the default option

• direct the DOL to modify its new participant disclosure regulation so that an investment that uses a mix of asset classes can be benchmarked against a blend of broad-based securities market indices

• allow individuals to roll over insurance contracts into individual retirement accounts

• allow required minimum required distributions to be rolled over into Roth IRAs

The legislation would also restore jurisdiction over the fiduciary rules in the tax code to the Treasury Department, and would require Treasury officials to consult with the SEC in prescribing rules relating to the professional standard of care owed by brokers and investment advisors to IRA investors — thus adding yet another element to the debate over a new, broader fiduciary standard.

Monday, June 3, 2013

The Tax Man is a kid in a candy store - 401(k) Savings threats

On this blog we've tried to inform the readership about the very immediate threats to the United States' primary savings vehicle, the 401(k) Plan.  See previous postings on the 'Save My 401(k)' campaign. 

Recently Fox News had a brief piece produced on The Willis Report, linked below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hPDjLIzcD2U

In the report you can hear Judy Miller of ASPPA and Jonathan Hoenig of Capitalist Pig Asset Management discuss one of the proposed Tax Reform's attacking 401(k) plans, the $3m lifetime benefit cap.  I think they do a good job of highlighting that by capping savings for the wealthy, that there will be a trickle down negative impact on the working middle class as well.  Bottom line, ANY program engineered to dis-incentivize savings stated differently is to incentivize dependency on government. 

We don't take political stances here on this blog, but any program engineered to create dependency on ANY other institution feels wrong, and is very dangerous.  The private sector can, and has, successfully engineered a savings system that works very well.  If anything, politician's should be looking for ways to increase incentives to save. 

Check the video, become aware, act!

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Save My 401(k) - Part 2, Retirement Plan Limits under Attack!!!

This is a continuation of some thoughts from last fall where there were proposals kicking around Washington D.C. surrounding Tax Reform and specific threats to the Retirement Plan system.  Back then we thought we might see the dreadful 20/20 rule where individuals would be capped on the amount of contribution benefit to the greater of $20,000 or 20% of compensation per year.  That proposal would have hurt savings across the board.  Because of that ASPPA created a grass roots campaign called Save My 401(k) which many of us practitioners gladly got behind.  Here's the website for information on how to support it.

www.savemy401k.com

Flash forward 6 months and Obama's new budget proposal does come with a bunch of cuts directly impacting the Retirement Plan System.  The biggest one is the lifetime cap of $3m.  That seems like a lot of money to the average Joe.  Here are some thoughts:

1.) The number is actually determined as an annual living benefit of $205k/year.  They use that to back into this arbitrary $3m number.  That calculation is levered by prevailing interest rates which are at an all time low.  Therefore, when (not if) interest rates go up, that $3m number will go down and will go down sharply!

2.) The impact on this cap will predominantly be felt by the people in charge of companies.  Those who decide on whether or not to have a plan to begin with.  If they hit the cap, a huge incentive for them goes away and voila, the plan goes away too.  That is felt by every day people, not just the wealthy!

3.) The rule does NOT impact Deferred Compensation plans, aka Executive Bonus Plans.  Why not?  Interesting question.  The big CEO's, President's of Industry, the President of the U.S. ALL have accounts greater than $3m that aren't impacted by the rule.....it is very curious.

Brian Graff, President of ASPPA does a really good job of pointing this out on CNBC.  Link to the video here.  Enjoy!

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000161050.

Friday, April 5, 2013

Let's Talk About Risk, Man.


Yesterday, I saw a good post from NAPA Net regarding the potential of triggering a Form 5500 type audit.  For those unaware, NAPA is the National Association of Plan Advisors.  I found particularly interesting the list of actual 5500 responses deemed likely to trigger an audit or investigation.  Specifically listed were: 

• line items that are left blank when the instructions require an answer
• inconsistencies in the data disclosed on the Form 5500 schedules
• a large drop in the number of participants from one year to the next
• a large dollar amount in the “Other” asset line on the Schedule H

*Other red flags include hard-to-value investments, non-marketable investments, and consistent late deposits of deferrals.  Included in this category would be Self Directed Brokerage Accounts and Employer Stock.

The reason that this post struck me as interesting has to do with a topic that we discuss often on this blog and when we're out consulting with clients.  Specifically, Risk Mitigation.  Regular readers of this blog know that my firm is a Discretionary Corporate Trustee and that one of the primary reasons we are hired, although not the exclusive one, is to provide relief from exposure to fiduciary liability risk. 
 
Risk mitigation is crucial to our story, but we are consciously aware that of the fact that while fiduciary based law suits are increasing, they are still relatively uncommon in the small plan marketplace where we find most of our clients. 

One area that I've been focusing on when meeting with clients is in risk categorization.  Generally, I view employer (plan sponsor) risk falling into three main areas of concern:

a.       High Risk/Low Probability – This is the risk of law suit.  It is unlikely to occur, but if it does, it will be unpleasant, expensive financially to defend and will have a reputation cost as well.

b.      Low Risk/High Probability – We've found that in 85% of the plans we take over, we catch some kind of administrative, fiduciary or document breach up front and correct them.  These types of issues are likely to pop up from time to time and are a quite common problem.  They are relatively inexpensive to correct but do cause aggravation to clients.   

c.       Medium Risk/Medium Probability – This is the audit risk.  In my opinion, I believe that this is ought to be the biggest area of concern for an employer.  The risk of audit is becoming greater and greater and in the political environment of today, with extreme governmental debt and tax reform coming, this is one area that the government can easily generate revenues in the form of excise taxes, penalties and fines.  It is this risk that is supported by NAPA's posting.

The lesson here for employers is to make sure that 5500's are completed with the same kind of care and attention to detail that a person would use when filling out their IRS 1040.  

The lesson for advisors is two-fold. 

1.) Providing a 5500 review to help clients avoid potential audit trigger's could/should be among your services.

2.) Try coaching clients to eliminate some of those difficult to value assets like employer stock or Self Directed Accounts because those plans are the low hanging fruit from an auditor's perspective.

Finally, some a little self serving here, it would be a good idea for employers to hire a professional fiduciary services provider, like a Discretionary Corporate Trustee.
 

 

Friday, January 18, 2013

Thanks for 2012 and The Big Five in 2013

To all the readers of this blog, I wanted to say thank you for your previous and continued interest.  2012 was a very important and, frankly, a big year for us.  We've gotten more attention then ever and have more hits per day and then ever before.  Looking forward to continuing the dialogue in 2013 and working with each of you to try and fine ways to better improve the delivery of good Retirement Plan Consulting.  That said, here's what we have to look forward to in 2013 in the Retirement Plan Industry.

1. Threats to DC plan tax incentives coming from two continuing debates on Capitol Hill — over the nation’s debt limit and about tax reform.  This is a very real potential threat that we've discussed previously leading to 'Save My 401k' campaign.  I'm told that 55,000 citizens have submitted letters to their congress people to date and more are doing so every day.  We are getting their attention.

2. Fee disclosure is not over. We expect DOL regulators to look at advisor fees again in 2013, focusing on critical questions about how fees are paid.  This is going to be interesting.  As it unfolds, I expect to see enforcement of last year's 408(b)-2 regulations and my opinion is that Plan Sponsors will be held accountable for compliance leading them to ask a lot of questions to their advisors about advisory fees.  Could get uncomfortable for some.

3. The definition of a fiduciary and what the advisor’s role in that is. Expect to see a proposed rule from DOL in the second quarter of the year.  This debate roles on.  Some of us involved in the industry and with the National Association of Plan Advisors will likely have a chance to weigh in on this issue.

4. Lifetime benefits. We know that this issue is an area of great interest to the DOL. We’re moving toward a requirement in this area; probably by March we’ll see a proposed regulation on providing lifetime income estimates on participant statements.  This is a great idea.  However, there are a lot of great ideas that lead to extremely poor execution.  A great example is the next item.  The idea of a glide path where people start out more aggressively invested and get more conservative as they age is a great idea.  The industry's deliverable on that, the Target Date Mutual Fund, was a poorly executed result (at least from the investors point of view....actually a great deal for those fund companies).

5. Reevaluation of target date funds — in particular, regarding their usage as QDIAs.  I'm crossing my finger's that eyes will be open as to the major flaws that exist with the current availability and structure of these funds and hope that the QDIA definition will eliminate these as an option......

Keep your eyes open, as there will surely be more to come.

Best - Jason

Friday, December 14, 2012

Where the Retirement Industry is Going

Well, it has finally happened!  Someone else was interested in what I had to say, hah!  It was even recorded.  Here's some proof.  The below link's to a five minute video of yours truly discussing some recent retirement industry issues and trends.  This video is courtesy of Employee Benefit News.  Enjoy!

http://bcove.me/ty4g93kf


Thursday, November 8, 2012

What do election results mean for your 401(k)?

As yet another sign of the apocolypse (thanks Superstorm Sandy), Yours Truly was interviewed by Benefits Pro on my thoughts regarding the election and the future of Retirement Plans.  Below is a link to the article.  Enjoy!

http://www.benefitspro.com/2012/11/07/what-do-election-results-mean-for-your-401k

Friday, November 2, 2012

Save My 401(k)

In 2013, tax reform will be on the table in Congress.  Everything will be on the table, and one area that is getting serious consideration is cutting the benefits afforded by 401(k) Plans.  This is a very serious threat to the primary way Americans save for Retirement.  I encourage any regular readers or those of you who occasionally stumble upon this blog to contact your congress person and encourage them to "Stay Away from Your 401(k)".

See this website that was set-up for just that purpose.  There's a fun 'Youtube' video that you can link to from this website and places on twitter and facebook that you can link to as well.

www.savemy401k.com

Save My 401k Logo