Alternative Realities: The Impact of Extreme Changes in Defined Contribution Plans on Retirement Income Adequacy in America

Q3 Social Sciences
Jack L. VanDerhei
{"title":"Alternative Realities: The Impact of Extreme Changes in Defined Contribution Plans on Retirement Income Adequacy in America","authors":"Jack L. VanDerhei","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3403753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years there have been a number of policy proposals that call into question the value of existing defined contribution plans. However, the suggested alternatives do not provide a detailed analysis of the impact of terminating defined contribution plans on retirement income adequacy for American households. Previous research by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) has provided some tangential evidence with respect to the potential impact. In 2014 EBRI provided simulation analysis of the serious error introduced by models that ignored future contribution activity from defined contribution plans. In 2017 EBRI produced simulation results showing that, if there were no employer-sponsored retirement plans (defined benefit as well as defined contribution) and individuals were assumed to behave in the manner observed for those with no access to such plans, the aggregate retirement deficits would jump from $4.13 trillion to $7.05 trillion (an increase of 71 percent). In contrast, this Issue Brief provides a comprehensive exploration of the impact on retirement income adequacy for various cohorts of American households if defined contribution retirement plans were completely eliminated. As expected, the results are significantly greater for younger cohorts, since they would lose potential access to defined contribution plans for a longer period. The youngest age cohort (those currently ages 35–39) would suffer the most, with average retirement deficits increasing 23 percent from $49,182 to $60,253. Older cohorts would experience less of an impact: those ages 40–44 would have an increase of 18 percent, while those ages 45–49 would have a 13 percent increase. The average deficits for households above age 50 would increase but by less than 10 percent. The results are also analyzed by preretirement income quartile and breakouts into the following categories: single male, single female, widow, and widower. We find that elimination of defined contribution plans would have the most negative impact on single females. The Issue Brief then analyzes the opposite end of the defined contribution access spectrum by exploring the impact of a universal defined contribution scenario where every employer (with the exception of those that already sponsor a defined benefit plan) is assumed to sponsor a defined contribution plan. Again in this scenario, the youngest age cohort and single females would experience the largest change in retirement income adequacy. The youngest age cohort would benefit the most from this scenario, with average retirement deficits decreasing 24 percent from $49,182 to $37,506. Older cohorts would experience less of an impact: those ages 40–44 would have a decrease of 19 percent, while those ages 45–49 would have a 16 percent decrease and those ages 50–54 would have a 12 percent decrease. The average deficit for households above age 55 would decrease but by less than 10 percent.","PeriodicalId":39542,"journal":{"name":"Social Security Bulletin","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Security Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3403753","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years there have been a number of policy proposals that call into question the value of existing defined contribution plans. However, the suggested alternatives do not provide a detailed analysis of the impact of terminating defined contribution plans on retirement income adequacy for American households. Previous research by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) has provided some tangential evidence with respect to the potential impact. In 2014 EBRI provided simulation analysis of the serious error introduced by models that ignored future contribution activity from defined contribution plans. In 2017 EBRI produced simulation results showing that, if there were no employer-sponsored retirement plans (defined benefit as well as defined contribution) and individuals were assumed to behave in the manner observed for those with no access to such plans, the aggregate retirement deficits would jump from $4.13 trillion to $7.05 trillion (an increase of 71 percent). In contrast, this Issue Brief provides a comprehensive exploration of the impact on retirement income adequacy for various cohorts of American households if defined contribution retirement plans were completely eliminated. As expected, the results are significantly greater for younger cohorts, since they would lose potential access to defined contribution plans for a longer period. The youngest age cohort (those currently ages 35–39) would suffer the most, with average retirement deficits increasing 23 percent from $49,182 to $60,253. Older cohorts would experience less of an impact: those ages 40–44 would have an increase of 18 percent, while those ages 45–49 would have a 13 percent increase. The average deficits for households above age 50 would increase but by less than 10 percent. The results are also analyzed by preretirement income quartile and breakouts into the following categories: single male, single female, widow, and widower. We find that elimination of defined contribution plans would have the most negative impact on single females. The Issue Brief then analyzes the opposite end of the defined contribution access spectrum by exploring the impact of a universal defined contribution scenario where every employer (with the exception of those that already sponsor a defined benefit plan) is assumed to sponsor a defined contribution plan. Again in this scenario, the youngest age cohort and single females would experience the largest change in retirement income adequacy. The youngest age cohort would benefit the most from this scenario, with average retirement deficits decreasing 24 percent from $49,182 to $37,506. Older cohorts would experience less of an impact: those ages 40–44 would have a decrease of 19 percent, while those ages 45–49 would have a 16 percent decrease and those ages 50–54 would have a 12 percent decrease. The average deficit for households above age 55 would decrease but by less than 10 percent.
另类现实:美国固定缴款计划的极端变化对退休收入充足性的影响
近年来,有一些政策建议对现有的固定缴款计划的价值提出了质疑。然而,建议的替代方案并没有详细分析终止固定缴款计划对美国家庭退休收入充足性的影响。雇员福利研究所(EBRI)之前的研究已经提供了一些关于潜在影响的间接证据。2014年,EBRI对模型忽略了固定缴款计划的未来缴款活动所带来的严重误差进行了模拟分析。2017年,EBRI的模拟结果显示,如果没有雇主赞助的退休计划(固定福利和固定缴款),并且假设个人的行为方式与那些无法获得此类计划的人一样,那么总退休赤字将从4.13万亿美元跃升至7.05万亿美元(增长71%)。相比之下,本问题摘要提供了一个全面的探索,如果确定供款退休计划被完全取消,对不同年龄段的美国家庭的退休收入充足性的影响。正如预期的那样,年轻人的结果要大得多,因为他们可能会在更长的时间内失去参加固定缴款计划的机会。最年轻的人群(目前年龄在35-39岁之间)将受到最大的影响,平均退休赤字将从49,182美元增加23%至60,253美元。年龄较大的人群受到的影响较小:40-44岁的人群将增加18%,而45-49岁的人群将增加13%。50岁以上家庭的平均赤字将增加,但增幅不到10%。结果还分析了退休前收入的四分位数,并细分为以下类别:单身男性,单身女性,寡妇和鳏夫。我们发现,取消固定缴款计划对单身女性的负面影响最大。然后,问题摘要通过探讨普遍设定缴款方案的影响,分析了设定缴款方案的另一端,即假设每个雇主(已经赞助设定受益计划的雇主除外)都要赞助设定缴款计划。同样,在这种情况下,最年轻的年龄组和单身女性在退休收入充足性方面的变化最大。最年轻的群体将从这种情况中受益最大,平均退休赤字将从49182美元下降24%至37506美元。年龄较大的人群受到的影响较小:40-44岁的人会减少19%,而45-49岁的人会减少16%,50-54岁的人会减少12%。55岁以上家庭的平均赤字将下降,但降幅不到10%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Security Bulletin
Social Security Bulletin Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信