Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowA major change to how Americans save for retirement is close to becoming law.
The Senate on Thursday passed the Secure Act as part of its massive spending package. The House passed it earlier this week and it now heads to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it into law.
The Secure Act—which stands for Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement—is designed to help more people set aside more money for retirement. It does so primarily by removing some of the hurdles that keep people from saving.
Among its highlights is a provision that would make it easier for small businesses to band together to offer retirement plans to their employees. It also opens the door for long-term part-time employees to gain access to workplace retirement plans.
In addition, it raises the age that Americans must start drawing from retirement savings, known as the required minimum distribution age, from 70½ to 72, as people are living and working longer. It also provides more years for people to contribute to individual retirement accounts, for the same reason.
It creates new rules that could expand lifetime-income options within workplace plans, such as annuities. That’s aimed at helping people establish reliable streams of income in retirement. It would also make it easier for employees to transfer retirement plan assets when they change jobs.
It also fixes a component of the 2017 tax overhaul that raised taxes on benefits received by family members of deceased military veterans, as well as taxes on some students and members of Native American tribes.
It is widely considered the biggest piece of retirement legislation since the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Secure Act had bipartisan support among lawmakers, as well as many in the financial and retirement industries.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
It’s already relatively “easy” to save for retirement (at least in terms of structural impediments) whether or not a worker has access to a 401k or 403b (nonprofit version).
The main impediment is poor budgeting and a consumption bias, as Pete the Planner never tires of pointing out in his IBJ column.
From 2013 to 2018 life expectancy in the US was going down.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy
Chris B – is it poor budgeting and consumption bias, or is it more money going to things like health care premiums and thus less to savings/retirement?
Indeed, part of it is that wage growth has barely kept pace with inflation. But no IBJ reader’s “necessities” outrun their income except by choice; sure, it’s easy to cut the 401k contribution if health premiums go up, but it’s unwise. Look…I learned the hard way. Mid-life with minimal retirement savings is a bad place to be so I changed my spending and saving patterns.