Subscribe

EBRI: Cap on tax-preferred 401(k)s would clip large and small earners

Some employees in top bracket could face 15% reduction in account balances; lower-paid likely down 10%

If retirement plan contributions were limited to the lower of $20,000 a year or 20% of income, earners on both ends of the financial scale would feel the pain, new research indicates.
A study from the Employee Benefit Research Institute revisited the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility’s recommendation to cap annual tax-preferred contributions to 401(k)s at the lower of $20,000 or 20% of income. The commission, headed by Erskine Bowles and former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., came up with the suggestion late last year as part of a proposed blueprint for reducing the national deficit.
At the moment, employers and employees can sock away $49,000, or 100% of a worker’s pay if it does not exceed that threshold.
Using a simulation dubbed the EBRI Retirement Security Projection Model, the organization revealed that if the contribution limits recommended by the commission were put in place, those in the highest income quartile would feel the pain — and in no small amount, either.
Under the cap, workers between the ages of 36 and 45 who are in the top income quartile of that age group could face a 15% reduction in their 401(k) account balances by the time they reach retirement age.
The shortfall would also hit younger workers who ranked within the highest income quartile. People between ages 25 and 36 were likely to take a 12% hit to their retirement account balance by the time they became eligible to collect Social Security.
The retirement account levels of employees in the lowest income bracket would also take a hit. The lowest earners aged 26 to 35 and 36 to 45 could lose nearly 10% of their 401(k) account balance by retirement age if the retirement plan contribution limits were applied.
Though EBRI warned that the impact of the limitation could fall disproportionately on part-time employees, the organization noted that lower-income workers’ current or future contributions combined with what their employer chipped in almost always exceeded 20% of salary.

Learn more about reprints and licensing for this article.

Recent Articles by Author

Stuck in the middle

Newly elected Finra board member whose firm is connected to a bribery scandal says the matter should have no effect on his ability to serve.

Fighting for market share in the LTC business

A handful of publicly held life insurers dominate the market for traditional long-term-care insurance, but mutual life insurers are beginning to make inroads with agents and financial advisers.

Breaking up is hard to do – especially with annuities

When a client came to his office bearing her new divorce decree, adviser Dale Russell became the bearer…

Longevity insurance promising – but higher rates would help

The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service like it, as do many estate-planning experts. Now all that…

Long-term care: Cutting back coverage

When a 74-year-old client visited Ellen R. Siegel six years ago with news of an upcoming 12% rate increase on the premium of her long-term-care insurance, the adviser knew she had to navigate the potential benefit cuts with the precision of a surgeon.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print