Plans of the Future

Retirement advisers see a future for these plan design innovations.

Plan design innovations, from employer matching in Roth accounts to student loan retirement matching and in-plan retirement income, are expected to gain more traction among plan sponsors in the coming decade.

But potential is one thing—what do plan advisers think will stick? And what are the stumbling blocks to their implementation?

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

Many employers may see these plan innovations as a way to both attract and retain workers, as well as help employees build a bigger nest egg and more smoothly transition into their retirement years.

Roth Friendly

Matthew Hedley, vice president, retirement services at OneDigital, believes more plan sponsors will offer employer matching in Roth accounts in the next several years.

Hedley said that employer matching in Roth accounts can be a “great strategy” for plan participants and sponsors alike.

Under the SECURE 2.0 Act, plan participants can choose to receive employer contributions to a Roth account versus on a pre-tax basis.

“From a tax perspective, the employer will need to have a discussion about what is best for their particular company regarding whatever the tax liability will be,” he continues. Overall, he thinks this plan design “continues to encourage the usage of Roth strategies,” which equates to “positive momentum for savers and retirement plans.”

Craig Stanley, lead partner, retirement plan consulting at Summit Group 401(k) Consulting, an Alera Group Company, also believes that “the Rothification of employer contributions is going to gain traction,” in coming years.

“Roth savings in general is attractive and is going to help savers,” he says. “The utilization has spiked dramatically and will continue to go up as savers understand the difference between pre-tax and Roth savings.”

Stanley believes that education will be a hurdle, however.

“Nobody is there yet, because the industry, the payroll companies and recordkeepers, have not fully figured out how to administer those plans. Once that is out of the way, I think you will see adoption of (employer matching in Roth),” Stanley says.

In-Plan Annuity Potential

Hedley also thinks that the industry will see an uptick of in-plan retirement income plans in the next five to 10 years– essentially providing a guaranteed annuity that would provide retirees with reliable payouts that mimic a steady paycheck.

One hurdle plan sponsors will need to overcome from an education standpoint, however, is misconceptions about annuities.

“People already have these perceptions, which are negative perceptions, of annuities,” he says. “What we are hoping to get across is these are not retail annuities. These are institutional strategies. They are going to be flexible, be more liquid and come at a lower cost.”

“What are we trying to achieve? A consistent paycheck in retirement,” he added.

“You work your whole career and you get a check two times a month, then you get to retirement and you are forced to recreate your paycheck,” he notes. “How in the heck are you going to do that? You’d have to do that with a trusted adviser. But there are a lot of people in this country who do not have the means to have an adviser. Typically, the average employee is going to have a difficult time finding a sophisticated, wealth adviser.”

The industry’s migration from pensions to defined contribution plans in recent decades has also forced workers to try to figure out how they’ll recreate consistent income in retirement, Hedley adds.

Summit Group’s Stanley also sees in-plan retirement income gaining “a lot of traction for two reasons.”

First, he believes there is demand for workers being able to take a “huge pot of money accumulated and turn that into a consistent and predictable stream of income” in their retirement years. 

“Most savers aren’t great at that, and they end up distributing more than they should and end up depleting their assets before they are no longer here,” Stanley says. “There is a big demand to create a solution that can provide that dependable income and manage that longevity risk.”

A second factor that will likely influence the uptake of in-plan options is that product manufacturers have become more involved in the design of these plans for sponsors.

“Our firm and myself—we have taken a conservative approach with in-plan retirement income,” he says. “But we’re all talking about it and thinking about it. I think that will happen (in the future) and the momentum is there.”

Student Loan Matching

Deanna Spivey, a retirement plan consultant at SageView Advisory Group, has seen a number of the firm’s clients express interest in student loan retirement matching, a provision of SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 that allows employers to make matching retirement account contributions against qualified student loan payments.

“Over the last few years, we’ve seen a shift in employers wanting to provide as much financial resources to their employees as possible,” Spivey says. “And they know that their employees have large student loans,” she continued, adding that employers also see this offering as a way to attract and retain talent.

In fact, Spivey has had one client successfully add student loan matching to their retirement plan offerings.

The plan sponsor is a small employer, and she believes this particular offering may be easier to implement for a small-to-midsize employer unless a third-party company can help them with the administrative needs.

“I think each individual plan sponsor has to look at the need,” Spivey adds. “How many employees would really truly need this and take advantage of this? Also from an administrative standpoint, is this going to require a level of work they can do internally? They would need to track whether employees are making student loan payments, but also that they match that.”

Top Advisers Talk Plan Design

Advisers navigate auto and personalization options to maximize plan design.

The very title “adviser” may make it seem like the best way to approach plan sponsor clients about how to organize their workplace retirement plan is with answers. 

But Dee Spivey, a retirement plan consultant with SageView Advisory Group, says when having a conversation with a client on plan design it’s better to start with a question: “What is your goal?”  

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

Spivey, who is based in Richmond, Virginia, tries to determine the plan sponsor’s objectives specific to the retirement plan, whether the goal is simply to provide a benefit and check a box, or to fundamentally help participants find financial success in their futures. To get there, it generally takes more questions before getting into the answers. 

“You’re also going to need to know about the kind of structure of their organization,” she says. “What type of employees are they going to have? What’s their turnover? Is the goal to recruit more individuals? What type of costs [are they comfortable with]—meaning are they looking to make a match or to make a contribution?”  

She says that knowing the demographics of the organization should be a priority, along with understanding the compensation levels and age range. She adds that learning about the plan sponsors themselves is important.  

“We place a huge focus on understanding the plan sponsor’s ability to administer the plan,” she says. “What kind of teams do they have internally? What kind of support will they need?” 

Design Concepts for Plan Maximization 

Andy Bush, a partner and financial adviser with Horizon Financial Group, along with Bill Bush, a financial adviser at the firm, think about the usual design concepts to maximize for the plan sponsor.  

Andy Bush says a safe harbor match is the first basic plan item that comes to mind. This feature tends to have the greatest impact on a plan as it incentivizes employees to put their own dollars down. Additionally, it helps with some of the plan testing in which more highly compensated individuals can max out their contributions without the worry of getting a return because of failed testing.  

“Some of our plans have done a safe harbor match, and then they’ve done a discretionary match on top of that, which has yielded probably the absolute best return,” Andy Bush says. “It allows a lot of money to flow into the plan. It increases participation tremendously.” 

For example, if a person puts in 4%, they get 8% from the company with a safe harbor match and a discretionary match, which is almost a “foolproof” return, according to Andy Bush.  

Bill Bush adds that the auto-enrollment feature has significantly increased participation for most plans, which will have to be implemented for any new plan by 2025 unless an exception applies.  

Andy Bush says, however a plan is working, his team will discuss and make plan design adjustments as needed during every annual review. The team makes sure that the plan is functioning, while adding any features the client is looking to enhance it with. He noted that it’s not a one-time conversation, but a continual one to ensure they are putting a plan together that works best for participants. 

“Those conversations can lead into other paths like non-qualified plans and other options to help boost [participant’s] overall benefit,” says Bill Bush.  

Andy Bush’s main piece of advice for successful plan design is to have a strong relationship with third-party administrators. 

“A lot of times, they’re the ones that can help identify the impact of a plan design that will bring clarity to the business owner, better than just a conversation,” he says. “I believe those relationships are vital.”  

Education Is Key 

Todd Nuttall and Dave Gardner, partners at Caliber Wealth Management, say the biggest mistakes they see in plan design is that plan sponsors may not be focused on the education aspect of the plan for participants.  

According to Gardner, this could be due to taxes and misalignment at an ownership level. Tax benefits are allowed to be passed through to the owner from both participating in the 401(k) and from some of the expenses that come from running the 401(k). If employers are focused on these elements only, they may miss the fact that participants need strong education over time for the plan to really work well and be useful.  

“Another thing that creates a little bit of misalignment is that maybe the plan sponsor is trying to recruit a certain group of employees and they know that a 401(k) is required in order to go out and recruit those employees,” says Gardner. “Recruitment is one great tool of the 401(k) but it does lead to a little bit of misalignment if we come up with a longer-term view and perspective of what the 401(k) plan is. It’s a real benefit, and there’s some complexity to it that we need to be educating our participants on.” 

Another reason plan sponsors aren’t placing a premium on education is because they assume they are already educated on 401(k)s, says Nuttall.   

“The second part of that is I think there’s a little bit of a hesitation due to, ‘If we hold these brown bag lunches every month to bring in the adviser to educate, does that take away time from them being productive employees and interrupt the flow of things?’” he notes. 

Nuttall says that, in fact, the opposite effect is true. Providing education to employees allows participants to get the education that they need so that they can have peace of mind and not be stressed out as much at work about finances and retirement. This in turn makes them better employees because they’re not worried as much about their personal finances or their retirement plans. 

“What we’re finding is that if we reengage our plan sponsors and educate them, then that education is matriculating down into the employees at a better level,” says Gardner. “We step in and reeducate those plan sponsors on what’s out there. We do it in a way that’s not overwhelming to them but can be an ‘ala carte option’ to select the plan features and provisions that are going to work for their goals.” 

«

Close