Only 47% of Homemakers Are Saving for Retirement

Most associate retirement with insecurity and poverty.

Homemakers, either women or men, who devote their lives to taking care of their families and who do not work outside the home are at risk of an insecure retirement, Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies (TCRS)  and Aegon Center for Longevity and Retirement (ACLR) found in a survey of 1,600 homemakers in 15 countries around the globe. Only 47% of women around the world are saving for retirement, and that ticks down to 44% in the U.S.

Only 29% of homemakers consider themselves to be habitual savers who are continuously saving for retirement (30% in the U.S.). Fifty-one percent of homemakers, both globally and in the U.S., have no strategy for retirement, either written or unwritten. Only 11% globally have a written plan (8% in the U.S.).

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

The majority of homemakers (86% globally and 81% in the U.S.) are women. Eighty-eight percent globally (90% in the U.S.) are married, cohabitating or are in a civil partnership. And most (69% globally, 55% in the U.S.) are the parent of one or more financially dependent children.

It is no wonder, then, that when presented with a series of associations about retirement, only 60% of homemakers cite positive words, such as leisure, freedom and enjoyment, versus 71% of workers and retirees. In contrast, homemakers are more likely to cite insecurity, poverty and ill health.

Forty-eight percent of homemakers are not confident they will be have a comfortable retirement, compared with 42% of workers. Sixty-five percent of homemakers believe their spouse’s or partner’s income will be very or extremely important to them in retirement, compared with 41% of workers.

“Homemakers contribute greatly to their families and society, as parents, caregivers and role models to their children,” says Catherine Collinson, president of TCRS and executive director of ACLR. “Because their work is unpaid and comes without employer or retirement benefits, homemakers face even greater retirement risks than workers due to their reliance on others for income. It is a myth that only workers retire. Homemakers also need to plan and prepare for financial security in old age. For everyone, and especially homemakers, a separation, divorce or loss of a spouse or partner can be devastating, both emotionally and financially.”

NEXT: What can improve homemakers’ situation?

Transamerica cites five steps that homemakers, employers and governments can take to be better prepared for retirement. First, they should work with their spouse or partner to become involved in their family finances and seek out the help of a financial adviser. Second, they should seek out part-time work for the income and retirement benefits.

Employers should offer flexible work arrangements so that homemakers can juggle work and family responsibilities. They should also consider offering health and retirement benefits to part-time workers and contract employees. Finally, governments should consider offering credits for homemakers who are unable to pay into their social security system, in recognition of their unpaid work and contribution to society.

The full report, “Homemakers Are Not Off the Hook: How Should They Be Planning for Retirement?,” can be downloaded here.

 

Florida Takes Top Spots in Retirement Friendliness

From weather to number of senior centers, WalletHub ranks 150 cities across the country for the best—and worst—places to retire.

No surprise, cities in Arizona and Florida top out among the best for retirement-friendliness. The worst? According to WalletHub’s rankings, it’s New York and New Jersey.

The report compared the retirement-friendliness of the 150 largest U.S. cities across 24 metrics, including cost of living, percentage of the population that’s elderly, access to health care and availability of recreational activities, among others.

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

Anchorage, Alaska, has the highest percentage of people over the age of 65 who are employed. Other good bets for employment post-retirement age are Washington, D.C., and Lincoln, Nebraska. The lowest percentage is in Brownsville, Texas. But Brownsville gets high ratings for the cheapest in-home care, as do Shreveport, Louisiana; and Montgomery, Alabama. The highest costs for in-home care are found in Seattle; Tacoma, Washington; and San Francisco.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Minneapolis and Washington, D.C., have the greatest number of recreation and seniors’ centers per capita. New York City, and Toledo and Boise City, both in Idaho, have the fewest recreation and seniors’ centers per capita.

California takes top spots for best mild weather in Glendale, Riverside and Bakersfield. Boston and Providence, Rhode Island, get called out for worst weather, as does Indianapolis.

If percentage of the population age 65 and up is important, consider Scottsdale, Arizona; Hialeah, Florida; and Cape Coral, Florida. The cities with the lowest percentage of population 65 and older are Santa Ana, California; Aurora, Illinois; and Gilbert, Arizona.

For overall rankings in affordability, activities, quality of life and health care, the top 10 cities from first to tenth place are:

  1. Tampa, Florida
  2. Scottsdale, Arizona
  3. Boise, Idaho
  4. Cape Coral, Florida
  5. Orlando, Florida
  6. Sioux Falls, South Dakota
  7. Baton Rouge, Louisiana
  8. Port St. Lucie, Florida
  9. Overland Park, Kansas
  10. Peoria, Arizona

The worst cities overall for retirement-friendliness were, beginning with the last-ranked city on the list:

  1. Newark, New Jersey
  2. Jersey City, New Jersey
  3. Providence, Rhode Island
  4. Aurora, Illinois
  5. New York City
  6. Yonkers, New York
  7. Chicago
  8. Boston
  9. Worcester, Massachusetts
  10. Detroit

«