Wave of Coronavirus Hardship Distributions Still Building

Only 5% of respondents to a new survey have withdrawn from their retirement accounts, but another 7% said they plan to do so in the coming weeks.

Low- to moderate-income (LMI) retirement plan participants have mostly turned to reducing their spending levels and using credit cards to find financial relief during the pandemic; however, more will be turning to their retirement plans for liquidity, according to research from the nonprofit Commonwealth and the Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association (DCIIA) Retirement Research Center.

Seventy percent of LMI retirement plan participants have reduced their expenses. But, the researchers note, those making less than $30,000 are less likely to have cut expenses, perhaps because there is little room to reduce expenses in their budget. Fifteen percent of respondents have turned to credit cards to meet expenses during COVID-19.

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

The research found that, so far, few LMI 401(k) participants have tapped their accounts. Only 5% of respondents have withdrawn from their account, but 7% said they plan to do so in the coming weeks. Eight percent of people whose income has been reduced as a result of the pandemic have withdrawn from their account versus 2% of those with unchanged income.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act created a new type of distribution, called a coronavirus-related distribution (CRD), for employees affected by the pandemic and expanded retirement plan loan limits. A survey of 137 401(k) plan sponsors—with no reported limit on plan size or participant base—by the Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA) found nearly two-thirds (63.5%) are allowing participants to take CRDs. Only about one-third (36.5%) of respondents increased plan loan limits.

One in five plan sponsors (19.7%) surveyed by the PSCA are still taking a wait-and-see approach, and fewer than 10% have already determined they will not implement any of the optional CARES Act provisions.

Ascensus looked at its own retirement plan client base of plan sponsors with 500 or fewer employees, and found 11.7% have adopted the CRD option and 7.5% have adopted the expanded loan amount option. Ascensus found there has been 2.5 times the normal level of hardship distribution activity since the passage of the CARES Act, as retirement savers have begun taking CRDs. However, the overall number of savers taking CRDs remains fairly small at 12 per every 10,000, Ascensus reported.

The PSCA reports that among plans offering a CRD, nearly 40% indicated an average of just 1% to 5% of participants have taken one, and nearly as many said fewer than 1% of participants have done so. Eighteen percent reported that no participants have. Among plans that have increased the loan limits, most reported that fewer than 1% of participants have taken advantage of this option, and more than one-quarter stated that none have.

Among the more than 4 million participants on Alight’s platform who are eligible for the CARES Act provisions, 2.2% took a CRD, and 52% of those participants took the maximum amount allowed.

The Savings Picture

Five percent of respondents to the PSCA survey have suspended matching contributions and fewer than 1% have suspended non-matching (or profit sharing) contributions. Larger organizations were somewhat more likely to have suspended the match. Three percent of plan sponsors are considering reducing or suspending contributions but had not made a decision as of mid-June when the survey ended.

Ascensus’ look at plan sponsors with 500 or fewer participants found 11.8% of employers had stopped or decreased their match as of the end of May. The survey also found that 7.5% of employers that decreased their match in or after March returned to pre-March levels in May.

Ascensus found employer match or profit sharing contribution suspensions were driven by business interruptions or closures, and such suspensions happened in the smallest plans and in plans in certain industries more so than others.

The majority (93.1%) of participants made no change to their savings rates, and 3.8% increased their savings rate, according to Ascensus. However, 1.3% discontinued their retirement plan deferrals and 1.8% reduced their savings rates.

Commonwealth and the DCIIA Retirement Research Center note that data from 2008 indicates that when plan sponsors pause matches, 20% of participants also stop contributions. Its survey found that LMI plan participants are more likely to have paused or stopped retirement plan contributions (10%) than stopped paying bills (8%), borrowed from friends or family (7%) or sold any possessions (7%).

The organizations also say offering emergency savings along with retirement accounts will help decrease withdrawals.

Be Prepared for a Potentially Wild Third Quarter

After falling precipitously in the first quarter, the S&P 500 Index added 20% during the second, making for the best quarter since 1998 and the best second quarter since 1938. What comes next is anyone’s guess.

Ryan Detrick, senior market strategist for LPL Financial, is among the sources who commonly share economic commentary with PLANADVISER.

Taking stock of the freshly ended second quarter, and looking ahead to the third, Detrick says the markets remain at a critical crossroads. So much in the near-term future will depend on our collective progress (or lack thereof) fighting the coronavirus pandemic. Also key will be the management of global trade tensions between the U.S. and China, and the United Kingdom’s ongoing exodus from the European Union. What we can say at this point, Detrick observes, is that the second quarter was something special from a performance point of view.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

“What a quarter the second quarter was, with the S&P 500 Index adding 20%, for the best quarter since 1998 and the best second quarter since 1938,” Detrick says. “Of course, stocks fell 20% in the first quarter, so what we really have is a bad case of whiplash in 2020 thus far.”

As Detrick points out, a 20% quarterly gain is quite rare, so it is hard to extrapolate too much from the second quarter’s remarkable bounce. However, historically, previous large quarterly gains have led to continued strength.

“In fact, a quarter later, stocks have been higher the past eight times after gaining at least 15% during the previous quarter,” Detrick says. “In this sense, future strong returns are quite normal after a big quarter. Although it might not seem likely given the headlines and magnitude of the current bounce, it is important to be aware that extreme strength usually begets more strength.”

Detrick says it is also important to keep in mind that the third quarter has historically been the weakest quarter of the year.

“Breaking the data down more, though, shows that July has been actually the strongest month during the summer,” Detrick adds. “August and September have tended to be troublesome and dragged the third quarter down.”

In related commentary derived from data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Chris Rands, fixed income portfolio manager at Nikko Asset Management, emphasizes the importance of the employment rate when it comes to driving sustainable economic growth post-coronavirus.

“Of the approximately 20 million people who became unemployed due to COVID-19, around 15.5 million currently believe it is temporary,” Rands observes. “This is not an unreasonable assumption given that 3 million of these temporarily laid-off workers just returned to work.”

As Rands explains, most of the job losses tallied so far were in leisure and hospitality. The other top categories were trade, transportation and utilities. These sectors together in March and April shed about 12 million jobs.

“However, if you look at the rehiring that came through May, most of the employment was in the hardest-hit sectors, with the subcategories of food services and drinking places, and retail trade, showing some strong employment,” Rands says.

Rands uses some back-of-the-envelope math to project that approximately 4 million people out of those approximately 15.5 million currently temporarily unemployed could likely remain unemployed in the next six months to a year. These figures would in turn imply an unemployment rate of around 7% to 8% in that timeframe.

“If half of those employed in accommodation and food services and retail trade returned to employment when the economy opens, that would equate to 6 million jobs,” Rands says. “Given the scale of the decline and government policies in place, this doesn’t seem unreasonable. Having said that, my ‘fixed income gut’ tells me that it feels a little too optimistic. … History shows the U.S. economy can put on about 500,000 jobs monthly following a recession, but it very rarely exceeds a million. That being said, we have never experienced these conditions before, particularly for those who believe it is all temporary.”

Rands’ analysis continues: “To put this into context for rates, the U.S. Federal Reserve didn’t hike rates until 2015—seven years after rates were effectively lowered to 0% following the Great Recession—when the unemployment rate fell to about 5%. If the above estimate is correct and unemployment in 12 months’ time is at 7% to 8%, then we can add another three to five years to the time it could take for the unemployment rate to fall from 8% to 5%. This would leave rates at zero for the next four (at the lower end of the estimate) to seven years (at the higher end), before the Fed was in a position to contemplate higher rates—well beyond the Fed’s recent commentary that rates will be low until at least until 2022.”

Like his peers at LPL and Nikko, Brad McMillan, chief investment officer for Commonwealth Financial Network, says 2020 has been and will continue to be a very challenging year from various perspectives. Still, he sees several reasons for tempered optimism.

“Halfway through 2020, we’ve already had enough news (and then some) to fill up an average year,” McMillan says. “So far, we’ve seen a pandemic explode—then moderate. The stock market crashed—then recovered rapidly. There were protests around the nation—and we don’t know what will come next there. In addition to these major events, politics has steadily become more confrontational, and we know it will likely get worse as we move toward the November elections. Given the headlines, the key to figuring out what is likely to happen over the rest of the year is to focus on the most important trends, which for us means the coronavirus pandemic, the economic response to it, and the financial markets.”

Speaking frankly about the coronavirus situation, McMillan says the real question for the rest of 2020 is not if there will be a second wave, but whether it will be large enough to derail the economic recovery underway.

“So far, it does not look like it will,” he says, adding ample notes of caution. “As of late June, we are seeing significant second waves in several states, and rising case counts in many others. Although it is quite possible we will see lockdowns locally, a national shutdown looks unlikely, which should allow much of the recovery to continue. Although there are risks to that outlook, it remains the most probable case for the rest of the year. Despite the rising case counts, the economic reopening is making solid progress. Job reports so far have indicated the damage has peaked and many have returned to work, leading to a bottoming out and rebound in consumer confidence. Surprisingly strong consumer spending data has validated this, as consumers spend only when employed and confident. And, while business confidence remains low, it, too, has rebounded and shows signs of continued recovery.”

«