Lost at Sea December 2020 Popular ERISA Safe Harbor Features May Expose DC Participants to Increased Levels of Risk and Retirement Income Insecurity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lost at Sea December 2020 Popular ERISA safe harbor features may expose DC participants to increased levels of risk and retirement income insecurity. S.S. LOST AT SEA Authors: Dan Long, QPFC, AIF® Relationship Manager, Retirement Solutions, DoubleLine Nick Dalgety, CFP® Head of National Accounts, DoubleLine Andy Larson, CPC Director of Retirement Education, Retirement Learning Center DoubleLine partnered with Retirement Learning Center to publish this content. DoubleLine’s investment team follows a mandate that tries to avoid taking risks that historically have led to catastrophic principal losses. In fact, the name “DoubleLine” voices our cardinal mandate: Like a careful motorist on a winding mountain road, the manager must not cross the double line into the oncoming lane of risk. We believe that it is prudent to take a deliberate approach to asset allocation and carefully measure the risk-reward trade-off. DoubleLine Capital || 333 S. Grand Ave., 18th Floor || Los Angeles, CA 90071 || (213) 633-8200 || doubleline.com || @DLineCap Lost at Sea Popular ERISA safe harbor features may expose DC participants to increased levels of risk and retirement income insecurity. Summary The primary goal of Employee Retirement Income Security Act A lack of attention to participant goals and risk (ERISA) plans is to help participants secure retirement income. planning is linked to 404(c), QDIAs and auto enroll/ However, too many participants in defined contribution (DC) escalate features. plans lack retirement income goals and fail to properly evaluate investment risk. This lack of DC participant planning and risk Promulgated in October 1992 and broadly impacting DC plans assessment can be traced to the ubiquitous 404(c) and qualified ever since, 404(c) allows DC participants to make their own default investment alternative (QDIA) safe harbors. investment decisions while relieving plan sponsors of the liability associated with those decisions. At the time, everyone got what Under these influential safe harbors, DC participants are often they wanted – what could possibly go wrong? inattentive to the key aspects of their retirement income planning and investment risk management. Inattention to Next, with the Pension Protection Act (PPA) of 2006, other these critical risk decisions creates a riskier and virtually aimless changes to QDIA and auto-enrollment/auto-escalate rules approach to DC plan investing. increased participation and deferral rates by automating the enrollment, deferral and investment election process. Again, We believe it’s time for DC stakeholders – plan sponsors, these were very positive developments for DC plans – what advisers, service providers and the government – to take steps could possibly go wrong? to directly address these risks. These safe harbors foster a lack of DC participant attention to key elements of retirement planning – specifically, setting retirement income goals, and understanding and taking the appropriate level of risk. Participants are really not to blame for this hands-off attitude as the powerful and persistent messaging In this paper we explore the following considerations: is very clear: • DC participants are often inattentive to • Do nothing, and you will be enrolled in the plan. retirement goal setting and risk assessment. • Do nothing, and your contribution rate will be decided. • Education rather than advice is primarily offered to help participants set planning • Do nothing, and your contribution goals and address investment risks. rate will increase each year. • Common DC messaging promotes a “do • Do nothing, and your equity allocation nothing” approach among DC participants. will be selected for you. • QDIAs – overwhelmingly in the form of QDIA defaults put the investing cart before the horse and can target-date funds (TDFs) – might not be lead to investments that are selected before the precursors of a suitable for many participants. good investment strategy are in place: • Solutions are available to enhance retirement income planning and mitigate investment risk. • Do nothing, and don’t develop holistic retirement income goals. • Do nothing, and don’t establish a risk tolerance for losses. Participants are Lost at Sea when they are under the • Do nothing, and don’t establish an influence of a combination of safe harbor rules like investment time horizon. 404(c) and QDIA, along with automatic plan provisions and target date funds. • Do nothing, and don’t establish a target rate of return. 2 Lost at Sea Popular ERISA safe harbor features may expose DC participants to increased levels of risk and retirement income insecurity. PPA introduced the 408(g) Fiduciary Adviser For example, TDF QDIAs don’t take into account an individual’s retirement income goals, other assets or pensions, or saving An often-overlooked advice provision of the PPA was the habits, all of which have a significant impact on investment risk introduction of an ERISA fiduciary exclusively for plan decisions. As a result, TDF QDIAs have the potential to expose participants. This “Fourth Fiduciary” is unique as it need not DC participants to unplanned and even unnecessary investment replace existing service providers or investment options, nor risks. Regardless, DC plans continue to use equity-heavy TDFs is the 408(g) Fiduciary Adviser subject to co-fiduciary liability with automatic enrollment, investment defaults, and the rules. protections of 404(c) and QDIA safe harbor rules. While lauded for their many positive impacts, 404(c) and Jason Zweig from The Wall Street Journal said it plainly when he QDIA safe harbor rules actually foster an environment where wrote in August 2019 about TDFs, “These funds aren’t wimpy.”1 DC participants pay little attention to the key elements of While these higher risks might be advantageous to a portion retirement planning such as setting retirement income goals of investors, TDFs might not be the right default choice for all and understanding appropriate levels of risk. Because the DC participants at all times given their higher levels of equity 404(c) safe harbor only requires DC plan sponsors to provide risk. Equity-heavy TDF QDIAs might serve younger participants participants “education” to help make investment decisions, well by providing them a simplified approach and oversight for actual investment “advice” is rarely offered to assess planning relatively smaller account balances. risks – particularly advice held to an ERISA fiduciary standard. However, despite many creative themes and tools, few in the However, this lack of attention to the investment planning financial industry would defend the education model as effective process becomes more problematic as a participant ages. in helping DC participants make appropriate short- and long- Certainly by their mid-40s, participants should be taking a term investment decisions. more-careful and holistic look at their investment decisions as they begin to build multiple retirement accounts and develop Decades of education under the 404(c) safe harbor have more complex financial planning needs. Instead, while primarily provided only modest levels of investment understanding to designed to be a total portfolio solution, too many participants DC participants. Research continues to show that too many mix and match TDFs with other TDFs and other funds that are participants don’t understand investment risks when making available on the core menu. asset allocation decisions and too few participants make retirement income planning decisions. Also, and potentially Morningstar summarizes in a 2019 report, “Plan sponsors the most critical issue, too many participants fail to adequately should encourage participants not interested in using a evaluate the investment risks of a plan’s selected QDIA. target-date fund in its entirety to use a type of in-plan advice solution, such as advice or managed accounts.”2 The QDIA has grown beyond its original intent and has become almost synonymous with target-date An overly simplified approach to retirement planning, and a funds. propensity for higher equity allocations, illustrates the critical need for TDFs to be coupled with more professional investment As originally envisioned, the QDIA was intended to be the advice, especially advice providers held to an ERISA fiduciary investment default if a DC participant failed to make an standard. investment election. QDIA defaults are now predominately TDFs, and it is estimated TDFs will comprise over 50% of all DC plan assets in the near future. Despite the popularity of TDFs, we believe their one-size-fits-all approach does not suit all participants in all situations. 3 Lost at Sea Popular ERISA safe harbor features may expose DC participants to increased levels of risk and retirement income insecurity. Conclusion Another unique element of the 408(g) model is that it can be delivered through a registered investment adviser, a broker- Future retirees will likely rely on DC plans for a substantial amount dealer, a trust department of a bank or an insurance company. of their retirement income. However, while well intended, the As such, 408(g) Fiduciary Advisers are well positioned to work 404(c), auto enroll/escalate features and QDIA rules have had with DC plan sponsors to support the growth of financial the unintended consequence of encouraging participants to wellness programs – and respond to the need for a wide range pay less attention to the key aspects of retirement planning of account consolidation and product types such as insurance, and investment risk