Council Makes Recommendations for Including Lifetime Income Options in QDIAs

The ERISA Advisory Council’s recommendations to the Department of Labor (DOL) include publishing guidance confirming that a named plan fiduciary may appoint a 3(38) investment manager to select and monitor annuity and other lifetime income providers, as well as modifying qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) regulations.

The Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans, referred to as the ERISA Advisory Council, has sent a report to Secretary of Labor R. Alexander Acosta focusing on recommendations for promoting lifetime income (LTI) within defined contribution (DC) plans through changes to the annuity selection safe harbor and modifying the qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) rule to focus on asset accumulation and decumulation issues in the context of LTI needs and solutions.

Based upon testimony received during two days of hearings supplemented by written material submitted from interested stakeholders, the Council said it observed:

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

  • No single product or plan design is likely to address decumulation needs for all DC plan participants. This issue arises from differences in general financial circumstances, account sizes, assets held outside of plans, health profiles, age, gender and marital status. To meet these variable needs, plans may need different solutions.
  • Plan sponsors may be deterred from incorporating LTI features within QDIA options because QDIA regulations remain ambiguous in several areas, including liquidity requirements and the ability to limit participation to particular demographic groups, e.g., participants of a specific age or length of service.
  • Plan sponsors remain challenged in incorporating LTI options due to fiduciary concerns around selecting and monitoring an annuity issuer. Plan sponsors generally seek an objective and uniformly applied safe harbor. No witnesses before the Council suggested standards for such a safe harbor. Several witnesses broadly supported potential and pending legislative proposals that would materially modify the fiduciary framework; however, this legislation is beyond the Council’s scope and remit.
  • Inconsistencies and disparities across LTI products and administrative platforms hinder LTI utilization.
  • As discussed in prior Councils’ reports, participants would benefit from clear and unbiased education and information related to DC plan asset decumulation strategies. Plan sponsors may be more inclined to provide this information if they were certain that providing such information would not constitute investment advice.
  • The complexity of the LTI topic masks the fact that plan design offerings, such as a Social Security bridge option or installment payout, could be accommodated today on most recordkeeping platforms at limited cost.

As for pending legislative proposals regarding an annuity selection safe harbor, speakers at a recent Brookings Institution event suggested that those proposals miss the mark and agreed that a financial strength criterion asking how sound is an annuity carrier should be a critical part in any annuity selection safe harbor for defined contribution (DC) plan sponsors. However, the ERISA Advisory Council recommended that the Department of Labor should publish guidance confirming that a named plan fiduciary may appoint a 3(38) investment manager to select and monitor annuity and other LTI providers for DC plan decumulation, as well as accumulation. ”Specifically, applying the fiduciary responsibility scheme of ERISA section 3(38) in which the plan fiduciary only has responsibility for the prudent selection and monitoring of an independent expert would address many plan sponsor concerns about fiduciary liability,” the Council says in its report.

The Council notes that the QDIA regulations tangentially address LTI and the DOL’s guidance has generally been informal. In 2016, in an information letter to Christopher Spence, senior director, Federal Government Relations at TIAA, the DOL said a DC plan could prudently choose a default investment for the plan that contains lifetime income elements.

The Council concluded that amending QDIA regulations to specifically address LTI could incent plan sponsors to adopt innovative QDIAs, including QDIAs with LTI options. It says such changes should address the permissibility of including fixed annuities, living benefits and other LTI approaches in a QDIA; address the importance of tailoring QDIA options to affected participants, similar to rules applicable to QDIA balanced funds. (It specifically recommended that the DOL clarify that sponsors may default participants into different options based on participant demographics because plan populations may not be sufficiently similar for a single default to be universally appropriate); maintain the current transferability and liquidity requirements, but clarify whether living benefits satisfy these requirements; and address the extent to which charges may be imposed if they have the effect of limiting liquidity and/or transferability.

The Council further concluded that plans offering different kinds of distribution options could have a positive material impact on participants’ retirement income. Including these distribution options are settlor decisions and these options are readily available on most recordkeeping platforms at modest cost. The Council said it believes more plan sponsors would adopt multiple distribution options if the DOL clarifies that offering multiple distribution options is a business decision made in a settlor capacity and this decision is exempt from fiduciary liability. It recommends that the DOL encourage plan sponsors to adopt plan design features that facilitate LTI, including, but not limited to: allowing participants to take ad hoc distributions, enabling installment payments, providing Social Security bridge options and allowing for payment of required minimum distributions.

Annuities Are for Savers and Spenders

In his experience leading Principal’s retirement income solutions business, Sri Reddy says, the No. 1 thing people get wrong about annuities is to say that purchasers of such products are investors.

Since joining Principal in August 2018, Sri Reddy, senior vice president of retirement and income solutions, has continued his long-running efforts to clear up common misconceptions about annuities and guaranteed income products.

On this point, the firm recently commissioned and published a white paper by Michael Finke and Wade Pfau. The research looked at how retirees can use guaranteed income annuities to not only improve financial outcomes, but also increase confidence and reduce stress in retirement.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

The white paper data shows retirees who had guaranteed income through an annuity were more likely to feel confident and accept more market volatility with their other assets. Reddy points to supplemental simulations detailed in the paper, which suggest adding an income annuity to a retirement portfolio allows a retiree to get the same or higher income with lower risk of outliving savings than an investments-only approach. The paper emphasizes that using both annuities and investments can enhance the value of assets for heirs over the long term.

“On an emotional level, retirees are more confident when there’s certainty to their monthly income,” Reddy says. “The certainty an income annuity provides increases confidence and reduces stress in retirement. The head and the heart come together here to show that annuities really do help people have enough, save enough and protect enough for their future.”

Stepping back from the research results, Reddy says he’s concerned by the common misconceptions that Americans tend to have about annuities, but at the same time he understands that skepticism is natural, considering how the conversation about retirement income is rife with complexity.  

“The situation we face when discussing ‘annuities’ versus ‘guaranteed income’ is not unlike the conversation about ‘Obamacare’ versus the ‘ACA,’” Reddy says. “The features of the Affordable Care Act are very popular among consumers, but ‘Obamacare’ is often talked about in some groups as a negative thing.”

In his experience, the No. 1 thing people get wrong about annuities is to say that annuity customers are investors.

“They are in fact savers who we are helping to invest so they can address inflation and participate in the growth of the economy,” Reddy says. “This distinction is significant. It means that our customers display very different behaviors versus what Wall Street or academics say is the optimal course for investors. Annuity purchasers are people looking for peace of mind. They want to participant in gain without losing big. They also don’t want choppiness.”

Reddy says another harmful misunderstanding is that “annuitization is an all-or-nothing game.”

“It is really not that at all,” Reddy says. “In fact, if someone is telling you to annuitize all your assets, find another adviser or provider. That’s not an outcome that anyone in our organization would promote.”

Reddy notes that one novel way advisers and retirees are using annuities is as a bridge between the working years, ending at about age 62 on average, and the full Social Security claiming age of 70 1/2.

“We see more people using annuities as an eight or nine year bridge to guarantee the non-discretionary income for the beginning years of retirement—to get clients to full Social Security benefits,” Reddy points out. “If you can delay Social Security until 70 1/2, that’s a huge benefit to the individual’s level of guaranteed income. You are basically doubling Social Security this way.”

According to Reddy, when annuities are explained in terms of maximizing income and driving happiness and confidence, people respond well. He also notes that, in the Principal book of business, the vast majority of income annuities are purchased with a cash refund provision, meaning if something happens to the person who bought them, the remainder between what they got and what they paid will be paid out to the beneficiaries.

“We emphasize that you should consider annuitizing against non-discretionary expenses, and then you can let the rest of your money work harder for you,” Reddy concludes. “In fact annuities will help you spend effectively what you’ve earned. We’ve seen the studies that show people at all wealth levels are afraid to spend down their 401(k) assets. Many people in fact end up under-spending because they are concerned about seeing their balance decline and they want to leave money behind for loved ones.”

«