GAO Study Highlights Increased Mortality of Impoverished Seniors

The U.S. is more unequal than the other countries studied, low income and wealth are associated with higher mortality, and Social Security does a great deal to reduce the impact of inequality, the study found.

A recently published report from the Government Accountability Office assessed and compared the relationship between income, wealth, and life expectancy of the elderly in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

The study chose Germany, Canada, and the U.K. as comparators primarily due to the quality and availability of their data on the subjects being examined. The researchers focused on those aged 55 or older from 1998 to 2019.

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

The research concluded that wealth and income inequality is greater in the U.S. than the other three countries and that lower income and wealth are associated with lower life expectancy. For example, in 2016, those in the top quintile on average made 13 times more than those in the bottom quintile in the United States. In Canada, this same ratio was 8 to 1.

Each declining income quintile in the U.S. was associated with an increase in mortality. The study tracked populations in their 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s in 2002, and measured what percent of each group survived until 2012 by income quintile. For those in their 50s, 60s, or 70s, mortality increased as income decreased, but this pattern did not extend to the 80s and 90s, suggesting that lower income is more predictive of an early death. For example, 68% of those in their 70s in the top quintile in 2002 survived until 2012, whereas only 61% in the middle quintile, and 48% in the bottom quintile.

It also highlighted the impact that Social Security benefits have in diminishing the impact of wealth inequality. When one does not account for the present value of anticipated Social Security benefits, the top wealth quintile on average has a net worth that is 272 times higher than the bottom. However, when accounting for Social Security, this ratio drops to 27 to 1. The wealth ratio from the top quintile to the middle quintile drops from 37 to 1 down to 8 to 1 when Social Security is accounted for. This sharp reduction in inequality is due to the progressive method by which Social Security benefits are calculated.

Their definition of wealth included the value of defined contribution plans and higher wealth households keep a higher proportion of their wealth in financial assets than households in lower wealth quintiles. Though the authors do not state it, this suggests that access to retirement investments might have a disproportionate impact on this gap.

However, female heads of households do not benefit from Social Security as much on average as couples or male-led households. This is because women have a lower workforce participation rate than men, have lower incomes in general, and are more likely to stop working when they start a family. As a result, they tend to receive less in Social Security payments when they retire than men do. This problem is compounded by the fact that women tend to live longer than men.

They also noted that defined benefit plans also tend to reduce the wealth gap between the top and bottom quintiles if their present value is accounted for, but defined benefit plans are becoming less common.

The value of pensions provided by a national government in reducing wealth inequality holds true in the other countries included in the study also. In Germany, the wealth ratio from the top quintile to the middle quintile drops from 13 to 1 down to 4 to 1 when their public pension scheme is accounted for. The study also praised Germany for having national health insurance that covers long-term care for seniors, a program the country began in 1995, and which diminishes the rate at which seniors lose their wealth as they age.

The study was commissioned by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sander, D-Vermont, and builds on a similar study from 2019, likewise sponsored by Senator Sanders, which tracked growing income inequality among seniors over time. That study found that income and wealth inequality were more or less stable from the 1940s to the 1970s but have been increasing sharply from the 1980s to the present day, with a few short-term exceptions, such as the 2008 market crash which damaged the net worth of the top quintile more so than the bottom due to their higher exposure to financial assets.

In response to the recent study, Senator Sanders said in a press release that “poverty is a death sentence among older American households.”

Maximum Benefit and Contribution Limits Table 2023

Maximum Benefit/Contribution Limits for 2018 through 2023, with a downloadable PDF of limits from 2013 to 2023.

Maximum Benefit/Contribution Limits for 2013-2023
As Published by the Internal Revenue Service


PDF of Maximum Benefit/Contribution Limits for 2013-2023 available here.

Click category to jump to definition.

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

202320222021202020192018
Elective Deferrals (401k
& 403b plans)
$22,500$20,500$19,500$19,500$19,000$18,500
Annual Benefit Limit $265,000$245,000$230,000$230,000$225,000$220,000
Annual Contribution Limit $66,000$61,000$58,000$57,000$56,000$55,000
Annual Compensation Limit $330,000$305,000$290,000$285,000$280,000$275,000
457(b) Deferral Limit $22,500$20,500$19,500$19,500$19,000$18,500
Highly Compensated Threshold $150,000$135,000$130,000$130,000$125,000$120,000
SIMPLE Contribution Limit $15,500$14,000$13,500$13,500$13,000$12,500
SEP Coverage Limit $750$650$650$600$600$600
SEP Compensation Limit $330,000$305,000$290,000$285,000$280,000$275,000
Income
Subject to
Social Security
$160,200$147,000$142,800$137,700$132,900$128,400
Top-Heavy Plan Key Employee Comp $215,000$200,000$185,000$185,000$180,000$175,000
Catch-Up Contributions

$7,500

$6,500

$6,500

$6,500

$6,000

$6,000
SIMPLE Catch-Up Contributions $3,500$3,000$3,000$3,000$3,000$3,000

The Elective Deferral Limit is the maximum contribution that can be made on a pre-tax basis to a 401(k) or 403(b) plan (Internal Revenue Code section 402(g)(1)). Some still refer to this as the $7,000 limit (its original setting in 1987).

The Annual Benefit Limit is the maximum annual benefit that can be paid to a participant (IRC section 415). The limit applied is actually the lessor of the dollar limit above or 100% of the participant’s average compensation (generally the high three consecutive years of service). The participant compensation level is also subjected to the Annual Compensation Limit noted below.

The Annual Contribution Limit is the maximum annual contribution amount that can be made to a participant’s account (IRC section 415). This limit is actually expressed as the lessor of the dollar limit or 100% of the participant’s compensation, applied to the combination of employee contributions, employer contributions and forfeitures allocated to a participant’s account.

In calculating contribution allocations, a plan cannot consider any employee compensation in excess of the Annual Compensation Limit (401(a)(17)). This limit is also imposed in determining the Annual Benefit Limit (above). In calculating certain nondiscrimination tests (such as the Actual Deferral Percentage), all participant compensation is limited to this amount, for purposes of the calculation.

The 457 Deferral Limit is a similar restriction, applied to certain government plans (457 plans).

The Highly Compensated Threshold (section 414(q)(1)(B)) is the minimum compensation level established to determine highly compensated employees for purposes of nondiscrimination testing.

The SIMPLE Contribution Limit is the maximum annual contribution that can be made to a SIMPLE (Savings Incentive Match Plan for Employees) plan. SIMPLE plans are simplified retirement plans for small businesses that allow employees to make elective contributions, while requiring employers to make matching or nonelective contributions.

SEP Coverage Limit is the minimum earnings level for a self-employed individual to qualify for coverage by a Simplified Employee Pension plan (a special individual retirement account to which the employer makes direct tax-deductible contributions.

The SEP Compensation Limit is applied in determining the maximum contributions made to the plan.

EGTRRA also added the Top-heavy plan key employee compensation limit.

Catch up Contributions, SIMPLE “Catch up” deferral: Under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001 (EGTRRA), certain individuals aged 50 or over can now make so-called ‘catch up’ contributions, in addition to the above limits.

«