October 8, 2013 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) will provide live video webcasting of the Board’s in-person public meetings.
Previously,
the only ways to tune into GASB’s public meetings were to attend in person or
through telephone conferencing.
Beginning
October 30 and 31, teleconferences, which are deliberative meetings held by
telephone between in-person GASB meetings, will be audio-only webcast. Live
webcasting of both in-person public meetings and teleconferences will be hosted
on the GASB website.
“This
will allow our stakeholders from across the nation to tune in to all the board’s standard-setting activities for state and local governments. We
anticipate that this will lead to increased participation in our due process,” said
GASB Chairman David A. Vaudt.
The GASB is the
independent, not-for-profit organization formed in 1984 that establishes and revises
financial accounting and reporting standards for state and local governments.
Are Employers Offsetting Match for Increased Participation?
October 8, 2013 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – A study indicates employers may be offsetting their matching contributions to manage cost increases from automatic enrollment into defined contribution (DC) retirement plans.
Researchers
from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College used data from the
National Compensation Survey (NCS) conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics to examine the relationship between auto-enrollment and employer
decisions about matching contributions and overall compensation. The
researchers first confirmed that the auto-enrollment plans in the sample have
higher participation rates—77% vs. 67%. These higher rates will increase
employers’ total compensation costs.
The
study found workers covered by auto-enrollment have a maximum match rate of 3.2%
of pay, compared with 3.5% for those in plans without auto-enrollment. According
to the Issue Brief about the study, while this finding shows that, on average,
plans with auto-enrollment have lower match rates, this difference might be
driven by factors other than the automatic enrollment provision. For example, a
larger percentage of the workers covered by auto-enrollment in the sample have
defined benefit (DB) plans in addition to 401(k)s. Since these workers have an
additional source of pension coverage, their employers may offer less generous
401(k) matches. If so, defined benefit plan coverage could be driving the lower
matches in auto-enrollment plans.
However,
further analysis found that participants in plans with auto-enrollment have a
match rate that is 0.38 percentage points lower than those without an automatic
provision, even after controlling for other factors.
The researchers also
considered whether employers may be using low default rates to limit their own
contributions. Plans with an auto-escalation feature were included in the sample.
On
average, the default contribution rate for the auto-enrollment plans is 3.4%;
it drops to 2.8% if plans with an auto-escalation feature are classified by
their initial default rate rather than their full escalation default rate. To
receive the maximum match in the sample plans, workers would need to contribute
an average of 5.1%. So the default rate is set well below the rate needed for
the maximum match.
The
average employee contribution rate in all 401(k) plans, including those without
auto-enrollment, was considered as a benchmark. This data was not available for
the sample plans, but employer surveys typically find a median rate of 6%—well
above the default rate used by employers with auto-enrollment. According to the
researchers, these results suggest that, in addition to offering lower maximum
match rates than plans without auto-enrollment, employers with auto-enrollment
may be using their default employee contribution rate to help offset the higher
costs that come with higher participation rates.
Finally,
the study examined actual compensation costs rather than employers’ 401(k) plan
design decisions when automatic enrollment is used and found no evidence that
total compensation, 401(k) costs, non-401(k) costs or wages differ between
plans with and without auto-enrollment.
“Auto-enrollment
policies are still quite new and future changes in plan design—such as more
widespread use of auto-escalation—could have more positive effects on retirement
saving levels. Therefore, it will be important to continue monitoring
auto-enrollment both on the employer and the worker side to more fully assess
its long-term impact on retirement saving,” the researchers concluded.
“How
Does 401(k) Auto-Enrollment Relate to the Employer Match and Total
Compensation?” can be downloaded from here.