Benefits February 26, 2004

Help Desk Call Volume Points To Mounting Retirement Concern

February 26, 2004 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - Measured by increasing call volume to Financial Finesse's help desks, retirement planning and saving are two issues the aging Baby Boomer population is beginning to sit up and take notice of.
Reported by

Financial Finesse attributed the marked increase in retirement planning and saving concerns to the “beginning of an emerging retirement crisis,” brought on by the dawning of the 58 th anniversary of the Baby Boom generation. Support for this contention was found in the overall increase in the number of retirement planning calls in 2003 – 10% of the total, compared to just 7% of the total in 2002 – coupled with the questions being asked, the provider of financial information to 250,000 employees in more than 300 different companies said in a 2003 trend analysis.

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

While normally increased awareness to financial planning concerns is taken as a positive sign by the financial information provider, the nature of the calls in the waning months of last year caught the eye of Financial Finesse. For example, a question about the penalties for taking an early distribution was one of the top five questions posed by employees, while the second most popular question in the fourth quarter was on the pros and cons of taking out a loan against assets in a retirement plan. In fact, of all the top five questions, Financial Finesse says only two were about planning for retirement.

All of this becomes a significant issue when overlapped with the fact that the average age of employees is rising and “most are far behind where they need to be in terms of funding their retirements,” Financial Finesse said.

The trend toward saving and planning was also noticed across the aggregate. Employees are becoming more proactive about managing their money and achieving their savings goals judged by the 42% increase in the number of budget and saving calls from the end of 2002 to the end of 2003. Specifically, employees wanted to know:

  • How do I put together a budget?
  • How do I manage my financial affairs after a divorce?
  • I am having trouble making ends meet, what can I do?
  • How do I manage the stress of my money problems?
  • I need help evaluating my financial situation due to a change in employee status.

Overall, budgeting and saving made up 17% of all calls during the fourth quarter of 2003 to Financial Finesse’s counselors, second only to the 39% of calls focused on debt, followed by the 13% of calls the fell into the broad miscellaneous category – estate planning, stock options, insurance, investing. Rounding out the list of help topics was:

  • Retirement planning – 9%
  • Homeownership – 9%
  • Taxes – 7%
  • Finding a financial planner – 3%
  • Education planning – 3%.

Also on the rise was the number of investment calls. Normally, Financial Finesse can expect 2% of the total call volume in a given quarter to be reserved for investment related questions, but in the final three months of 2003, that figure doubled to 4%. This is particularly noticeable when compared to years past, when the fourth quarter saw a decline in the number of savings and investment related questions, as employees traditionally became more reactive to their finances, Financial Finesse said.

Compliance February 25, 2004

SEC Goes "Public" with Redemption Proposal

February 25, 2004 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - As anticipated, the SEC has decided, by a 4-to-1 vote, to see what the public thinks about a mandatory redemption fee on quick, market-timing trades in mutual funds.
Reported by

>If enacted, the SEC proposal would require that funds charge a 2% fee on shares sold within five days of purchase (see  SEC Ponders Five-Day Redemption Fee ).   Not that there isn’t concern about the proposal, even among the SEC commissioners who agreed to put the idea out for public comment yesterday.   In fact, SEC commissioner Paul Atkins was so convinced the plan will hurt shareholders that he voted not to issue it for public comment, calling the 2% a “simplistic solution.”   “The only winner here I see is the fund industry,” Atkins complained.

Retirement Plan Impact

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

>What isn’t totally clear at present is how such a redemption fee might be levied on retirement plan investors.   Frequently those trades are processed via an omnibus arrangement, obscuring the individual trading details from the fund company that would ostensibly be tracking and assessing the charges.   The SEC dealt with this possibility in the new proposal, noting that “Many funds today that impose redemption fees do not impose them on shareholders who hold their shares through financial intermediaries such as broker-dealers and retirement plans”, the SEC said the proposed rule would “require that funds obtain the information they need to assess the redemption fee, and to oversee the efforts of intermediaries to assess those fees and remit them to the fund.”  

>Perhaps more ominously for plan sponsors, the proposal might also mean that a plan participant’s regular payroll contribution, if followed by a routine rebalancing transfer within five days, might trigger the redemption fee on the perceived “quick” liquidation of monies.

>According to Dow Jones, Atkins said it’s no surprise that fund companies support redemption fees and predicted they will “laugh all the way to the bank” as mandatory fees boost fund assets and act as a disincentive for investors to leave a fund.   Indeed, the Investment Company Institute, a mutual fund trade industry group, was quick to lend its support to the proposal – which largely mirrored one the ICI put forth last Halloween (see  Mutual Fund Proposal No “Treat” for Retirement Plans ).    

>SEC commissioner Cynthia Glassman also raised reservations about the proposal, describing it as a “band-aid” that won’t deter market timing trades that generate big profits, making the 2% penalty the cost of doing business.   Even SEC chief William Donaldson said he may have reservations as well, but wants the SEC to get comment on the plan before making any final decision.

>Money market mutual funds and exchange-traded funds wouldn't be subject to early redemption fees under the SEC proposal.    Additionally, the SEC has proposed several provisions designed to prevent the redemption fee from affecting "most ordinary redemption transactions by smaller investors," including:  

  • The rule requires that a fund calculate the redemption fee on shares held the longest period of time first.    According to the SEC, this method will minimize the likelihood that redemptions of part of a shareholder's account will be assessed a redemption fee.
  • The rule would include a de minimis exception - the fund would not be required to impose a redemption fee of $50 or less.    According to the SEC, this means that a fund could waive redemption fees on the redemption of $2,500 or less in fund shares.
  • The rule would include an emergency exception that would allow a shareholder not to pay a redemption fee in the event of an unanticipated financial emergency, which according to the SEC, means that at least $10,000 would be available to a shareholder in a financial emergency and no redemption fee would be charged.

>Another big exception would be given to funds geared toward market timers, who clearly tell investors that they permit market timing, which can impose costs on fund investors. Paul Roye, director of the SEC's investment management division, said the plan isn't meant to be a cure-all but rather a supplement to fair-value pricing.

Fair Fare?

>The SEC also said that "The principal solution to abusive market timing transactions is the accurate calculation of net asset value each day, using current and not stale prices."   The SEC reiterated a statement it made last December that "the Investment Company Act of 1940 requires funds to calculate their net asset value based on the "fair value" of a portfolio security if the market quotes are unavailable or unreliable."

>The SEC went on to note that, "though fair value pricing can reduce the profits that market timers seek to extract from mutual funds, it is subjective in nature."   Consequently, the agency believe that a redemption fee, together with fair value pricing, can serve to "…reduce, if not eliminate, the profits that market timers seek to extract from the fund."   The SEC said the release for comments would solicit information on how funds can more effectively implement fair value pricing methods, and whether the SEC should provide further guidance in this area.

Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted to the Commission within 60 days of its publication in the Federal Register.   However, changes won't become final without a second vote by the SEC.

«