Key Terms and What They Mean

Explaining the basics of the infrastructure underpinning 401(k) retirement accounts.

 

Key Terms and What They Mean

Retirement plans involve numerous legal requirements and terms. Given the scrutiny plans receive, sponsors should understand what key terms mean for their plan and its participants. Online definitions from the IRS are a good starting place; the Department of Labor also provides definitions for plans and for compliance with the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Plan Eligibility

Generally, a plan may require an employee to 1) be at least 21 years old and 2) have a year of service, typically defined as working at least 1,000 hours in a 12-month period, before the employee can participate in a plan. However, plans can allow employees to begin participation before reaching age 21 or before completing one year of service.

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

Employers frequently provide more generous enrollment requirements to enhance employee recruitment, says Marc Fowler, director of retirement education with retirement plan provider Human Interest in San Francisco: “Often what we see is that they put immediate eligibility in place because that is very attractive in terms of being able to bring new talent into the organization.”

Matching Contributions

Defined contribution plans can structure matching contributions in several ways. These include:

  • Dollar-for-dollar match: Employers contribute $1 for every $1 an employee contributes, up to a certain percentage of the employee’s salary;
  • Single-tier percentage-based match: Employers match a fixed percentage of employee contributions, often up to a specified limit;
  • Multi-tier match: The match rate varies based on the employee’s contribution level or years of service;
  • Discretionary match: Employers determine the match amount yearly based on company performance or other factors; and
  • Safe harbor match: The plan’s match allows it to pass several nondiscrimination tests automatically.

Among Human Interest’s plans, about 70% use a single-tier formula; 23% have multiple tiers; 6% use dollar caps; various formulas are split among the remaining 1%.

“Typically, people want an easily describable, easily implemented plan when it comes to matching, and that tends to be the single-tier formula,” says Fowler.

Vesting Options

Some contributions vest 100% immediately, including:

  • Employee contributions, such as salary deferrals and Roth contributions;
  • Rollover contributions; and
  • Traditional safe harbor contributions.

The DOL states that, for an employer’s matching 401(k) contributions, employers can choose from two vesting schedules. The first option is cliff vesting, under which employees are 100% vested in employer contributions after three years of service. The second option is graded vesting, which requires employee vesting of at least 20% vested after two years, 40% after three years, 60% after four years, 80% after five years and 100% after six years. However, automatic enrollment 401(k) plans that require employer contributions must vest those contributions after two years.

Employers facing highly competitive hiring markets might consider immediate vesting, says Fowler. Companies with more frequent turnover of newer employees are likelier to use a graded vesting schedule.

True-Ups

A 401(k) plan true-up is an additional contribution the employer makes at the end of the year to give employees the total matching contribution to which they are entitled based on their total annual contributions. Shortfalls can occur when the employer matches annually but calculates matching contributions with each pay period. This practice can affect employees who make uneven contributions during the year, front-load their contributions early or join a plan later in the year.

Carol Buckmann, a partner in the law firm Cohen & Buckmann P.C. in New York City, notes that true-ups are not required, but the transactions benefit employees. She explains that at year-end, sponsors review employees’ total contributions for the year and calculate the hypothetical match if the employee had contributed evenly throughout the year. If the employee has received less than the calculated matching contribution, the employer adds additional funds to “true up” the account. Buckmann says this puts participants in the same position as if they had contributed evenly throughout all payroll periods.

Safe Harbors

401(k) plans face annual nondiscrimination tests to ensure that the plans benefit all employees and not just business owners or highly paid employees. Retirement plan safe harbor provisions allow 401(k) plans to satisfy specific nondiscrimination testing requirements automatically. Employers must commit to making the required contributions for the entire plan year.

Funding methods can include:

  • Basic match: The employer matches 100% of employee contributions up to 3% of compensation, plus 50% of contributions between 3% and 5%;
  • Enhanced match: The employer’s match that is at least as generous as the basic match. For example, a 100% match on the first 4% of employee contributions; and
  • Nonelective contribution: The employer contributes at least 3% of each eligible employee’s compensation, even if the employee does not contribute anything.

Safe harbor provisions simplify plan administration and benefit both employers and participants because:

  • Safe harbor plans automatically pass critical nondiscrimination tests;
  • Employer contributions are typically 100% vested immediately;
  • Higher contribution limits allow all employees, including highly compensated employees, to maximize their contributions; and
  • They reduce compliance burdens and associated costs for employers.

Plan Sponsors Understand Need for Guaranteed Income, but Lack ‘Annuity Fluency’

Employers not planning to offer an in-plan annuity option cite a lack of understanding as their top barrier for implementing a solution, according to a new survey from provider TIAA.

Many plan sponsors recognize that Social Security alone is not enough guaranteed income for participants to retire on, and they understand the need to adopt lifetime income solutions into their retirement plans, according to results from TIAA’s “Building a Better Retirement” survey.

Yet at the same time, many plan sponsors lack “annuity fluency,” according to investment and annuity provider TIAA, as 43% of those not planning to offer annuities in their retirement plan cited a lack of understanding as their No. 1 barrier.

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

TIAA’s survey, the results of which were published Wednesday, included responses from 500 C-suite leaders in finance and human resources across 17 industries—including 225 plan sponsors that offer a 401(k) plan, 225 that offer a 403(b) plan and 50 that offer a 457 plan. The survey was conducted between June and August. When asked how to improve employees’ retirements, most employers ranked increasing the employer match first, followed closely by offering guaranteed income for life (such as an annuity) and providing financial education.

Of the employers that do not yet have an in-plan annuity option, 80% reported they are actively considering adding an annuity to the retirement plan, and about half of those (42% of those not offering an annuity option yet) said they plan to offer an annuity within the next two years.

TIAA is among an ever-increasing group of asset managers and insurers selling in-plan annuity solutions in the defined contribution marketplace. The firm, along with its Nuveen asset management arm, offers target-date funds that put some of a participant’s contribution into an annuity that can later be annuitized for a guaranteed paycheck in retirement. This week, the firm announced one such product would be offered on Empower’s recordkeeping platform in partnership with Franklin Templeton’s Putnam Investments.

Hard to Explain

The survey found that 63% of plan sponsors surveyed said they are unable to articulate the value and importance of annuities. According to TIAA, employers feel caught between momentum for change and the need for greater understanding of annuities. For example, even 58% of sponsors not planning to offer an in-plan annuity acknowledged annuities’ growing momentum.

TIAA argued in its survey that this lack of annuity fluency emphasizes the essential role of plan advisers and . While 88% of employers work with an external consultant or financial adviser to assist with fiduciary oversight, investment recommendations and more, TIAA concluded that employers are demanding more support.

Tim Pitney, TIAA’s head of lifetime income default sales, says plan sponsors should turn to their consultants first to learn more about in-plan annuities, as they would for advice on investments or fees.

“I would inquire what level of expertise the consultant has with annuities, [because] not all consultants may have that expertise,” Pitney says.

He adds that many other organizations also provide education about annuities, such as the International Retirement Income Council, among others.

Responding to TIAA’s survey, most employers—about 85%—said they understand the basics of how annuities work, but they need to better understand how to fit annuities into a plan and a portfolio. Some of the most common questions employers asked about annuities in responding to the survey included: “Are annuities portable?”, “How do different types of annuities compare?” and “What are best practices for adopting annuities?”

“The marketplace has historically [been] driven by retail annuities and the notion that they’re complex, high-cost and [involve] high commissions and high-pressure sales,” Pitney says. “I think the first point of education for any fiduciary is to understand that we’re really talking about are high-quality, low-cost, institutionally-priced annuities that are appropriate for corporate [and] not-for-profit plans.”

TIAA’s survey summary also emphasized that when the government makes implementing solutions easy, employers respond quickly. For example, the Pension Protection Act of 2006 authorized target-date portfolios as a qualified default investment alternative, and now nearly 90% of 401(k) and 403(b) plans offer TDF portfolios, almost always as the default option.

More recently, the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Act of 2019 and the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 included provisions that allow plan fiduciaries to include insurance-backed income options into DC plans.

Meanwhile, more hybrid annuity TDFs have recently come to market, such as BlackRock’s LifePath Paycheck and J.P. Morgan Asset Management’s SmartRetirement Lifetime Income TDF.

“I think it’s going to take some time, but education and product development will eventually come together,” Pitney says. “There will be greater adoption, and ultimately, I do believe that we will see annuities and other lifetime income solutions become part of the overall ecosystem.”

«