The Senate is on the verge of voting for the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA) a new replacement to the ACA. Find out how the passing of the BCRA will impact older Americans and their healthcare in this informative article by Kaiser Family Foundation.
Prior to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), adults in their 50s and early 60s were arguably most at risk in the private health insurance market. They were more likely than younger adults to be diagnosed with certain conditions, like cancer and diabetes, for which insurers denied coverage. They were also more likely to face unaffordable premiums because insurers had broad latitude (in nearly all states) to set high premiums for older and sicker enrollees.
The ACA included several provisions that aimed to address problems older adults faced in finding more affordable health insurance coverage, including guaranteed access to insurance, limits on age rating, and a prohibition on premium surcharges for people with pre-existing conditions. Following passage of a bill to repeal and replace the ACA in the House of Representatives on May 4, 2017, the Senate has released a discussion draft of its proposal, called the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 (BCRA) on June 26, 2017, that follows a somewhat different approach.
The Senate BCRA discussion draft would make a number of changes to current law that would result in an increase of four million 50-64-year-olds without health insurance in 2026, according to CBO’s analysis.
The Senate proposal would disproportionately affect low-income older adults with incomes below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL): three of the four million 50-64-year-olds projected to lose health insurance in 2026 would be low-income. CBO projects the uninsured rate for low-income older adults would rise from 11% under current law to 26% under the BCRA by 2026.
The increase in the number and share of uninsured older adults would be due to several changes made by the BCRA to private health insurance market rules and subsidies, as well as changes to the Medicaid program.
CHANGES AFFECTING PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE
Age Bands. Under current law, insurers are prohibited from charging older adults more than 3-times the premium amount for younger adults. The Senate bill would allow insurers to charge older adults five-times more than younger adults, beginning in 2019. States would have flexibility to establish different age bands (broader or narrower). CBO estimates that age rating would increase premiums significantly for plans at all metal levels for older adults. The impact of age rating would be such that, for a 64-year-old, the national average premium for an unsubsidized bronze plan in 2026 would increase from $12,900 (current law) to $16,000 (BCRA). The wider age bands permitted under the BCRA would result in higher premiums for an unsubsidized bronze plan than the premium for an unsubsidized silver plan under the current law age-rating standard.
Tax Credits. The Senate’s BCRA makes three key changes affecting premium tax credits for people in the non-group insurance market. First, it changes the income eligibility for tax credits, extending eligibility to people with income below the FPL but capping eligibility at income of 350% FPL. Under current law, income eligibility for tax credits is 100%-400% FPL. This change has the effect of reducing premiums for people with incomes below poverty in the marketplace who are not otherwise eligible for Medicaid (discussed further below) while increasing premiums for people with incomes between 350%-400% FPL.
Second, BCRA changes the level of subsidy for people based on age. Under both current law and the BCRA, individuals must pay a required contribution amount, based on income, toward the cost of a benchmark plan; the premium tax credit equals the difference between the cost of the benchmark plan and the required individual contribution. Under current law, the required contribution rate is the same for all people at the same income level regardless of age. However, under the BCRA, the required contribution amount would increase with age for people with an income above 150% FPL. For example, under current law, at 350% FPL, individuals are required to contribute the same percentage of income toward the benchmark plan, regardless of age (9.69% in 2017). Under the BCRA, starting in 2020, a 24-year-old would contribute about 6.4% of income, while a 60-year-old would have to contribute 16.2% of income.1
Third, the Senate proposal reduces the value of the benchmark plan used to determine premium tax credits from a more generous silver-level plan (under current law) to the equivalent of a bronze plan (under BCRA). Deductibles under bronze plans are much higher than under silver plans (in 2017, on average, $6,105 for bronze plans vs. $3,609 for silver plans). Under current law, silver plan deductibles are further reduced by cost-sharing subsidies for eligible individuals with incomes below 250% FPL (on average to $255, $809, or $2,904, depending on income). The BCRA eliminates cost-sharing subsidies starting in 2020. As a result, people using tax credits to buy a “benchmark” bronze plan would face significantly higher deductibles under the Senate proposal than under current law.
For older adults with income above the poverty level, the combined impact of these changes would be to increase the out-of-pocket cost for premiums at all income levels. For example, a 64-year old with an income of $26,500 would see premiums increase by $4,800 on average for a silver plan in 2026; a 64-year old with an income of $56,800 could see premiums increase of $13,700 in 2026, according to CBO.
Premium tax credits under the BCRA would continue to be based on the cost of a local benchmark policy, so results would vary geographically. Older adults living in higher cost areas could see greater dollar increases, while people living in lower cost areas could see lower increases.
For a bronze plan, the national average premium expense for a 64-year old could increase by $2,000 for an individual with an income of $26,500 in 2026 and by as much as $11,600 for an older adult with $56,800 in income.
Under current law, people with income below 100% FPL generally are not eligible for premium tax credits. The ACA extended Medicaid eligibility to adults below 138% FPL, but the Supreme Court subsequently ruled the expansion is a state option. To date 19 states have not elected the Medicaid expansion, leaving 2.6 millionuninsured low-income adults in this coverage gap.
For older adults with income below 100% FPL who are not eligible for Medicaid, CBO estimates the extension of premium tax credit eligibility will significantly reduce the net premium expense for a 64-year-old in 2026 relative to current law (e.g., by more than $12,000 for an individual at 75% FPL).
However, CBO estimates that few low-income people would purchase any plan. Even with relatively low premiums, older adults with very low incomes may choose to go without coverage due to relatively high, unaffordable deductibles. For example, an individual with an income of $11,400 (75% FPL) who is not eligible for Medicaid, would pay $300 in premiums in 2026 under BCRA but face a deductible in excess of $6,000 – which amounts to more than half of his or her income that year.
Changes to Medicaid proposed in the Senate bill also contribute to the increase in the projected increase in the number of uninsured older adults nationwide. The BCRA would limit federal funds for states that have elected to expand coverage under Medicaid for low-income adults, phasing down the higher federal match for these expansion states over three years (2021-2023). This provision, coupled with a new cap on the growth in federal Medicaid funding over time on a per capita basis, would result in an estimated 15 million people losing Medicaid coverage by 2026 according to CBO, some of whom are counted among the four million older adults projected to lose health insurance under the BCRA, shown in Figure 1. In 2013, about 6.5 million 50-64-year-olds relied on Medicaid for their health insurance coverage, a number that has likely increased due to the Medicaid expansion.2 Since 2013, Medicaid enrollment overall has grown by nearly 30%.
IMPACT ON OLDER ADULTS ON MEDICARE
The loss of coverage for adults in their 50s and early 60s could have ripple effects for Medicare, a possibility that has received little attention. If the BCRA results in a loss of health insurance for a meaningful number of people in their late 50s and early 60s, as CBO projects, there is good reason to believe that people who lose insurance will delay care, if they can, until they turn 65 and become eligible for Medicare, and then use more services once on Medicare. This could cause Medicare spending to increase, which would lead to increases in Medicare premiums and cost-sharing requirements.3
The proposed BCRA changes to Medicaid are also expected to affect benefits and coverage for older, low-income adults on Medicare. Today, 11 million low-income people on Medicare have supplemental coverage under Medicaid that helps cover the cost of Medicare’s premiums and cost-sharing requirements, and the cost of services not covered by Medicare, such as nursing home and home- and community-based long-term services and supports. The BCRA reduces the trajectory of Medicaid spending, with new caps on the growth of benefit spending per person; these constraints are expected to put new fiscal pressure on states to control costs that could ultimately affect coverage and benefits available to low-income people on Medicare. Under the BCRA, the growth in Medicaid per capita spending for elderly and disabled beneficiaries is dialed down to a slower growth rate, from CPI-M+1 to CPI-U beginning in 2025, below currently projected growth rates, just as the first of the Boomer generation reaches their 80s and is more likely to need Medicaid-funded long-term services and supports.
DISCUSSION
The Senate bill to repeal and replace the ACA, known as the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 (BCRA), if enacted, would be expected to result in an increase of four million uninsured 50-64-year olds in 2026, relative to current law. The increase is due to a number of factors, including higher premiums at virtually all income levels for older adults, potentially unaffordable deductibles for older adults with very low incomes, , and reductions in coverage under Medicaid. Reductions in coverage could have unanticipated spillover effects for Medicare in the form of higher premiums and cost sharing, if pre-65 adults need more services when they age on to Medicare as a result of being uninsured beforehand. The BCRA would also impose new, permanent caps on Medicaid spending which could affect coverage and costs for low-income people on Medicare.
Other changes in BCRA will affect Medicare directly. The BCRA would repeal the Medicare payroll tax imposed on high earners included in the ACA. This provision, according to CMS, will accelerate the insolvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and put the financing of future Medicare benefits at greater risk for current and future generations of older adults – another factor to consider as this debate moves forward.
Nueman T., Pollitz K., Levitt L. (2017 June 29). How the senate better care reconciliation act (BCRA) could affect coverage and premiums for older adults [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/how-the-senate-better-care-reconciliation-act-bcra-could-affect-coverage-and-premiums-for-older-adults/
Are your employees placing enough emphasis in their retirement? Here is a great article by Cynthia Loh from Employee Benefit Advisor on what employers can do to help their employees properly utilize their 401(k)s.
When it comes to debating the root cause of why Americans, as a whole, are short at least $6.8 trillion in retirement savings, it’s never long before someone points a finger at fees.
But while fees do their part to erode retirement nest eggs, there’s actually something far more detrimental to a comfortable retirement: the investing behavior of savers themselves. In fact, behavioral mistakes could cost savers 1.56% per year.
How does poor behavior add up to such a cost? Here are three core employee 401(k) missteps, and how plan sponsors can limit them.
1. Employees often make poor fund selections
Employees generally find it challenging to choose their own investments, and the task often ends up costing them.
For many employees, the initial obstacle of setting up a 401(k) plan stops them in their tracks. A large fund line-up can cause analysis paralysis, and actually reduce participation rates. One study found that for every additional 10 funds added to a set of plan options, participation drops by about 2%.
For those employees who do participate, they are left to fend for themselves with complex fund lineups. Ideally, they would establish an asset allocation with a correct level of risk and an optimal diversification for that risk tolerance. Unfortunately, a 2015 study by Financial Engines found that 61% of unadvised plan participants had inappropriate risk levels.
Finally, it’s not uncommon for employees to attempt investment selection without fully understanding proper diversification. Instead of balancing risk, participants might divide their money evenly between the options on an investment menu. For example, if six out of 10 options are stock funds, they are likely to end up at roughly 60% stocks. If 18 out of 20 options are stock funds, they will end up with 90% stocks.
So, what should you, the plan sponsor, do when your employees face a 401(k) situation that seems to inhibit participation, leads to unnecessary risk, and fails to encourage proper diversification?
Solution: Consider offering managed 401(k) accounts as a Qualified Default Investment Alternative
If employees find it challenging to make fund selections confidently, why not build in default investment advice to your plan? A Qualified Default Investment Alternative (QDIA) provides a standard, default offer of a portfolio customized to each employee. By constructing a diversified, optimized portfolio for each employee as a standard service, your 401(k) plan can help employees avoid uninformed decisions about their investments. The fund selection process will be more straightforward for new employees. As such, they may be less likely to opt for unduly high risk levels, and, by default, their investments will then be properly diversified.
In other words, rather than providing employees with a list of ingredients, provide them with a prepared meal customized to their palate and set up to satisfy their financial health.
2. 401(k) participants often “set it and forget it”
For those participants that successfully navigate participation, asset allocation, and fund selection, the ongoing maintenance of a 401(k) still presents challenges. Many plan participants choose their deferral rates and funds on the first day of work and might not change anything for the entire time they’re at that employer — or even after they leave. Meanwhile, they’re missing out on the benefits that could be had by rebalancing or switching investments based on macro trends, such as an ETF price decrease.
Plan sponsors should consider all the options available to them for helping employees understand the right asset allocation, appropriate fund allocations, ongoing portfolio maintenance — and the path forward to a secure, stable retirement.
Solution: Enable automation to help your employees maintain their 401(k)
401(k) maintenance is essential, but it shouldn’t fall on individual employees to disrupt their daily lives to keep things up-to-date. Technology can make the task of maintaining 401(k) investments far easier for employees.
If employees don’t want to actively revisit their deferral rates and asset allocations on an annual basis, automation can handle the process of portfolio rebalancing and tax optimization for the participant. While target-date funds (TDFs) have offered limited automatic adjustment for years, today, 401(k) plans built with automated advice tend to offer more personalized optimization for employees. For instance, TDFs usually rely on a generic set of assumptions about their investors to determine how they rebalance and adjust risk over time. Automated 401(k) plans can offer personalized rebalancing, tax optimization, and asset reallocation, solving for an individual’s specific characteristics and goals.
3. Poor investing behavior is a workplace issue
Employees talk to each other about their benefits, worry together from time to time, and often ask one another for advice. In short, water-cooler talk plays a role in how participants behave with regards to their 401(k).
In any given office, there’s at least one employee — we’ll call him Gary — who fancies himself a stock trading guru. Gary checks the morning headlines and stock tickers. He’s always offering unsolicited financial advice to his fellow colleagues. And he spends a lot of time at the water cooler.
For novice employees, having somebody like Gary in the office can either inspire them to gain financial literacy or drastically sway their investing behavior. As the plan’s fiduciary, the 401(k) plan sponsor should make sure the right financial advice reaches all employees, so that water-cooler talk from people like Gary doesn’t play too large a role in employees’ investing behavior.
Solution: Offer personalized financial advice in your 401(k) plan
A responsible way to give employees the information they need to make good decisions is to offer personalized financial advice with your 401(k) plan. Advice from a fiduciary adviser helps participants make decisions for their own individual situation, removing the confusion of what they hear at work, see on television, or learn from their peers.
That advice becomes more valuable when it takes into account personal goals such as buying a home and covers all assets, including 401(k) assets. Some 401(k) platforms have educational features built in that can anticipate when a participant has a question or appears confused and serves up tailored information that can help employees make a sound decision. Others make use of customer service centers that make it easy for employees to ask questions to experts when they need to, rather than front-loading them with information during an orientation.
Save your employees the cost of poor investing behavior
When it comes down to it, plan sponsors often underestimate just how confusing 401(k) plans can be for employees. Most employees know that saving for retirement is important, but few actually understand all they should do to maximize the benefit of their 401(k) contributions.
Help your employees save money by selecting a 401(k) solution that helps to minimize behavioral mistakes. Poor fund selection, lack of account maintenance, and bad advice shouldn’t detract from employees’ results. With elegant solutions like a managed account QDIA, investment automation, and expert advice, you can save your employees time, money and anxiety.
Loh C. (2017 June 13). What's really draining employee 401(k) accounts [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/whats-really-draining-employee-401-k-accounts
Are you looking for the key to unlocking a successful wellness program? Check out this article by Joseph Goedert from Employee Benefit Adviser and see how data collecting can be a great resource to use when creating a successful wellness program.
The collection and analysis of consumer data can provide insights to employers, including healthcare organizations, into their employees’ health status while offering the basis for information for the creation of wellness plans.
An individual’s buying habits, voting affiliation and voting history, television viewing, financial status, family status and social sentiments—which are the emotions behind social media mentions—together can give a view of the individual’s overall well-being, says April Gill, vice president of analytics solutions at Welltok, a vendor that offers health optimization services.
Social media mentions, for instance, can be analyzed to generate a sentiment score on the general happiness of an individual. A regular voter can indicate a person who may be active in community affairs and may be agreeable to accepting a walking program to improve health.
Consumer data, matched with health data like lab results, claims and biometric data, can be used to start making correlations that detail the healthcare needs of a person. The goal, Gill says, is to have a better understanding of an individual’s receptivity to joining a health program that can offer the highest probability of success.
If an individual subscribes to Netflix or other television services, data collection companies can see what television shows a person is watching and if they are a couch potato and need to exercise more. A person watching a lot of sports might be a candidate for suggesting a step program or playing a sport. A diabetic who often is online may be a good candidate for an online diabetes management program and to stay engaged in the program. “We need to offer resources in a manner that patients are ready for,” Gill asserts. These resources could come from an employer, health plan or provider organization.
Privacy laws may limit the types of health data that employers can see, but Welltok will work with local providers to identity employees to be targeted for health interventions. “We can get individual level data from providers,” Gill says. “It behooves employers to establish relationships with local providers.”
That relationship includes working with providers to move beyond a focus on utilization—tracking how many individuals participated in a certain programs, she advises.
But while data can paint a picture of wellness, there are many gaps in the available information, Gill cautions. A lot of commercial data is not identifiable, and sometimes the data is incorrect.
Goedert J. (2017 June 9). Is data collection key to a successful wellness program [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/news/is-data-collection-key-to-a-successful-wellness-program?brief=00000152-1443-d1cc-a5fa-7cfba3c60000
Praising your employees on a frequent basis is a great way to increase employee engagement and productivity. Take a look at this article by Brookie Madison from Employee Benefit News on how employees are more likely to leave a job if they do not feel like they're getting enough praise.
Employers may be spending more than $46 billion a year on employee recognition, reviews and work anniversaries, but recent research shows it could be worth the investment to commit even more to the effort.
Although more than 22% of senior decision-makers don’t think that regular recognition and thanking employees at work has a big influence on staff retention, 70% of employees say that motivation and morale would improve “massively” with managers saying thank you more, according to a Reward Gateway study.
By not receiving regular feedback on their performance, employees feel they are not progressing at work, says Glenn Elliott, CEO of Reward Gateway. In fact, nearly one in two employees reported they would leave a company if they did not feel appreciated at work, the study found.
This is particularly true of millennials, Elliott says, who make up the largest segment of the workforce, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. To this generation, “Saying thank you for good work or good behavior shows you values those things and want to see more of that behavior,” he says.
Overall, employees want praise and recognition more frequently than at annual awards ceremonies. Although 90% of senior decision-makers believe they prioritize showing appreciation and thanks in a timely way, more than 60% of workers would like to see their colleagues’ good work praised more frequently by managers and leaders.
“On average, businesses spend 2% on recognition,” says Elliott. “Businesses can increase effects of recognition by moving money from tenure-based to valued- and behavior-based recognition.”
More than eight out of 10 workers (84%) say praise should be given on a continual, year-round basis.
The Reward Gateway study polled 500 workers and 500 decision-makers in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia.
Madison B. (2017 June 11). Workers willing to leave a job if not praised enough [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.benefitnews.com/news/workers-willing-to-leave-a-job-if-not-praised-enough
Do you need help building up engagement among your employees? Take a peek at this interesting article by Joe Wedgwood at HR Morning about the benefits of employee engagement and how to get your employees more engaged.
“Organizations with high employee engagement levels outperform their low engagement counterparts in total shareholder returns and higher annual net income.” — Kenexa.
Your people are undoubtedly your greatest asset. You may have the best product in the world, but if you can’t keep them engaged and motivated — then it counts for very little.
By making efforts to keep your people engaged, you will maximize your human capital investment and witness your efforts being repaid exponentially.
The benefits of an engaged workforce
Increase in profitability:
“Increasing employee engagement investments by 10% can increase profits by $2,400 per employee, per year.” — Workplace Research Foundation.
There is a wealth of research to suggest that companies that focus on employee engagement will have an emotionally invested and committed workforce. This tends to result in higher profitability rates and shareholder returns. The more engaged your employees are the more efficient and productive they become. This will help lower operating costs and increase profit margins.
An engaged workforce will be more committed and driven to help your business succeed. By focusing on engagement and investing in your people’s future, you will create a workforce that will generate more income for your business.
Improved retention and recruitment rates:
“Replacing employees who leave can cost up to 150% of the departing employee’s salary. Highly engaged organizations have the potential to reduce staff turnover by 87%; the disengaged are four times more likely to leave the organization than the average employee.” — Corporate Leadership Council
Retaining good employees is vital for organizational success. Engaged employees are much less likely to leave, as they will be committed to their work and invested in the success of the company. They will have an increased chance of attracting more qualified people.
Ultimately the more engaged your people are, the higher their productivity and workplace satisfaction will be. This will significantly reduce costs around absences, recruitment, training and time lost for interviews and onboarding.
Boost in workplace happiness:
“Happy employees are 12%t more productive than the norm, and 22% more productive than their unhappy peers. Creating a pleasant workplace full of happy people contributes directly to the bottom line.” – Inc.
Engaged employees are happy employees, and happy employees are productive employees. A clear focus on workplace happiness, will help you to unlock everyone’s true potential. On top of this, an engaged and happy workforce can also become loyal advocates for your company. This is evidenced by the Corporate Leadership Council, “67% of engaged employees were happy to advocate their organizations compared to only 3% of the disengaged.”
Higher levels of productivity:
“Employees with the highest levels of commitment perform 20% better than employees with lower levels of commitment.” — The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).
Often your most engaged people will be the most dedicated and productive, which will give your bottom line a positive boost. Employees who are engaged with their role and align with the culture are more productive as they are looking beyond personal benefits. Put simply, they will work with the overall success of the organization in mind and performance will increase.
More innovation:
“Employee engagement plays a central role in translating additional job resources into innovative work behaviour.” — J.J. Hakanen.
Employee engagement and innovation are closely linked. Disengaged employees will not have the desire to work innovatively and think of new ways to improve your business; whereas an engaged workforce will perform at a higher level, due to increased levels of satisfaction and interest in their role. This often breeds creativity and innovation.
If your people are highly engaged they will be emotionally invested in your business. This can result in them making efforts to share ideas and innovations with you that can lead to the creation of new services and products — thus improving employee profitability.
Strategies to increase employee engagement
Communicate regularly:
Every member of your team will have valuable insights, feedback and suggestions. Many will have concerns and frustrations too. Failure to effectively listen and respond to everyone will lower their engagement and negatively affect the company culture.
Create open lines of communication and ensure everyone knows how to contact you. This will create a platform for your people to share ideas, innovations and concerns with you. It will also bridge gaps between senior management and the rest of the team.
An effective way to communicate and respond to everyone in real-time is by introducing pulse surveys — which will allow you to gather instant intelligence on your people to help you understand the sentiment of your organization. You can use this feedback to create relevant action plans to boost engagement and make smarter business decisions.
Take the time to respond and share action plans with everyone. This will ensure your people know that their feedback is being heard and can really make a difference.
Recognize achievements:
“The engagement level of employees who receive recognition is almost three times higher than the engagement level of those who do not.” — IBM Smarter Workforce Institute.
If your people feel undervalued or unappreciated then their performance and profitability will decrease. According to a survey conducted by technology company Badgeville, only 31% of employees are most motivated by monetary awards. The remaining 69% of employees are motivated by job satisfaction, recognition and learning opportunities.
Make efforts to celebrate good work and recognize everyone’s input. Take the time to personally congratulate people and honor their achievements and hard work. You will likely be rewarded with an engaged and energized workforce, that will make efforts to impress you and have their efforts recognized.
Provide opportunities for growth:
Career development is key for employee engagement. If your people feel like their careers are stagnating, or their hard work and emotional investment aren’t being reciprocated — then you can be certain that engagement will drop.
By meeting with your people regularly, discussing agreed targets and time frames, and clearly highlighting how they fit into the organizations wider plans, you can build a “road map” for their future. This will show that their efforts and hard work aren’t going unnoticed.
Improve company culture:
“Customers will never love a company until the employees love it first.” — Simon Sinek.
Building a culture that reflects your brand and creates a fun and productive working environment is one of the most effective ways to keep your employees engaged. It’ll also boost retention and help recruitment efforts. If your culture motivates everyone to work hard, help each other, become brand ambassadors, and even keep the place clean — then you have won the battle.
An engaged and committed workforce is a huge contributor to any organization’s bottom line. The right culture will be a catalyst to help you achieve this.
Here’s how you can improve the company culture within your organization:
Empower your people: Empowered employees will take ownership of their responsibilities, solve problems and do whatever it takes to help your company succeed. This will drive your company culture forward. Demonstrate you have faith in your people and trust them to fulfill their duties to their best of their abilities. This will ensure they feel valued, which can lead to empowerment.
Manage and communicate expectations: Your people may struggle to understand your cultural vision. By setting clear and regular expectations and communicating your vision via posters, emails, discussions and leading by example, you will prevent confusion and limit deviation from your desired vision.
Be consistent: To sustain a consistent culture, you must show uniformity with your actions and communications. Make efforts to have consistent expectations and standards for all your workers, and communicate everything in the same way.
By focusing on employee engagement and investing in your people, they will repay your efforts with an increase in performance, productivity and — ultimately — profit
Wedgwood J. (2017 June 8). Why employee engagement matter - and 4 ways to build it up [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.hrmorning.com/employee-engagement-ways-to-build-it-up/
Determining a proper asset allocation is an important first step in creating your portfolio and planning how it will grow in the future. Asset allocation is the process of diversifying your investments into different asset classes based on the investor’s time horizon, their goals and how much risk they can tolerate.
Brian Bushman
“People always ask me what they can invest in that will make them a lot of money without the chance of losing any,” said Brian Bushman, Saxon Financial Advisor. “I tell them that this simply doesn’t exist. But I can, however, help them design an optimized portfolio based on their risk tolerance and what they are trying to accomplish.”
Whether you’re just beginning to save for retirement or you’re much further down the road with more substantial savings, asset allocation is the result of understanding your comfort with risk and how to best diversify your investments to accomplish your goals.
The key to asset allocation is diversification. This allows an investor to take advantage of investing in many different opportunities which can reduce their overall risk. Assets can be allocated either strategically or tactically. A strategic plan sets a target allocation and consistently rebalances that allocation back to the original percentages while a tactical plan focuses on adjusting the portfolio based on current economic conditions and opportunities in order to produce a better risk adjusted return. Brian and the investment team at Saxon bring a hybrid approach to designing and managing their investor’s portfolios.
Many investors only consider the returns on their investments, but it is very important to assess the level of risk a portfolio is taking to achieve that return. Saxon’s approach is to optimize this risk vs. return ratio.
It is also important for investors to understand there are different types of risk. Most associate risk with investment risk which is the risk of losing money. However, there are many other risk factors to consider. Inflationary risk, interest rate risk, credit risk, taxability risk, currency risk and legislative/political risk are other types of risks that need to be considered when developing a portfolio.
Below are the three main factors needed in designing a suitable portfolio for the client.
3 Factors in Designing a Suitable Portfolio
Time Horizon
The amount of time that you have to reach your goals should directly impact the level of risk you are willing to take. When you’re young you have much more time to recover from any losses that could be incurred from a drop in the market, but as retirement approaches you have less time to recover from market losses.
The closer you get to retirement, the more you should consider reducing your risk level. Once you retire and need income from your investments you may need to redesign your portfolio from an accumulation portfolio to an income portfolio.
Risk Tolerance
Typically, investments that have the potential to generate higher returns are riskier. This is where the idea of risk tolerance comes in. This refers to the amount of volatility an investor can tolerate.
If your risk tolerance is low, then you will likely earn a lower return. To compensate for a lower anticipated return, it is important to evaluate the amount you are investing and possibly adjust your timeline accordingly to reach your goals. Usually gauged by a questionnaire, risk tolerance is often used to categorize investors as aggressive, moderate or conservative.
Goals
Each person’s goals are different, whether you are working towards a long-term goal of retirement or a short-term goal, you should consider these goals in your asset allocation plan. One person’s ideal asset mix could be completely wrong for someone else. Outside of setting financial goals and an ideal retirement goal, it is important to set a goal to adjust investments as you age.
“There is no crystal ball that provides insight on how to best allocate assets. It’s a process that begins with an initial risk assessment, diversifying your investments and continually monitoring the progress of your portfolio,” said Brian Bushman, Saxon Financial Advisor.
A Saxon investment advisor can provide guidance through the process of creating a well-balanced portfolio.
To download the full CenterStage article click here.
Is your employee benefits plan properly protected from cyberattacks? Here is a great article by Marlene Y. Satter from Benefits Pro on why employers must make sure that their employee benefits program is protected from cyberattacks and data breaches.
Think only credit card data and bank accounts are the targets of cyberattacks? Think again—because employee benefits data is in the hackers’ crosshairs.
That’s according to a report by the Society for Human Resource Management, which says that attacks on benefit plans can result in more than just loss of data for employers who fail to safeguard the information.
The report quotes Neal Schelberg, a partner with law firm Proskauer Rose in New York City, saying at the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans’ 2017 Washington Legislative Update in Washington, D.C. that employee health and retirement plans “are big targets and particularly susceptible to cyberattacks,” and warning employers to defend their plans against hacking attempts.
Schelberg pointed to some major attacks, including a June 2016 hit on more than 90 deferred-compensation retirement accounts of Chicago municipal employees. Hackers not only got personal information, but managed to pull money from 58 accounts, with the city losing $2.6 million that had to be replaced in participant accounts and also providing credit monitoring services to account holders.
Another big hit the very next month targeted a grocery workers union pension plan in St. Louis, with hackers demanding a three-bitcoin (about $2,000) digital currency ransom to return control of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 655 pension plan’s computer servers.
Among the data at risk were employee names, birthdates, Social Security numbers and bank information. While the union refused to knuckle under and pay ransom (it had a backup system), it did end up footing the bill for a year of credit monitoring and theft restoration services.
But in another case, the University of Massachusetts Amherst was on the hook for a $650,000 penalty and had to follow a corrective action plan after a malware infection targeting the university's employee health care plan exposed the sensitive health information of 1,500 people in a potential violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Why so much? The Department of Health and Human Services found that the university had failed to accurately assess the risk of malware infection and adopt procedures to secure its data.
According to Schelberg, benefit plans “are particularly susceptible to cyber-risks because they store large amounts of sensitive employee information and share it with multiple third parties.” And even though security measures may not be foolproof, cyber-risks “can be managed.”
It could be argued, he said, that it’s actually within a plan trustee's fiduciary duties not only to prepare for a possible cyberattack but also to ensure that any breach results in as little exposure, and cost, as possible.
Some actions he suggested sponsors take to protect plan data include the following:
Developing and implementing a framework to address cybersecurity issues
Addressing third-party vendor vulnerabilities that could add risk, especially for electronic transfer of sensitive data to third parties
Backing up sensitive data, then storing it off network where it is not accessible to hackers
Boosting passwords, including adding multifactor authentication for accessing data systems
Increasing investment in security software and systems
Involving boards of directors more directly in security matters
Considering the purchase of cyberliability insurance
Sponsors must also be current on the HIPAA requirements for notification of people whose health information may have been breached, even if a third party is involved, as well as for ERISA requirements for notification and for other actions in the event of a security breach.
And in the case of ERISA, the process could be far more complicated than sponsors believe.
In the report, Kristen Mathews, another partner in Proskauers New York City office, was cited saying that benefit plans are affected by the laws of states where health plan enrollees or retirement plan participants live—not just the state where the company is headquartered or where the plan is administered.
She pointed out that pension plans could be affected by security laws in any state in which a retiree or beneficiary resides.
Satter M. (2017 June 9). Employers need to protect benefit plans against cyberattacks [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.benefitspro.com/2017/06/09/employers-need-to-protect-benefit-plans-against-cy?ref=hp-news&page_all=1
With the passing of the AHCA, Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are on the verge of expansion. Check out this article by Emily Zulz of Benefits Pro and see how this new legislation will impact HSA's.
Since the new Congress began in January, there have been more than 20 bills proposed that impact consumer-directed health care, and more specifically HSAs. In May, the House of Representatives narrowly passed the American Health Care Act.
A new report from HSA Bank provides insight into specific impacts on HSAs and consumer-directed health care outlined in the American Health Care Act, as well as examines the other proposed legislation.
“Whether they get passed or not, I don’t expect that to have a negative impact on HSAs,” Chad Wilkins, executive vice president and head of HSA Bank, told ThinkAdvisor. “We’ll continue to see that kind of growth going forward. And if they do get passed, we’ll see more wind at the back of high-deductible health plans and HSAs.”
HSAs, which can be as much a retirement savings vehicle as a health care financing plan, have grown in popularity recently.
The number of people enrolled in HSAs continues to grow, although more slowly than in previous years. According to America's Health Insurance Plan report, 20.2 million U.S. residents were covered through HSA-compatible, individual, small-group or large-group plans in 2016.
A Fidelity analysis shows a surge in health savings account in the third quarter of last year.
Wilkins, who co-authored the report with Kevin Robertson, senior vice president and chief revenue officer, attributes the growth in HSAs to both the cost standpoint for employers offering plans, as well as the cost savings for individuals both today and in retirement.
And he predicts this growth and popularity will continue to expand -- despite what happens in Congress.
“There’s been a lot of changes in legislators over the past 10 years and HSAs have stayed relatively stable in that world,” Wilkens said.
The report provides insight into the six specific impacts on HSAs and CDH plans outlined in AHCA, as passed by the House, with a focus on how they will positively impact individuals' ability to own their health.
The top-ranking Democrat on the Senate side of the Joint Economic Committee, though, has said expanding the health savings account program would do little to help ordinary Americans cope with cuts in Affordable Care Act coverage expansion programs.
According to Robertson, these impacts “focus on expanding access to health savings accounts and CDH plans for Americans.”
1. Raises HSA contribution limits to the high-deductible health plan (HDHP) out-of-pocket maximum.
The current 2017 HSA contribution limits are $3,400 for a single plan and $6,750 for a family plan. The proposed 2018 contribution limits would increase that to $6,550 for a single plan and $13,100 for a family plan.
2. Repeals the ACA contribution limit on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) (currently $2,600 for 2017)
Approximately 20 percent of Americans covered by private insurance are able to contribute to an HSA since they are enrolled in a qualified HDHP, according to the report. For those not covered by an HDHP, this change effectively allows for significantly higher contributions to help cover large out-of-pocket expenses.
3. Allows spouses to make catch-up contributions to the same HSA
“The most significant obstacle to maximizing spousal contributions has been the aggravation of having to open a second account,” the report says.
This change will make it easier for seniors to maximize their savings for retirement years, both in terms of lower administration costs, and simplification of the contribution process.
4. Repeals the prescription requirement for over-the-counter medications as qualified medical expense distributions from HSAs, FSAs, and health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs)
The ACA raised the prices for anyone purchasing over-the-counter medications, and with this repeal, it will immediately lower healthcare costs for people using HSAs, FSAs, and HRAs to purchase these products, according to the report.
5. Lowers the penalty for non-qualified HSA distributions made prior to age 65 from 20 percent to 10 percent
This penalty exists to ensure that HSAs are used as health care savings tools and not tax shelters for assets. The report says a lower penalty would make HSAs more attractive since “the fear of a 20 percent penalty may have been a detractor in individuals using HSAs as a savings account.”
6. Allows for qualified distributions to reimburse medical expenses incurred within 60 days of HDHP coverage but before HSA account is established
“Even though an individual may be covered by an HSA-qualified health plan, they are not allowed to claim their medical expenses as qualified distributions until they have met the legal requirements of establishing their HSA,” according to the report.
This provision would give individuals a 60-day window to cover these instances.
Emily Zulz (2017 June 16). 6 favorable changes to HSAs under GOP health bill [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.benefitspro.com/2017/06/16/6-favorable-changes-to-hsas-under-gop-health-bill?ref=hp-news&page_all=1
Are you having a hard time figuring out all the different technologies associated with your benefits program? Read this great article by Linda Keller from SHRM on how to navigate through the different technologies accociated with you employee benefits program .
It’s easy to get caught up wanting to deliver a sophisticated platform to engage your workforce. Many benefits technology solutions promise to make employees smarter consumers of health care through slick recommendation engines, bots, and avatars delivered on smart phones.
I advise you to keep these three things in mind when you evaluate benefits technology:
1. Technology won’t solve your millennial dilemma.
Right now Millenials make up the largest portion of the workforce. HR professionals are scrambling to figure out how to best communicate and educate them about benefits. The fact is Millennials rely heavily on their parents -- not technology -- to make insurance decisions. When the Affordable Care Act changed the benefits landscape by allowing kids to stay on their parents’ plan until age 26, it meant that these new workers didn’t have to take an active role in managing their benefits. They just deferred to their parents. HR needs to figure out how to appropriately involve parents in the benefits decision-making process, while ensuring they meet Millennial’s growing demand for non-traditional benefits. Some solutions may include call center support where questions can be answered prior to enrollment.
2. Technology is necessary to reduce compliance risk.
Labor laws are complex and fluid. The future of ACA and its unpopular reporting requirements are unclear. I believe what is clear is that federal, state and local compliance requirements will continue to be a burden and risk for HR. Compliance falls on HR shoulders and the importance of well-kept records is crucial to avoiding fines and penalties. I advise beginning by automating processes that are currently manual and present the highest risk to your organization. If you continue to rely on manual processes for compliance, the odds of success are not in your favor.
3. Technology is not a strategy.
Employers will waste a lot of money on benefits technology if they don’t know what they want to do with it. Develop a clear strategy and roadmap first -- then consider how technology can enable your strategy. Determine your cost management and employee engagement goals and then figure out how benefits technology can help drive down administrative cost, create enrollment efficiencies and enhance communication and reporting.
Keller L. (2017 May 23). Losing sleep over benefits technology? get over it! [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://blog.shrm.org/blog/losing-sleep-over-benefits-technology-get-over-it
Have your employees been dipping into their 401(k)s to support their financial needs? Then take a look at this article by David Sherman from Employee Benefit Adviser on why employees shouldn't dip into their 401(k)s and what employers can do to help employees support themselves financially without having to use the money saved in their 401(k)s.
When dire financial need strikes, employees often tap their retirement accounts. While there are cases in which a 401(k) withdrawal makes sense, these loans should be viewed as an absolute last resort.
There are significant downsides related to 401(k) loans such as including penalties, administration and maintenance fees as well as “leakage” from retirement accounts. This occurs when an employee takes a loan on their 401(k), cashes out entirely or leaves their job and rolls over their account to their new employer.
Borrowing from retirement plans presents hazards to the employer, as well. More employers are minimizing the ability of employees to dip into their 401(k) savings by limiting the number of loans from 66% in 2012 to 45% in 2016, according to SHRM. Despite this, the bottom line is that employees need access to low cost credit.
More than 1-in-4 participants use their 401(k) savings for non-retirement needs, according to financial education provider HelloWallet. That amounts to a startling $70 billion of retirement savings that employees are siphoning away from their future.
There are hidden costs to 401(k) loans. One of the perceived benefits of a 401(k) loan is that the borrower isn’t charged any interest. That’s a fallacy: 401(k) loans typically include interest rates that are 1 to 2 points higher than the current Prime Rate plus administrative fees. While the borrower pays this money to him or herself rather than to a bank, these “repayments” don’t take into account penalty of taking money out of a 401(k) for months or years when it might have enjoyed market gains.
The downside of the interest rate is that it makes paying back the loan more difficult and this will likely lead to 401(k) leakage. In some cases, loopholes that allow employees to raid their 401(k)s before retirement reduce the aggregate wealth in those accounts by 25%. Simply put, this translates into having the most senior and highest paid employees stay on the job because they do not have enough funds in their account to retire. From an HR administrator’s standpoint, that can increase overall costs, since employees who cannot afford to retire are drawing higher-than-average salaries. And thanks to their advanced age, they also run-up costs on the employer’s medical plan.
The financial wellness alternative
Employers should offer socially responsible alternatives to borrowing from their 401k. Not only to ensure that older workers can afford to retire and make room for younger, less-expensive hires, but to ease the financial burden for employees when emergencies do happen. This should be offered as a voluntary benefit with no risk to employers. In a recent Wall Street Journal article, “The Rising Retirement Perils of 401(k) ‘Leakage’” Redner’s Markets made that leap offering a low-cost Kashable loan to its employees. It stopped leakage and offered employees of the online grocer much needed relief from financial stress.
Adding a financial wellness solution to the employee voluntary benefits package that provides access to responsible credit is a first step in untangling employees’ financials. For employees struggling with college loans and credit card debt, this financial-wellness benefit allows them to borrow when needed at a low rate. For the 35% of employees surveyed by PWC in 2016 that said they had trouble meeting their monthly household expenses and the 29% that said they had trouble meeting their minimum credit card charges each month, this voluntary program provides multiple benefits. For the employee, it is an opportunity to build or improve their credit score, and provide relief from financial stress. To the employer, it’s a risk-free solution to stop the leakage from retirement accounts.
Sherman D. (2017 June 5). 401(k) borrowing isn't free [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/401-k-borrowing-isnt-free?feed=00000152-1377-d1cc-a5fa-7fff0c920000
