Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Senior Finances. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senior Finances. Show all posts

Monday, March 14, 2016

Top 10 Growing Costs for Older Consumers

March 14, 2016– Even though inflation was too low for a cost – of – living adjustment (COLA) this year, a number of crucial items that older consumers typically buy jumped in cost, according to a new chart released today by The Senior Citizens League (TSCL). “These cost increases are forcing older consumers to make difficult choices,” says TSCL Chairman, Ed Cates. 

 “In the years when Social Security benefits don’t keep up with rising costs, people living on fixed incomes are forced to spend retirement savings faster than planned or worse, go into debt, just to make ends meet,” says Cates.

The following chart illustrates ten of the biggest cost increases over the past year in items most likely to be found in a typical retiree’s household budget.


“While the majority of Medicare beneficiaries did NOT have an increase in their Medicare Part B premiums this year, about one – third pay 16 percent more in premiums than they paid last year — one of the biggest increases in Medicare premiums on record,” Cates says.

“This especially affects people who have delayed the start of their Social Security benefits and pay for their Medicare by check,” Cates explains.  Over time however, TSCL studies indicate that Medicare Part B premium, increases are one of the top fastest – growing costs during most retirement years.

Prescription drug costs are another category that TSCL is receiving a lot of comments about from people age 60 and over. 

“There have been several back – to – back years recently of extreme prescription drug price spikes,” Cates says.  TSCL used data from Truveris, a healthcare data company that tracks thousands of drug prices, which showed that prescription drug prices rose 10.43 percent in 2015.  TSCL supports legislation that would allow Medicare greater authority to negotiate drug prices.

The cost of eating a more healthy diet rose while the cost of foods higher in fat and cholesterol like processed meats and cheese tumbled.  The cost of a pound of tomatoes rose 8.1 percent, almost as much as the average increase in prescription medicines.

Although the cost increase of doctor visits was one of the slower growing increases at 2.3 percent, the price of veterinarian care for pets rose 4.1 percent, nearly double the rate of physician costs. 

TSCL believes that’s due to the effect of insurers negotiating discounts from doctors for human care.  But the same is not so much the case with pet medical care because most people don’t have insurance for the pets.

“The takeaway is that, although the huge drop in fuel oil costs is only one area of spending, it’s big enough to drive down the COLA — even though older Americans drive less as they get older,” Cates says.  Research for TSCL indicates that using a seniors CPI — like the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly (CPI-E) — would pay a higher COLA in most years, even in 2016.  TSCL is lobbying for an Emergency COLA, as well as legislation that would pay a more fair and accurate COLA by switching to the CPI-E.

How are you affected by rising costs?  Take TSCL’s annual Senior Survey— visit www.SeniorsLeague.org.

Monday, October 26, 2015

50-Somethings Advised to Calculate Their 'Long-Term Care Savings Gap'


If it's too big, it jeopardizes retirement dreams, but there are options


October 26, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Most Americans are poorly prepared to pay for long-term care costs, but there's a two-step fix, according to ACSIA Partners, a leading long-term care insurance agency. 

It starts by learning if there's a gap, and how big, between your ability to pay and your likely future expenses.

For most Americans there is indeed a gap. According to a May 2015, report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), 52 percent of households age 55 and older have no savings for retirement (let alone long-term care). 

If you're among the 48 percent with some retirement savings, you may be prepared to cover some, but not all, of your probable LTC tab.

What to do?

"Step one," says Denise Gott, CEO of ACSIA Partners, "is to see if you have a gap, and how big." Doing so can take less than five minutes. 

For a rough estimate, Gott recommends entering a few facts into a calculator provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: http://longtermcare.gov/savings-calculator/.

Here's a sample calculation for a 52-year old woman planning to retire in Florida, who could afford to set aside$300 (earning 4 percent interest) per month starting now. 

She would have a long-term care savings gap of$652,184, based on $839,263 in projected care costs in Florida, for life remaining after age 65, minus $187,079in accumulated savings, as determined by government data and assumptions.

If the woman were married, there would likely be a similar gap for her partner.

Once you know you've got a gap, "the next step is just as simple and almost as quick," says Gott. "Ask a state-certified long-term care agent to help you explore your options." 

This can be done by phone or online. An in-person meeting is optional.

ACSIA Partners offers state-certified agents covering all parts of the country. 

To get in touch with one, just go to the company's website -- http://www.acsiapartners.com -- and submit an inquiry form indicating your state of residence.

ACSIA Partners LLC -- http://www.acsiapartners.com -- is one of America's largest and most experienced long-term care insurance solution agencies with hundreds of agents serving all states. 

The company is also a co-founder and sponsor of the "3in4 Need More" campaign, run by the 3in4 Association, which encourages Americans to form a long-term care plan.


Wednesday, September 23, 2015

30 Million Americans Used Retirement Savings for an Emergency Over Past Year21 Million Americans Aren't Saving for Retirement



NEW YORK, Sept. 23, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- 30 million Americans tapped their retirement savings for an emergency within the past year, according to a new Bankrate.com (NYSE: 
RATE) report.  The report also found that 21 million Americans aren't saving for retirement at all.

Surprisingly, millennials were the least likely to dip into their retirement funds prematurely (only 8% did so over the past 12 months).

In fact, millennials are the most likely age group to note an improved overall financial situation over the past year (40% say they're better off and just 11% say they're doing worse).

The numbers tell a more troubling story for 50-64 year-olds. 26% say their financial situation has deteriorated over the past year (more than any other age group) and 17% recently dipped into their retirement savings to pay for an emergency.

"Using retirement savings to cover an emergency is a permanent setback to retirement planning, with the possibility of taxable distributions, early withdrawal penalties, loss of tax efficiency, and the inability to replace withdrawn funds in future years," said Greg McBride, CFA, Bankrate.com's chief financial analyst.

  • The Bankrate.com Financial Security Index rebounded after sliding the past two months and now stands at 102.6 – the best since June.
  • Job security is a particular strength: people who feel more secure than a year ago outnumber those who feel less secure by more than two-to-one.
  • Savings is the one major area where Americans note deterioration, with 30% saying they feel less comfortable with their savings now compared to one year ago against 18% that feel more comfortable.
  •  
The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International (PSRAI) and can be seen in its entirety here:


PSRAI obtained telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 1,004 adults living in the continental United States. Telephone interviews were conducted by landline (501) and cell phone (503, including 311 without a landline phone) in English and Spanish by Princeton Data Source from September 3-6. Statistical results are weighted to correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of sampling error for the complete set of weighted data is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Research Examines Retirement Risk, Role of Annuities

A new research brief finds that pension plans have effectively managed key retirement security risks and that shifting to annuities would be a more expensive approach.

Public Pensions Manage Risks with Varied and Effective Strategies
Annuities Provide Lifelong Income to Retirees But Transferring Longevity Risk to Insurance Companies Has High Cost with Fewer Consumer Protections

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 1, 2015 – A new research brief finds that most public defined benefit (DB) pension plans have effectively managed key retirement security risks – investment, adequacy, longevity and inflation risks. 

The research also finds that a shift to funding retirement benefits from public pensions to fixed annuities would be a more expensive approach – with 57 to 175 percent higher costs. The public workforce also could face diminished consumer protections if their benefits were provided as annuities.

These findings are explained in a new Issue Brief from the National Institute on Retirement Security, Retirement Security Risks: What Role Can Annuities Play in Reducing Security Risks in Public Pension Plans? is available here.

“This research is particularly important as policymakers closely examine risks and the most cost-effective ways to provide retirement benefits for the public workforce,” said Diane Oakley, NIRS executive director. 

“For states interested in limiting their retirement costs for the public workforce, the research makes it clear that turning to annuities likely will increase costs,” Oakley explained.

During the last decade, managing investment risk has posed challenges while life expectancies have also increased. Yet, the research indicates that most public DB pension have successfully managed investment, adequacy, longevity and inflation risks appropriately as described below:

  • Investment Risk: Public pension plans have demonstrated their ability to invest retirement assets and achieve target returns over their long time horizons. Pensions take advantage of the risk premium generated by equity investments in their diversified fund portfolios over time.
  • Adequacy Risk: The fundamental principle underlying the appropriate and sustainable funding of retirement benefits is ensuring that sponsors pay the actuarial determined contribution (ADC). While a few states have failed to adequately pay their ADC, most states have paid 95 percent or more of the ADC.
  • Longevity Risk: DB pensions protect retirees from out living their savings even thought retirees are living longer. Advised by professional actuaries, public pensions appear to anticipate changes in mortality experience successfully.
  • Inflation Risk: Over time, the purchasing power of a fixed income stream diminishes even at low rates of inflation. Cost of living adjustments (COLAs) protect the purchasing power of retirees. State retirement systems manage inflation risk with limits on COLAs and using investment strategies designed to produce real rates of return.

In the private sector, fewer DB pensions are available to employees, and the trend has been to switch to defined contribution (DC) accounts. 

This shift places more responsibility and risks on individuals. As such, there has been an increased focused on the role of annuities in the retirement security equation. 

Annuities are products offered by insurance companies whereby an individual or a retirement plan pays money up front to the insurance company. The insurance company makes regular payments to retirees for the remainder of their lives or for a set number of years.

In the public sector, DB pensions remain the predominant retirement plan to help to attract and retain employees while enabling employees to retire with a monthly income. 

The research brief finds that if DB pension benefits were paid as fixed annuities, this approach would be more costly, and the public workforce also would face diminished consumer protections. 

With regard to annuities, this NIRS Issue Brief finds that:

  • Annuities cost more than current DB pension benefits. Because fixed annuity products deliver investment returns related to bond investments, it costs more to generate a given level of monthly income from fixed annuities than from DB pensions. Depending the pricing of the annuity, the cost of using fixed income annuities to fund DB pension benefits can be anywhere from 57 percent to over 175 percent more than the cost under a public pension’s diversified portfolio.
  • Annuities do not provide the same consumer protections as public pension benefits. Public pension benefits are protected by state constitutions, state laws, court decisions on contract law, and collective bargaining agreements, depending on the state. Annuities are protected by the financial strength of the insurance company, which is monitored by the state regulators, and are backed up by state guaranty funds.
  • Longevity annuities focus on the insurance value and are less expensive than fixed income annuities. By starting annuity income payments at a much older age, individuals can capture most of the insurance value of immediate annuities, but at a fraction of the cost by using longevity annuities. Further analysis with actual participant data, would be needed to help public plans consider if longevity annuities would be a helpful tool for plans considering ways to manage longevity risk. 


The National Institute on Retirement Security is a non-profit, non-partisan organization established to contribute to informed policymaking by fostering a deep understanding of the value of retirement security to employees, employers, and the economy as a whole. 

Located in Washington, D.C., NIRS’ diverse membership includes financial services firms, employee benefit plans, trade associations, and other retirement service providers. More information is available at www.nirsonline.com . Follow NIRS on Twitter @nirsonline.

. State Financial Security Scorecards Reveal Retiree Economic Pressure


The State Financial Security Scorecards research project gauges the retirement readiness of future retirees in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia.

Retirement Outlook Troubling; California, Florida, South Carolina Rank Lowest While Wyoming, Alaska, Minnesota Rank Highest
Webinar to Review Findings from Thursday, July 30, 2015, Webinar. Watch a replay of the Webinar here.

September 1, 2015– A new analysis indicates that Americans in nearly every state will fall far short in meeting their economic needs in retirement. 

The State Financial Security Scorecards research project gauges the retirement readiness of future retirees in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia in three key areas: anticipated retirement income; major retirement costs like housing and healthcare; and labor market conditions for older workers.

The research finds that the lowest ranking states include:

·         California due to low potential retirement income, low workplace retirement plan access and high retiree costs.
·         Florida due to high retiree costs, low wages for older workers and low workplace retirement plan access.
·         South Carolina due to low potential retirement income and low labor market scores.
The highest-ranking states include Wyoming, Alaska, Minnesota andNorth Dakota due to their relatively strong labor markets and lower retiree costs. However, each of these states with a favorable outlook is weak in terms of potential retirement income for retirees. 

For example, North Dakotans have an average defined contribution retirement account balance of only $27,700 – nowhere near the level of accumulated savings required to ensure self-sufficiency through retirement.

An interactive map with access to the State Financial Security Scorecards is available here. 

These state scorecards are designed to serve as a tool for policymakers to identify areas of focus for state-based policy interventions that will strengthen Americans’ ability to financially prepare for retirement.

The State Financial Security Scorecard project provides a two-page summary of the economic outlook for retirement security in every state. 

It considers trends in retirement plan participation rates in each state, evaluates average savings levels in individual retirement accounts in relation to median income and considers current poverty levels in each state.

“We developed the State Financial Security Scorecards to dig deep and really understand the root causes of why future retirees will struggle in some states,” said Diane Oakley, NIRS executive director. 

“Now, policymakers have a tool to identify the most urgent priorities and can take action to head off the looming retirement crisis in their states,” Oakley said.

“The retirement savings shortfall has become increasingly important at the state level because policymakers know it can have a deep impact on strained state budgets. 

The largest source of retirement income for most Americans is Social Security, but this critical federal program typically provides only a part of the income working families need to be self-sufficient. 

State programs must fill the gap and help Americans meet their most basic needs for food, shelter and medicine. 

The good news is that some states like California and Illinois already have enacted legislation to reduce future retiree poverty by encouraging workers to save today,” Oakley added.

“Out of crisis comes opportunity. States now are trying different ways to make sure that middle class workers don’t fall into poverty once they stop working, which harms individuals and their families,” said Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Georgetown University Center on Retirement Initiatives founder and former Maryland lieutenant governor. 

 “This new tool can help policymakers get a better read on financial security issues in their state, and enact sensible policies to help Americans get back on track when it comes to preparing for retirement,” she explained.

“This research project makes it abundantly clear that achieving financial security in retirement is an increasingly elusive goal for Americans,” saidHank Kim, executive director and counsel with the National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems. 

“The findings give policymakers yet another reason to explore innovative approaches, such as the Secure Choice Pension, which draws on the documented performance and efficiencies of public sector pension management, and extends it to those in the private sector,” Kim said.

The State Financial Security Scorecards come on the heels of the NIRS 2015 public opinion research revealing that an overwhelming majority of Americans (86 percent) believe that the nation faces a retirement crisis. 

Americans strongly support state action to address retirement insecurity the research found: 71 percent said state sponsored retirement plans are a good idea and 75 percent of Americans said they would participate.

This State Financial Security Scorecard project was conducted by Diane Oakley, NIRS executive director with support from AARP. 

The State Financial Security Scorecards build upon a 2014 research report, The Financial Security Scorecard, authored by NIRS and Dr. Christian E. Weller with the University of Massachusetts Boston.

The National Institute on Retirement Security is a non-profit, non-partisan organization established to contribute to informed policymaking by fostering a deep understanding of the value of retirement security to employees, employers, and the economy as a whole. 

Located in Washington, D.C., NIRS’ diverse membership includes financial services firms, employee benefit plans, trade associations, and other retirement service providers. More information is available at www.nirsonline. Follow NIRS on Twitter @nirsonline.