Bill Overview
Title: Pooled Employer Plan Fix Act
Description: This bill requires pooled employer retirement plans to designate a named fiduciary to collect contributions to the plan and implement written contribution collection procedures that are reasonable, diligent, and systematic. Current law requires a plan to designate one or more trustees to perform these tasks.
Sponsors: Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals participating in pooled employer retirement plans
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill affects pooled employer retirement plans, which are designed to provide retirement savings options for employees of small and medium-sized businesses.
- Pooled employer plans are generally available to employees of multiple employers who band together to offer a common retirement plan.
- Small and medium-sized businesses make up a significant portion of the global economy and employ a large number of individuals worldwide.
- Employees covered by pooled employer plans may range from those working in small businesses to participants in more complex employer networks.
- The global workforce potentially includes millions of individuals eligible for retirement plans under various laws.
Reasoning
- The Pooled Employer Plan Fix Act is primarily aimed at those already participating in pooled employer retirement plans, which are typically employees of small to medium-sized businesses. Individuals outside this demographic are less likely to be directly affected by this policy.
- The policy aims to clarify and improve the management and oversight of contributions to pooled employer plans, which should theoretically enhance the security of retirement savings for these employees.
- The budget constraint suggests a focus on manageable updates to administrative procedures rather than a broad financial overhaul, which may limit the direct financial benefit individuals experience.
- The direct impact will likely be limited to those with current or planned access to pooled employer plans, meaning it should not broadly influence those not covered by these plans.
Simulated Interviews
Chef (Dallas, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new requirement might make it easier for me to ensure contributions are handled properly.
- I hope it reduces my administrative burden, as planning for my and my employees' retirements is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I trust the plan's managers, but more oversight is always a good thing.
- The policy seems like a positive step to ensure all contributions are managed correctly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Accountant (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If more businesses join because of this, it could really help secure my retirement.
- I'm hopeful but unsure if this would significantly change my current job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Mechanic (Chicago, IL)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I want to make sure my savings are safe, so this sounds like a good idea.
- Not sure if it'll really change my daily life much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Marketing Manager (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might make setting up a plan more appealing.
- I think it helps reassure employees about plan stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Freelance Graphic Designer (New York, NY)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy means more accessible plans for freelancers like me, that would be great.
- I'm skeptical about it really helping in the short term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Construction Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about my retirement savings, so anything that helps is good.
- Not sure if this policy will directly help me though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Retail Store Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved that there's more oversight; I don't want to worry about mismanged contributions.
- This change seems reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Austin, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With better regulations, I might be more willing to start a plan.
- Hope it makes the process less confusing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Barista (Portland, OR)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm happy if this brings more security to my retirement.
- Uncertain how fast and impactful these changes will be.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy mandates fiduciary designation which could impose additional costs on retirement plans, mostly affecting small and medium businesses.
- There may be indirect costs related to compliance and regulatory oversight.
- The financial impact on individuals participating in pooled employer retirement plans is indirect and relates more to the safety and reliability of contributions.