Bill Overview
Title: SAFER Act
Description: or the SAFER Act This bill allows penalty-free distributions from tax-exempt retirement plans for domestic abuse victims.
Sponsors: Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]
Target Audience
Population: Victims of domestic abuse with tax-exempt retirement plans
Estimated Size: 100000
- The target population is victims of domestic abuse who have tax-exempt retirement plans from which they can make distributions.
- The potential global number of individuals impacted will be those who are experiencing domestic violence around the world, who have access to retirement accounts.
- Considering the accessibility of retirement accounts globally may vary, the global population includes those in countries with prevalent retirement savings systems, thus it could be fewer than total victims.
Reasoning
- The policy is targeted at victims of domestic abuse who have retirement savings accounts. This narrows the potential affected population significantly since not all domestic abuse victims have such accounts. The commonality of certain demographics like age, gender, and financial planning awareness (occupation) have been considered in the selection of profiles.
- The budget of the policy suggests it will not reach every potential beneficiary. Instead, it might be more pivotal for certain high-impact cases where individuals have substantial retirement accounts to draw from, either to escape a harmful situation or to facilitate rebuilding their lives post-escape.
- Impacts might range from negligible to very positive, depending on the level of domestic abuse, accessibility to retirement savings, and alternative support mechanisms available to the individual (e.g., family support). We're simulating scenarios with a spectrum of these factors to give a holistic view of the policy's potential reach and effectiveness.
Simulated Interviews
Accountant (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've considered leaving several times, but financial insecurity holds me back. My retirement savings are my only safety net. This policy could finally give me a feasible exit route.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have already divorced, but the policy would have been a lifesaver had it been enacted sooner. It’s a powerful tool for those trying to escape earlier.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Teacher (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My partner makes me feel trapped. Knowing I can access my retirement plan gives me hope for a secure future away from him if things worsen.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Nurse (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy would offer a crucial lifeline to those currently trapped. I wish it were around when I needed it.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retail Manager (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m not in an abusive relationship now, but the policy provides peace of mind. I’d feel safer knowing I have financial options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
IT Specialist (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My marriage is rocky. I may need the means to start over. This policy gives me hope.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Homemaker (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be my lifeline out. I could restart my life independently, without the oppressive control.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy helps those in need during their critical moments, as I had to struggle with limited options.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't need this now, but it's a reassuring option to have in case of any future adversity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelancer (Portland, OR)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like these offer a critical safety net. It's reassuring to have transitional financial security if needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $10000000)
Year 2: $4500000 (Low: $2500000, High: $9500000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Coordination with financial institutions to adapt systems for penalty-free transactions.
- Ongoing monitoring and support for beneficiaries of the policy to maximize effectiveness.
- Potential impact on financial markets due to changes in retirement savings withdrawal patterns.