WatchA large and growing share of American workers are tapping their retirement savings accounts for non-retirement needs, raising broad questions about the effectiveness of one of the most important savings vehicles for old age.
More than one in four American workers with 401(k) and other retirement savings accounts use them to pay current expenses, new data show. The withdrawals, cash-outs and loans drain nearly a quarter of the $293 billion that workers and employers deposit into the accounts each year, undermining already shaky retirement security for millions of Americans.
“What you have is 401(k) participants voting with their wallets saying they would much rather use this money for other purposes.
Overall, about a third of American households participate in 401(k)-type accounts, which hold a combined $3.5 trillion in assets. But a large portion of that money does not make it to retirement. A recent study by Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research found that the typical household approaching retirement age has an average of $120,000 in retirement savings, enough for roughly a $7,000-a-year annuity.
Follow
Befriend
229 threads
2,781 comments
zzyzzx says
Yep, we are in an economic recovery.... Obama said so!!!
FORWARD!!!!
Follow
Befriend (1)
250 threads
4,751 comments
Then as if pulling from their 401K isn't detrimental to quality of retirement they'll afford. The Government then gives you another Fuckyou very much, by penalizing you, for taking your own freaking money, thus money from the bank's CEO personal change purse.
People should be in charge of their own future. That includes retirement and health. Both of these sectors would be much healthier if Marge from HR wasn't the sole decider of how and were you get both.
The one and only possitive thing I "HOPE" will come from Obamacare, will be. People wont be tethered to a company they despise and loathe, just because of the "bennies"(Which they over pay for) like Health insurance because they've got chronic ailment that keeps them there.
Companies will really have to sweeten the pot, like providing healthcare for the whole family with out any premiums or out of pocket expenses.
You know like you'd expect from an insurance that you are already paying for.
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
I fully expect to tap my 401K before retirement. I will probably withdraw before the boomers retire en masse.
Follow
Befriend (5)
57 threads
1,327 comments
Premium
Peter P says
It could be advantageous that way (even with the penalty) if you project continuously rising taxes.
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
389 comments
Everyone I know who is near to, or has reached, retirement age, HATES their 401k because they were told if they contributed they'd earn a healthy return and retire comfortably.
The reality is that many of them were utterly raped by the markets and have had to go back to work.
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
mell says
Also there can be new restrictions. Besides, they can find a way to nationalize private retirement accounts.
Do we even technically "own" those accounts?
Follow
Befriend
229 threads
2,781 comments
Peter P says
Maybe you should withdraw it all out now before "they" do...
Follow
Befriend
4 threads
206 comments
Redwood City, CA
The typical household approaching retirement age has an average of $120,000 in retirement savings? I've read other articles that the average Baby Boomer only has $30k in retirement savings.
Follow
Befriend (9)
166 threads
1,551 comments
Premium
gbenson says
Sad but true. I remember that Enron lady who had a million dollar worth of Enron stock in her account-she was not allowed to sell it, but the executives were and she lost eveyrthing.
Follow
Befriend
9 threads
243 comments
Washington, DC
ducsingle5313 says
Either way, it's not enough to live on.
Follow
Befriend (7)
30 threads
1,218 comments
31 male
Premium
gbenson says
This is just the beginning. Wait till the word gets out, and none of us younger folk bother to participate. Then who will the sell to?
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
Call it Crazy says
Tempting...
Mine is all in government bonds. Perhaps it will drop after stocks do.
It is more tax efficient to withdraw in a low AGI year.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
If you are in your 50s and your 401k allocation was less than 75% bonds, your fund manager was grossly negligent (or, more likely, you ignored their guidelines and decided to gamble instead).
If you're only 40, though, worrying about your 401k balance is idiotic. You aren't even halfway through your prime working years.
I don't know why anybody would take an early withdrawal from their 401k. A loan, sure, but unless you're getting a 100% match, the penalty isn't worth it.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
finehoe says
120k is more than enough to live on if you own your home outright. A 3% annual return (bond interest or safe stock dividends alone will pay more) will cover you.
$30k wont, but I doubt many people have that. More likely its 50% of people have zero and 20% have over $100k, skewing the average way up.
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
Of course I did it for the match and the AGI reduction.
Follow
Befriend
4 threads
2,099 comments
Kevin says: 120k is more than enough to live on if you own your home outright. A 3% annual return (bond interest or safe stock dividends alone will pay more) will cover you.
I think you may be off by an order of magnitude. Perhaps you mean $1.2 million? At 3% this gives you $36k per year.
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
120K is enough? Did you mean 120K ounces of gold?
Alas, the only amount enough is MORE.
Enough means you want no more. More is always better.
Follow
Befriend
6 threads
650 comments
Pleasanton, CA
The 401k breaches are by the OWNERS of the accounts, themselves.
Are we now in an era where SELF victimization and foolish planning calls for pity and rants against any identifiable third party?
This is where self pity rationalizing becomes detached from all forms of responsibility and reality.
Hey, where's all my 401K money? Duh, I spent it and paid massive taxes and penalties on it. If you didn't spend the money, you would still have it, and a lot more, to take it out at retirement with no penalties, double Duh.
But there still must be somebody to blame, where are they? I'm going to sue them!
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
EBGuy says
Nope, I was actually referring to the ~12 years that people live after retirement. 3% would let you stretch your $120k for about that long, providing about $15k/year (plus SSI). This is more than enough for somebody without a mortgage payment.
Peter P says
You are a sad person.
Ceffer says
I wouldn't go that far, but I do think that fund managers should be giving better advice and realistic projections for retirement. Not having funds in stocks when you're old, not having bonds when you're young, etc.
The guidelines that vanguard provides me for my 401k are laughably bad, and I'm a college educated professional. I can only imagine how confused some food service worker must be.
Moving away from pensions as a retirement model may prove to be the biggest collective financial disaster in our history. The majority of the baby boomers are going to retire with nothing, and will wind up putting pressure on social security to pay more.
Follow
Befriend
6 threads
650 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Vanguard usually recommends a 60/40 stock/bond split, even if you are older, on the presumption that you may still be in the stock market for another 20-30 years.
Inflation protected securities are boring, but provide a reasonably consistent 7.2 percent over time, and some insurance against inflation. However, they don't provide the casino like thrill when the stock market surges.
Follow
Befriend (9)
416 threads
4,138 comments
Baltimore, MD
Kevin says
Oh, you mean it's enough if you draw down your principle. IMO not a good idea, unless you like the idea of a 50% chance of outliving your assets and assume no real inflation.
Follow
Befriend (7)
30 threads
1,218 comments
31 male
Premium
I can only imagine how confused some food service worker must be.
Not nearly as confused as you seem to be about the reality of the world you live in, to think that food service workers have 401ks
Entering retirement with a house paid off free and clear, and 120k in savings, won't allow for much "living", unless you reside in somewhere with the absolute lowest cost of living in the country
You assume this allows for 15k of disposable income per year (considering that your SS check will cover your property tax and insurance, your car insurance, and your supplemental health insurance and the littany of drug copays). That leaves 40$ per day to live off of. I guess you can eat road kill and dumpster dive for spoiled hot dogs and stale bread, or just eat soiled cardboard. But if you don't have access to these things in walking distance in your old age, gas will eat into your 40 quickly. Let's hope there's no car repairs, or worse yet, house repairs. Then there's kittly litter and cat food, the cable bill, your utilities for heat and AC and keeping the lights on. Nevermind, there's no point in explaining this to someone so dense,,,carry on in your fantasy world and blame republicans
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
Ssi + $15k per year is more than the median household income. It is beyond adequate. I know several retirees getting by just fine on less.
Yes, food service workers have 401ks. Some even get a nice employer match.
Follow
Befriend (7)
30 threads
1,218 comments
31 male
Premium
Maximum monthly SS draw is 2500
Average monthly SS draw is 1200
so I agree, if you are ok with counting on dieing ass broke by your 78th birthday, you can live on a 120k 401k with a house paid off free and clear, and your social security check, so long as nothing unexpected happens. But you better be healthy and content with staring at your dining room wall and eating expired pb n j and dented can goods from the discount grocer, and live in a low cost of living area. But it certainly isn't the golden years of retirement that eneration was told that retirement would be
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
Kevin says
What's the point of retirement if you can't take back to back cruises with a butler?
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
errc says
You have no idea what things actually cost, do you?
Exclusive of housing, I support a wife and 4 children with a budget of $5000 a month. I save everything else. We live extremely well, in a high cost of living city. Half of that $5000 is for things that I won't need when my kids are grown.
When I was single, my total income was under $30k for years and I lived just fine -- including housing payments!
$20-30k a year is more than enough for a single / retiree couple to live on happily. Yes, including travel and recreation. The proof is the millions of retirees living on less.
The only people who get to spend their retirement in luxury are the people who spent their working lives in luxury.
There's nothing wrong with dying broke, either. You know you can't take it with you, right?
Follow
Befriend
9 threads
243 comments
Washington, DC
Kevin says
Not a problem if you know when you're going to die. Otherwise...
Follow
Befriend (4)
117 threads
17,655 comments
Premium
Perhaps Logan should not have run.
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
779 comments
Dublin, CA
Kevin says
It is perhaps possible to live way under your means while you are working, save/invest a bunch of money and generate great return and then cash in during retirement and then increase your standard of living. But it seems like a bad gamble to trade your best years for this potential payoff when you are way older and presumably have less energy to live life to the fullest.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
dublin hillz says
Exactly.
I max out my 401k and get a 50% match, but I save the rest of myoney for fun things like vacations and a nice house.
Follow
Befriend (13)
52 threads
2,639 comments
Premium
The solution is to increase wages, or allow for inflation.
The 1987-2007 idea of keeping wages flat but allowing easy credit backed by rapid rises in the stock market and/or real estate market failed.
Follow
Befriend (2)
61 threads
1,307 comments
Premium
dublin hillz says
Totally agree. Spending money when you are young is a hell of a lot better then spending when you are old. I really wish I have 200K less $$ right now as that would mean more memories and experience the last 10 years. We are not making that mistake again
From my perspective, maxing the 401K at 17K for both me and my spouse is enough, along with matching. Anything more is too much saving and not enough playing.
In any case, the rules are preety loose as far as 401K.
I max out becuase the incentives are great (tax deferal and matching)and I believe are untouchable from liens and bankrucpcy.
I'll withdraw if I have to since the 401K handcuff so far is not that significant. 1)Tax free first (hardship, home purchase) then 2) loan from yourself and pay some admin fee and then 3) penalty. The penalty is 10%, not enough to make people think twice.