“It’s going to be difficult because people like their 401(k) plans,” said Bill Sweetnam, a partner with the Groom Law Group, Washington.
The prospects for Ms. Ghilarducci’s proposal are considered dim by some lobbyists. For starters, while the existing retirement system in the U.S. is voluntary for employers, Ms. Ghilarducci’s proposal would require participation. In addition, while investments under existing retirement plans are managed by private-sector money managers, investments in Ms. Ghilarducci’s plan would be managed by the federal government.
“It’s a non-starter,” Paul Schott Stevens, president and chief executive officer of the mutual fund industry’s Investment Company Institute, Washington, said of Ms. Ghilarducci’s plan. “It’s puzzling in the (financial) course we are in now that the committee would give currency to that proposal.”
“We believe the current employer-sponsored system is a good one that should be built on,” added Jan Jacobson, senior counsel, retirement policy, American Benefits Council, Washington.
“It (Ms. Ghilarducci’s proposal) is subsidized by workers who die early and forfeit their assets,” added Ed Ferrigno, vice president of Washington affairs, Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America, Chicago. “I don’t think there’s any prospect for her exact version.
“There may be some elements in it that may end up being considered.”
“There isn’t anybody out there who is serious that is supporting that kind (Ms. Ghilarducci’s) of plan,” added Mark Ugoretz, president of the ERISA Industry Committee, a Washington-based group representing employers.
More 401(k) Discussion
November 1, 2008 By Leave a Comment