WALKER: A watershed 401(k) deadline is hurtling our way

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Brent WalkerApril 1 will be a significant date for employers with 401(k) or other retirement plans. This is the deadline for their plan’s service providers to provide written disclosures about services provided, costs charged and their fiduciary status to the retirement plan.

It is a watershed event for the 401(k) plan industry, which is notorious for its lack of transparency around costs and services. For a long time, there has been a trend to bury the plans’ administrative costs within high-expense investment choices or insurance company annuity wrappers with no disclosure on the reimbursements paid to plan providers. As a result, many employers do not know what they are really paying for their retirement plan.

This all changes thanks to the U.S. Department of Labor’s new disclosure rule known as Regulation 408(b)(2). Service providers that must follow this rule include fiduciaries, investment advisers, record keepers and brokers. Simply put, anyone who gets paid in the operation of the 401(k) plan must disclose his or her compensation.

Fiduciaries of retirement plans must evaluate the expenses paid by their plans for services and investments. In fact, it is both a fiduciary breach and a prohibited transaction to allow your plan to pay more than reasonable expenses.

Plan fiduciaries may include the employer’s (also known as “plan sponsor”) retirement plan committee, plan trustee, investment adviser and all individuals exercising discretion in the administration of the plan. While these new rules and disclosures are a good thing, the result is that plan sponsors will face both higher expectations and legal responsibilities.

As game-changing as April 1 promises to be, June 1 could prove even more profound. Starting in June, all plan participants must be told something they probably never knew—how much they pay each quarter for their 401(k) plan. And this is not just in percentages. They must receive quarterly statements showing the dollar amount of plan-related expenses actually charged or deducted from their accounts.

If employers do not take a proactive stance on this issue, problems may ensue. Many participants believe they pay nothing for the services provided for their 401(k).

Remember that this disclosure follows a period in 2008 in which most participants experienced severe investment losses and may not have recovered those losses yet. It is likely there will be a number of concerned participants over these costs.

These concerned employees will likely camp out at their plan sponsor’s door, wanting to know why they are paying so much. If the plan sponsor does not have a good answer to these questions, and without proper communication and education, the perception could evolve that the retirement plan is not attractive and the whole purpose of the benefit plan is diminished.

And it is quite possible that the plan sponsor might not have good answers. Because 401(k) plan costs have been hidden for so long, it is no surprise that costs vary widely from one provider to the next. It is easy in such a system for companies to overpay for their retirement plan since they never get an invoice and the expenses are all taken from the plan assets.

So if you have a plan that is much more expensive than what you think it is, you want to know that ahead of time before the information gets out to your employees.

Make sure you receive cost and service disclosures as soon as possible in advance of the April 1 deadline to give ample review time before the June 1 participant disclosure deadline.

And when you receive the disclosures, you have a duty to review and evaluate them. Is the cost of the plan reasonable in relation to the services being received? Are the services appropriate for the plan? Are they meeting the needs of the fiduciaries and participants? Are there conflicts of interests and, if so, are they being managed properly?

While transparency on costs and services is good, it is up to plan sponsors and fiduciaries to use this information to better serve the participants. Remember, the ultimate goal of a retirement plan is to help employees retire successfully. Reasonable costs, good investment choices, and solid education on how to use these investments are the foundation of a good retirement plan.•


Brent Walker, certified financial planner, is president of WealthPoint Advisors, an Indianapolis-based, fee-only wealth management firm. Views expressed are the writer’s. He can be reached at 818-1040 or bwalker@wealthpointadv.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1