Click here for more information on the California state-run retirement fund that inspired the Virginia legislation. Source:  Georgetown Center for Retirement Incentives.

by Steve Haner

Next week’s reconvened General Assembly session will decide whether only full time employees of Virginia’s small businesses will be pushed into a new state-sponsored retirement savings plan, or part-time workers will join them there. 

The big question is whether this is something the state should be doing at all, but on that the Assembly has spoken. People who are not covered by an employer-sponsored retirement plan will be forced to send money to a state “Virginia Saves” account unless they take explicit steps to opt out.

Governor Ralph Northam’s amendment to expand House Bill 2174 will be voted on by legislators at the reconvened session April 7 and must be approved by both chambers. If rejected, he could then veto the bill, but that seems unlikely. More likely is that efforts to expand the program will continue in future sessions, as the sapling grows into a mighty oak.

The bill as introduced in the House of Delegates covered all workers but passed the Senate limited to employees with 30 or more hours per week. Increasing coverage to part-time employees greatly expands the pool of covered workers. It also greatly expands the pool of covered businesses, since to be drawn into the state-managed retirement mandate they need 25 eligible employees.

Expected to begin in July 2023, the program will require all covered employees to make payroll deductions into a retirement account managed by the Virginia College Savings Plan, already managing and investing higher education savings accounts. Employers are required to process their employees into the plan but are not at this point expected to provide matching funds.

Many if not most details still need to be worked out, including the exact percentage of the employee’s pay that will be deducted and the opt-out rules. In some of the handful of other states doing this, the deduction is 5% to 6% and the accounts are Roth IRAs, meaning there is no tax deduction for the contribution but when retirement comes, withdrawals are tax free. But this could also be a traditional IRA with the income tax deduction.

This is just one more example of full Democratic control of state government expanding state authority over the terms and conditions of employment. According to a report ordered by the 2020 General Assembly, about 45% of Virginia’s workforce or about 1.2 million employees are not covered by an employer-sponsored retirement plan.

The early data on three other states doing this does not indicate it will produce comfy retirements years. Researchers at Georgetown are compiling data on California, Oregon, and Illinois, who are about three years into their programs. Massachusetts and Washington State are preparing to jump in.

The employee opt-out rates in the three tracked programs range from just under 30% to almost 36%. The average account balance is only about $600 and about 20% of accounts were subject to withdrawals as well as contributions during the reporting periods.

The more frequent the withdrawals, obviously, the less value these accounts will accrue down the road. The pandemic recession might not have been the best time to judge this, but it doesn’t seem to have produced dramatic results in those other states. It probably won’t in Virginia, either.

Nothing is stopping any of these people from taking advantage of existing Roth or Traditional IRA accounts today. Small employers who offer such accounts as employee benefits have umpteen choices and get tax advantages to themselves as a strong incentive. People are making the decision not to save, as wise as that would be, often out of necessity.

Virginia’s minimum wage is about to go to $9.50 per hour, or about $20,000 per year for 40-hour weeks. Pulling another $1,000 out of those paychecks, with or without a tax advantage, is a significant loss of disposable income. Many won’t do it, and many who do will at some point seek the recoup the funds.

The planning reports leading up to passage claimed small employers were eager for such a state-managed option, but the bill was fiercely fought during the 2021 session with many business groups opposed. The same groups will resist the Governor’s amendment to expand this to every employee with any work hours at all.

The 2020 report supporting this move claimed that the state is the right entity to take on this function because: “6. Virginians generally trust the state to perform responsibly, particularly as it relates to fiduciary responsibilities and investment management.” Did anybody ask unemployment recipients, many still waiting for months for claims?

Major portions of the five-page bill are dedicated to preventing any liability on the part of the state. This is not a version of the Virginia Retirement System for private employees, or comparable to Social Security.

No act or undertaking of the Board is a debt or pledge of the full faith and credit of the Commonwealth or any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, and all such acts and undertakings are payable solely from the Program. The Commonwealth shall have no obligation for payment of benefits arising from this chapter.

And then:

In no event shall the Commonwealth, the Program, the Board, any Board member, or any participating employer be liable for any losses incurred by Program Trust investments or otherwise by any employee or other person as a result of participating in the Program.

If this all goes south one day, explaining and maintaining that lack of state accountability to account holders or to a federal judge may be a challenge.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

31 responses to “Virginia Will Mandate and Hold Retirement Savings”

  1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    We have the Va. 529 plan as grandparents and it is quite good, so I hope they do not mess it up.

    Hopefully if they develop a state system, any perks such as not taxing the bejesus out of retirement withdrawals would also be applied to those of us using the Tradition/Roth IRA options.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      That’s coming from Congress….and on those tax hikes, Virginia will happily conform. 🙂

  2. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    You can take this to the bank. Mary Morris and the other upper level managers for the Virginia College Savings Plan will be getting paid big bucks now. I expect them to get huge raises for their stewardship.
    https://www.openthebooks.com/virginia-state-employees/?Year_S=0&F_FieldName_S=grossPay&F_OrderBy_S=Descending&Emp_S=Virginia%20College%20Savings%20Plan
    Just like the VRS managers. Those guys are paid like kings.
    https://www.openthebooks.com/virginia-state-employees/?Year_S=0&F_FieldName_S=grossPay&F_OrderBy_S=Descending&Emp_S=Virginia%20Retirement%20System

  3. tmtfairfax Avatar
    tmtfairfax

    So long as the federal government, assisted by many state and local governments, purposely ignore enforcement of our immigration laws, there will be downward pressure on wages for Americans with lesser education and fewer job skills. But being woke is more important than advancing the welfare of people lawfully eligible to work.

  4. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I wonder what would happen if people could “opt-out” of Social Security – including Medicare?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      See Aesop, “The Grasshopper and the Ants.” Don’t need anything more deep or philosophical than that. (I thought about that for art, but worried about copyright.) Don’t need a PhD in economics. But is this a STATE responsibility?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        How much taxpayer money is spent on helping the elderly pay for their retirement years?

        If taxpayers end up paying instead of the person receiving the entitlements, are taxpayers entitled to require some “up-front” money from them?

        How many seniors would be broke and using most or all of their lifetime savings for Medicare care if we did not require them to pay FICA tax for Medicare and provide them with heavily subsidized Medicare Part B?

      2. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        True, Steve. But it’s not ants and grasshoppers. Ants eat dead grasshoppers. Got your A1?

        Reagan inadvertently created two income trajectories that one can use, in the sense of past performance, to predict what people need to save in an IRA to retire at 100% with SocSec as the only supplement.

        Believe it or not, it’s not much. Assuming investing at 4% annual return, a person working at minimum wage for his career needs to invest about $500/year and a person whose income was at the Cap needs to invest $1000 per $15,000 income to retire at 100% at age 65. It wouldn’t be difficult for the State to offer a 4% investment vehicle.

  5. The power to mandate without accepting responsibility for the outcome. An excellent gig if you can get it…

    1. PassTheBuckBureaucrat Avatar
      PassTheBuckBureaucrat

      You just described government qualifed immunity

  6. Baconator with extra cheese Avatar
    Baconator with extra cheese

    I’m sure these accounts will have relatively large maintenance fees with no real financial planning or management to help make the money grow.
    Will the state also be picking which investment options are available to ensure Equity? I suggest Dr Governor make it so Virginians can only invest their funds in companies owned and operated by non-whites. I would hate for citizens to be subjected to the shame associated with gains aquired through whiteness.

    1. You make an excellent point. The GA needs to create a “Virginia Saves Commission for Diverse, Equitable and Inclusive Investments”. I envision a nine to eleven member board, appointed by the governor, whose $250,000 per year salaries are covered by increased maintenance fees charged to the employees’ accounts. That will keep evil systemic racists from contributing to the financial success of employees in the Commonwealth.

    2. John Martin Avatar
      John Martin

      “I’m sure these accounts will have relatively large maintenance fees with no real financial planning or management to help make the money grow.” Do you always talk out of your ass?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Oh, it’s quite the admirable trait for Conservative types on BR… 😉

  7. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    This is a good step. People who would be affected are those who are not covered by a company’s retirement plan and many companies are no longer offering such plans. Yes, some companies offer Roth or traditional IRA plans, but most of these employees are probably not sophisticated enough to join one. There is a big difference between having the choice to opt in or opt out. This plan will provide an easy, less painful way to save for retirement. (Taking the money out early should be hard.)

    Social Security benefits will not be enough to sustain these folks when they retire. I know. If it were not for my Virginia retirement check each month, I would probably still be working. I realize that this plan is not the same as VRS and the payments will not be the same, but any supplement to the Social Security check will be very helpful.

    The reference to delayed unemployment checks and the implication that is an indication of the state’s unreliability is not a fair comparison. Workers had to apply for unemployment payments and meet certain criteria. When workers in the “Virginia Saves” program retire, they will notify the administering agency once that they have retired, fill out some paperwork, and the monthly checks will commence. The only criteria will be that they have money in the program and they are retired. If the notification is made sufficiently ahead of the actual retirement date, there will be no delay in the checks.

    The provisions relating to state liability are the same as, or very similar to, the provisions applying to the Virginia College Savings Plan. Therefore, these provisions are not unusual.

    I don’t understand the objections to this proposal. It is a benefit to ordinary workers. The only factor I would recommend be included in any amendments proposed by the Governor would be oversight by JLARC, similar to the oversight required of the Virginia College Savings Plan (Sec. 30-330 et seq.)

    1. “There is a big difference between having the choice to opt in or opt out.”

      Yes. My previous facetiousness aside, I have no fundamental objection to the state offering a voluntary retirement program to private-sector employees who are otherwise on their own regarding retirement planning.

      I also agree with your suggestion that oversight similar to that required of the college savings plan is in order.

      I’ll be back to adamantly oppose any efforts to make it mandatory, though…

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      I have that fundamental objection. The very idea of limited government is just dead. Big brother will protect you, cradle to grave. And despite all that verbiage, I’ll take the bet as to whether the taxpayers will be on the hook if the managers of these funds screw up or abscond with them.

      Waiting for somebody to once again ask, so why can’t we also do more lucrative investments will all those Social Security taxes? Why must that money be tied up in low interest bonds?

      1. If the taxpayers are to be on the hook for failure then I’m out.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Would taxpayers be on the hook to pay for those who did not save enough for their retirement if there was no Social Security and Medicare?

        Doesn’t Social Security and Medicare also protect taxpayers from having to pay for those who did not save?

        1. WayneS Avatar

          “Doesn’t Social Security and Medicare also protect taxpayers from having to pay for those who did not save?”

          No.

          Do you honestly not know where the money the government pays out in Social Security and Medicare benefits comes from? Here’s a hint – the government only has one source of revenue.

    3. Merchantseamen Avatar
      Merchantseamen

      What could go wrong? Sort of like VDOT losing some 2 billion dollars a decade ago.

    4. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Can’t begin to say how many folks that have their taxes down – RELY on their social security. If it was not for Social Security, many would live in poverty and would have to be supported by taxpayer-funded entitlements like Medicaid.

  8. This is classic Cass Sunstein “nudge” theory. The measure is designed to “nudge” people into participating in the savings plans by requiring them to opt out if they do not wish to participate. The opt-out provision represents a small barrier, and some people will stay in the plans who otherwise would never have opted in. The nudge is minimally invasive — certainly far less invasive than forcing people to participate.

    To my mind the optimum solution would be for state government to offer the program to small businesses, and they could participate as they choose. But I guess that wouldn’t have been a strong enough nudge.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Actually, the question is what do we do with folks who would not save for their retirement? Let them live in old folks homes, paid for by Medicaid – that is insufficient to pay for actual costs?

      See, we have theory then we have reality.

      What are we going to do with old people who did not set aside enough for their retirement and health care?

      theory and reality.

      1. Ethical Suicide Parlors, of course.

        Welcome to the Monkey House, Larry.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          No Monkey House , just folks who can’t remember how and why Social Security came to be in the first place AND that every single developed country on the face of the planet has the same approach.

          Only 3rd world countries don’t have a Social Security equivalent.

          Yet.. we still have those who SAY we’d be better off without it, in the name of “small government” or some such.

          You want small government? Get rid of Medicare as well as the government rule that says Employer-Provided health insurance cannot deny insurance to the old and sick.

          Don’t pay for Medicaid for folks to be in nursing homes…

          Don’t provide health insurance for kids of parents who can’t afford to.

          and a few more.

          take a vote and see who really wants “small govt”.

          1. WayneS Avatar

            Okay. I shall henceforth endeavor to keep the literary references to a minimum when responding to your comments using sardonic humor.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re: ” sardonic literary references”

            wait! what?

  9. Merchantseamen Avatar
    Merchantseamen

    Another Ponzi scheme Thievery at its finest with zero responsibility.

  10. PassTheBuckBureaucrat Avatar
    PassTheBuckBureaucrat

    Creeping bureaucracy

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      well.. “creeping” is the word for increasing taxpayer contributions to Medicaid to pay for folks who did not prepare adequately for their own needs…. and then we blame govt for having inadequate entitlements to pay for their needs….

Leave a Reply