On Senate Floor, Portman Highlights Need for Senate Action to Protect Worker Pensions, Help More Americans Save for Retirement
Today on the
Transcript of his remarks can be found below and a video can be found here: https://youtu.be/Tv1RjwSDUZU
"Mr. President, I'm on the floor tonight to talk about retirement security, something everybody cares about. Who doesn't want peace of mind in retirement? When I'm back home, I hear about it all the time partly because a lot of people are worried about the costs they're going to have in retirement, including long-term care costs. A lot of people are seeing their parents, grandparents living longer, healthier lives yet they don't have the retirement nest egg to be able to keep up. We need to do something to help on that.
"An IRA, even if you're not at work, you can take out an individual IRA. You get a tax deduction. That's good. And then some companies have defined benefit plans, the old pension plans. Those are great if you have one. Not as many workers do anymore but we want to preserve those that are left. If you're a federal government employee, you do have the federal employees' pension plan which works for them. All this together is incredibly important right now for the people I represent and people are worried about it. Some of the statistics are actually pretty scary that a lot of people that work for small businesses don't have access to a plan altogether. They just don't have any opportunity to get a retirement savings plan. About 50 percent of workers in these small businesses are in that category, as an example.
"Over time we've tried to address some of these issues. Right now, fortunately, the
"In fact, if you look at what's happened since then, total retirement savings have increased from about
"We also need to fix some outdated regulations that just don't make sense in today's world. I'm chair of what's called the Subcommittee on Retirement in the
"Let me back up and give you some of the troubling facts about why we need to do something here. First of all, less than half of employees, again that's small businesses with less than 50 workers, less than half of those workers have access to a plan. So the problem is really in our smaller businesses. We know that. Larger businesses all tend to have a 401(k). Many have a defined contribution plan. Others have a defined benefit plan like a pension. But they tend to have retirement options for workers but many small businesses do not. Even when workers have access to a plan, still only 34 percent participate. So among small businesses, fewer plans than there should be but also fewer people participating. Only 22 percent of part-time workers are in plans. Increasingly in our economy, people have part-time jobs, may have a few part-time jobs but they don't have a retirement plan in any of them. By the way, when you look at this in terms of the folks who are not participating, low-income Americans also are not participating as you would want. 22 percent only of low-income families are participating in retirement plans. Many of them don't have the disposable income to be able to contribute. We'll talk about that in a second, how to address that problem.
"And then the final problem I want to mention is not to do with the small businesses or part-time workers or low-income workers. It has to do with what we talked about at the beginning which is people actually outliving their retirement. Let's face it, we're living longer and healthier lives as Americans. That's a good thing. But a lot of people didn't or couldn't plan for that. So they may have thought, I've got a nice little nest egg here, a 401(k). I'm going to retire at age 65. When they're in their late 80's or 90's, they realize there wasn't enough set aside. Here's an opportunity for us to address that as well.
"Earlier this year we introduced this legislation,
"First, to increase this low 22 percent coverage among low-income workers, it expands what's called the Savers Credit. This has worked well but it is not refundable now meaning that for a lot of people who are low income, they can't take advantage of it. They don't have the income tax liability particularly with the new tax bill, frankly, where a lot of people have lower taxes so they don't have the ability to take the deduction but they can use a credit. We change the Savers Credit to expand it so it's more usable and we make it refundable but not refundable to individuals but to a retirement account. You don't want to provide more funding out there that is not going to be used for this correct purpose of retirement. It has to go into your retirement account. In addition it increases the credit amount available to a lot of low-income savers. This is really going to help on getting people who again are working but they're not saving, to be able to save for retirement.
"The bill also addresses the problem of only 22 percent of part-time workers being in a plan. It requires employers to allow part-time workers who have completed two years of service to participate in a 401(k) plan. This is a big deal to the
"It allows employers to make matching contributions to the 401(k) accounts of employees who are paying off student loans who otherwise wouldn't receive a full match. Why? Because they have to choose between paying down the student loan debt they've got and saving for retirement. I really like this idea. It's an innovative one. It was first proposed by Senator
"To get at this problem we talked about a few small businesses having plans, Portman-Cardin increases the tax credit that small businesses receive for starting a retirement plan. It's
"We think this is going to be a big deal in small businesses and we think it's worth giving them a tax credit for, kind of an innovative idea. And for small businesses, our bill also reduces some of the burdensome and duplicative regulations that are associated with administering the plan. For a lot of small businesses, they don't have a lawyer or general counsel. They don't have, you know, a professional who can help on this. But the HR person would sure like to have the ease of administration of these plans. So we do that which is important to get more of these small businesses offering these plans.
"The problem we have talked about with Americans living longer and healthier lives and being in danger therefore of outliving their retirement, we also address. And for those who follow this closely because you're getting close to retirement, pay attention here because this could be helpful. To help folks who have accumulated retirement savings preserve those nest eggs, to help preserve your hard earned nest egg, the bill actually changes what's called the minimum distribution rules. If you're in your late 60's or maybe turning 70, you may be shocked to have just found out that, guess what, that 401(k) you've got or the IRA you've got, you have to start distributing money out of it under what's called the minimum required distribution rules.
"My dad was a little surprised by that, because he was still working at age 70 and a half, when you have to start doing that. A lot of people back home are still working at age 70 and a half. And they want to keep their retirement nest egg there and they want to keep building it up. They hope to live a long life and they want to make sure they have something in there. But instead, no when you're 70 and a half, you got to start taking it out and paying taxes on it. We changed that from 70 and a half to 75. We do it over a few years because it is an expensive provision frankly in this bill. We pay for it through other means. But the idea is, you want to let people keep that money in their nest egg. And by the way, if your nest egg is
"Our new Portman-Cardin retirement legislation has the potential to fundamentally reshape for the better how a large number of American folks approach their retirement planning. That's a good thing, and I look forward to getting it passed through the
"It doesn't go to 75 and it doesn't have the
"Then there's this final bill that I was talking about. It is part of the SECURE Act, which is on the floor right now ready to go. It's also been introduced separately. And this is to address an urgent problem right now that's affecting over 450,000 Americans. Now, it gets a little complicated here, as retirement plans do sometimes. But these are people who are in these defined benefit plans, the pension plans. And they are in businesses that have shifted from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan like a 401(k). Now these are businesses who have said, 'We are not going to have additional pensions anymore, we're going to go to a 401(k) where individuals contribute and individuals control their account.' Now what happened in some of these businesses is they said, 'But if you're already in a defined benefit plan, you can stay in it. We're going to freeze your plan going forward, so new employees can't go into it, but you can stay in your plan.' And I think that's fair. Let people who are in the plan, who paid in all these years continue to stay in that defined benefit plan as they retire.
"The problem is that inadvertently, the rules with regard to pensions are tripping these people up. Because there's something called the nondiscrimination income testing. In other words, you can't have too many of the benefits go into a defined benefit plan to people who are more on the high-income as we spread out. The people that are left in these plans are people who are older, because the new employees have had to go to the defined contribution plan. So it is an older group of employees, and, therefore, more highly compensated because they've been given raises over time. So they trigger this nondiscrimination income testing and they lose their benefits. They can't continue to accrue benefits. That's just wrong. These are people who have played by the rules, done everything right, through no fault of their own, but through this quirky regulation, which was never meant to address this kind of an issue, they're facing the very real possibility -- 450,000-plus -- people that they're going to lose their benefits through no fault of their own. They should be able to continue to accrue benefits and get this retirement plan that they have worked so hard to be able to enjoy. Nobody really disagrees. Again, it is in the SECURE Act. We've introduced it separately.
"Around here you run what's called a hotline with your fellow senators to see, does anybody object to this, if it is a noncontroversial piece of legislation. So we did that with this. And, guess what? This legislation was approved by everybody on the Republican side. Nobody had a problem with it. Again, it's just a question of being sure that these flawed rules aren't inadvertently hurting these 450,000 Americans. And then we ran the hotline on the Democratic side and it was also very popular over there but at least one person objected. Maybe more but at least one. So we're trying to work on this together to try to get it done and we found out the objection is not based on the legislation at all. No one has any problem with the legislation. It's based on their interest in not allowing anything that's in the SECURE Act to be done separately because they want to be sure the SECURE Act gets done. I want to be sure the SECURE Act gets done, too. It is an important bill.
"It is a first step in the right direction as we said. But let's not take it out on these employees. If we don't fix it, then by this year end, like in the next couple months here, these people are going to lose their benefits. So my hope is that now that we have tested the waters and found out that it's not controversial among my colleagues, let's just bring it up under unanimous consent, get it done, and then let's move on and do the SECURE Act, too. So my hope is that we'll be able to do that.
"It's been introduced again as a stand-alone bill. So it's not like it's the other parts of the SECURE Act that are only in the SECURE Act that stand alone. So it shouldn't violate anybody's sense of fairness to say, let's deal with this separately and get it done. I want to thank Chairman
"Again, of the 50 plus revisions that are in there, there's a lot that really help the people that I represent back in



American Property Casualty Insurance Association Issues Statement on U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement
Arkansas Insurance Department Issues Statement on Individual Health Insurance Policies
Advisor News
- Iowa Senate sends health insurer tax increase to governor’s desk
- Temporary tax hike to fill Iowa Medicaid gap heads to governor’s desk
- Iowa Medicaid temporary tax plan draws sharp public opposition
- EDITORIAL: Make responsible tax cuts, increases
- Iowa House backs temporary tax hike to fill Medicaid gap
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- LIMRA: Final retail annuity sales total $464.1 billion in 2025
- How annuities can enhance retirement income for post-pension clients
- We can help find a loved one’s life insurance policy
- 2025: A record-breaking year for annuity sales via banks and BDs
- Lincoln Financial launches two new FIAs
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Boston Mayor Wu, unions strike deal to limit GLP-1 weight loss drug coverage amid ‘skyrocketing’ health costs
- Dr. Oz: Obesity, loneliness are enemies of public health
- A Medicaid 'spend down' may get an older person long-term care coverage but isn't a DIY strategy
- STEPHEN MOORE: Republicans can win on health care affordability
- Iowa Senate sends health insurer tax increase to governor’s desk
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- Securian Financial Launches FlexTech™ to Make Embedded Protection Simple, Fast and Convenient
- How outdated beneficiary choices can derail your plans
- Best’s Commentary: Proposed Risk-Based Capital Change in Hong Kong Could Bolster Market’s Global Standing
- Retirement Tax Worries on the Rise Among Americans, Allianz Life Study Finds
- Lincoln Financial Recognized for Leadership in the Advancement of Long-Term Care Planning
More Life Insurance News