Millions of workers are unprepared for the financial challenges that will face them during retirement. With the gradual disappearance of traditional pension plans from their employers, most workers can at best hope for coverage under 401(k) plans and similar employer-sponsored plan options that require them to make their own contributions toward their retirement savings. For those whose employers choose not to provide such a plan, workers have little recourse.

But the California state government is seeking to change that. Less than a month ago, Gov. Jerry Brown signed the law that created the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust, and assuming that the program survives a market analysis study, gets a sign-off from federal officials, and once again gets approval from the California legislature, the law will go into effect.

How it works
The program envisioned by the California law is relatively simple. Under the law, employers that have five or more employees and don't offer their own employer-sponsored retirement plan would automatically withhold 3% of each employee's paycheck and send that money to the Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust. There, it would be held in an IRA for the benefit of each worker. Workers would have the option to opt out of the program or to change their contribution percentages from the default 3% level.


The law calls for a slate of appointees to choose an investment manager to invest funds within the Trust. The program would allow the manager to invest up to 50% of assets in stocks -- with bonds, real-estate securities, insurance products, and mutual funds among the other permitted investment options. At the same time, however, it would require the manager to take steps to ensure that the value of participants' accounts would be protected, specifically contemplating the use of annuities or other insurance-based mechanisms to do so.

Pros and cons
Proponents of the measure point to several attractive attributes that the Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust would provide. The program would be portable, allowing employees to change jobs from one eligible employer to another without having to switch account providers or do cumbersome rollovers. With provisions for guaranteed return of principal, the program arguably balances risk and reward in a way that matches what workers want.

But opponents see the program as an attempted money-grab for the California Public Employees' Retirement System, which many believe would be named the investment manager under the law. With an estimated $7 billion going into the Trust in its first year, the money would represent just a small piece of the roughly $233 billion that CalPERS manages in public pension accounts. Despite assurances that money would be held separately, some are fearful that commingling could result in a transfer from private-sector employees to public employees.

Will it work?
Few would argue that people shouldn't have more retirement savings options. The new law doesn't really do anything that the workers affected by it couldn't do themselves, simply by setting up IRA accounts of their own and making automatic contributions. It does make retirement saving slightly easier for those who lack bank accounts and who wouldn't meet minimum initial investment requirements.

Moreover, concerns about CalPERS appear to be overstated. Looking at the pension fund's most recent investment report from 2011 (link opens PDF), you'll find that fund managers appear to follow a simple buy-and-hold strategy for much of its portfolio. That has produced gains on many stocks, although you'll find inevitable losses, including declines from the fund's book value on investments in financial stocks AIG (NYS: AIG) , Bank of America (NYS: BAC) , and Citigroup (NYS: C) . Moreover, with a global reach, the portfolio also includes beaten-down European stocks Banco Santander (NYS: SAN) and France Telecom (NYS: FTE) , along with plenty of other former high-fliers in international markets. Over the long haul, the fund has generated returns of 8.4% over the past 20 years.

Perhaps the most valid criticism of the program is the fact that 3% contributions aren't likely to add up to very much, especially for the lower-income workers that the state targeted in the law. In the fight to provide retirement security, though, every little bit is a step in the right direction.

CalPERS may have gotten hurt by Bank of America during the financial crisis, but can it recover its losses? To learn more about the most-talked-about bank out there, check out our in-depth company report on Bank of America. The report details whether Bank of America is a smart pick now, including three reasons to buy and three reasons to sell. Just click here to get access.

The article California's Retirement Savings Revolution originally appeared on Fool.com.

Fool contributor Dan Caplinger owns warrants on AIG. You can follow him on Twitter @DanCaplinger. The Motley Fool owns shares of AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, and France Telecom, as well as having options positions on AIG. Motley Fool newsletter services recommend AIG and France Telecom. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 - 2012 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Basics of Diversification

Learn one of the fundamental concepts of building a portfolio.

View Course »

Reading a Stock Quote

Learn to read the ingredients of a stock.

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

1 Comment

Filter by:
Frank_Keegan

First, check CalPERS and CalSTRS investment results through Q2 of this year. They fell so far behind they never will catch up. Politicians must tap a new artery of private money to push the government pension bomb far enough into the future so they and their cronies have time to flee the scene of their fiscal crimes. Secure Choice is a smooth way to do that. To any workers or small businesses delusional enough to pump money into this beast, be assured that 30 years from now when you try to get promised benefits, your money will be gone. As numerous recent studies from economics and legal experts across the political spectrum show, "Moral Hazard," corruption, lack of accountability and the occult nature of government defined benefit pension systems make them inherently unsustainable. Don't fall for this. It requires further legislative action, so you can stop it. If you cannot stop it, do not let anyone force you into it.
http://www.statebudgetsolutions.org/blog/detail/viewpoints-private-pension-plan-would-raid-taxpayers-to-fill-public-pension-gap

October 21 2012 at 10:46 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply