We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,244)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (422)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (804)
  • Wink's Articles (354)
  • Wink's Inside Story (275)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • Who Likes Immediate Annuities?

    February 15, 2017 by The Employee Benefit Research Institute

    WASHINGTON, February 14, 2017 — Which groups of people prefer immediate annuities? A new analysis by the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) finds that it’s those at the lowest and highest ends of the wealth spectrum.

    Why? bBecause those with inadequate assets might value a regular stream of income very highly and those with the most might expect to live longer and can also afford it even after leaving a bequest.

    The EBRI analysis also suggests a possible reason why demand for annuities is so low. “A large majority—more than 70 percent—of households that are currently receiving Social Security benefit already get at least three-quarters of their income in the form of annuities, from Social Security, employer-provided pensions, and other annuity contracts,” said Sudipto Banerjee, EBRI research associate and author of the study. “The fact that most retirees are already highly annuitized might help explain the lack of demand for additional annuity income.”

    With the decline of defined benefit (DB) pension plans, there has been some renewed interest in providing other options for guaranteed income flows to American workers. But demand for annuities has remained low in the United States, and the EBRI analysis was undertaken to understand the public’s preferences for such products, with a focus on how savings affect preferences for immediate annuities (which begin paying out a regular stream of income as soon as they are purchased).

    Top & Bottom Preferences

    EBRI used a unique experiment from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to assess the effect of savings on the preference for immediate annuities among retirees (ages 65 and above). Regression results show that effect of savings on annuity preferences follow a U-shaped pattern, meaning that people at the bottom- and top-ends of the savings distribution (those with the least and most assets) have a stronger preference for such annuities than people in the middle of the savings distribution. But, savings has a large positive effect on preference for annuities only for those in the highest-savings quintile (the top 20 percent in the wealth distribution).

    The study notes that possible explanations for such behavior could be:

    • People at the bottom of the savings distribution are very likely to run out of money in retirement and thus have a stronger preference for annuities.
    • People at the top end of the savings distribution expect longer lifespans and can afford annuities even after leaving a financial legacy for their heirs.
    • People in the middle generally face more uncertainty about their retirement adequacy and so they are more likely to hold on to their savings for precautionary purposes and perhaps also for some hope of leaving a financial legacy for their heirs.

    The results also show clear preference for annuitizing smaller shares of assets (or partial annuitization). When compared with their current financial situation, only 16.5 percent of retirees (ages 65 and above) preferred full annuitization of their assets, compared with 43.0 percent who preferred a one-quarter annuitization.

    The full report, “How Does Level of Savings Affect Preference for Immediate Annuities?” is published in the Feb. 8, 2017 EBRI Issue Brief, online here.

    – See more at: http://www.lifehealth.com/likes-immediate-annuities/?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=e-newsLink&utm_content=impact#sthash.HjJhzAI5.dpuf

     

    The Employee Benefit Research Institute is a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit research institute based in Washington, DC, that focuses on health, savings, retirement, and economic security issues. EBRI conducts objective research and education to inform plan design and public policy, does not lobby and does not take policy positions. The work of EBRI is made possible by funding from its members and sponsors, which include a broad range of public, private, for-profit and nonprofit organizations.

     

    Originally Posted at Advisor Magazine on February 14, 2017 by The Employee Benefit Research Institute.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency