How Much You Lose When Your Employer Cuts Your 401(k) Match

By Katy Marquardt

Posted: April 14, 2009

Many employees these days are realizing that the loss of a job benefit they once took for granted—the 401(k) match—is making a bit of a dent in their retirement portfolio. Over time, that dent could become a crater, according to new research from Hewitt Associates. For a younger worker who earns $50,000 and receives a full employer match of 50 cents to the dollar on 6 percent of his or her pay, the match cut means $16,000 less for retirement.

Although controversial, 401(k) match cuts are becoming an increasingly accepted way for companies to slash costs in this recession. And it's not just those in dire straights that are jettisoning their contributions—i.e. the Big Three automakers. Match-cutting is occurring throughout a wide range of industries, and those on board include FedEx, 7-Eleven, Eddie Bauer, Burton Snowboards, and AARP. In all, some 200 companies have announced plans to change or stop making contributions to their employees' 401(k)s or other defined benefit plans since June 2008, according to the Pension Rights Center's running tally.

You might be curious about how much these companies are actually saving by eliminating their 401(k) match. According to Hewitt, companies can save more than $1,500 per employee for a one-year match suspension (assuming the average employer match of 50 cents to the dollar on up to 6 percent of pay.) That adds up to $25 million in savings per year for a typical large company, $10 million for a midsize company, and $2 million for a small company.

Employer matches appear to have a psychological effect on employees. Research shows that when a 401(k) match is offered, more employees participate in a retirement plan. But on the flipside, when companies eliminate the match to their workplace savings plans, almost half see a drop in participation and deferral rates, Fidelity Investments found.

Just about every financial adviser will tell you that halting your own 401(k) contributions is a terrible idea. But here's an idea of the consequences in terms of dollars: If the above employee who earns $50,000 and contributes 6 percent stops adding to his or her 401(k) for just one year, he or she will have $48,000 less for retirement than if the contributions continued. And if that younger worker stops contributing for five years, the loss increases to a whopping $150,000.

So if your employer suspends your 401(k) match, what's the best move? Here are a few ideas:

Save more. With so many competing financial obligations these days, it's tempting to scale back retirement contributions. After all, it's money that you won't see for many years--decades for most investors. "You have to fight yourself right now," says John Carl, president of the Retirement Learning Center. "You've got rising expenses, wages being reduced, employers cutting [401(k)] matches. But this is the time to double-down your contributions if you can possibly afford it. If you can squeak even another $1,000 by, it can make a huge difference in the long term." According to Hewitt's research, the average employee can bridge the gap a 401(k) match suspension creates by upping their contribution by just 3 percentage points a year.

[See Why Young Investors Should Double Down.]

Consider a Roth IRA: This is particularly a good idea for younger investors. Unlike with a plain-vanilla IRA, you contribute to a Roth IRA after you pay taxes on it. Then, once you reach retirement, you won't owe any taxes on withdrawals. Strange as it may sound, think of yourself as a farmer, says Christian Cordoba, wealth advisor and principal at California Retirement Advisers in El Segundo, Calif.: "It's like paying tax on a seed and getting the harvest for free." Before you decide to open a Roth IRA, weigh your current tax rate against what you think your tax rate will be in the future. If you expect that you'll be in a higher tax bracket when you reach retirement, Roth is a good bet. But if you are making a ton of money now—and think your salary will likely be lower in retirement—you might want to delay taxes and stick with a traditional 401(k) or IRA. It's not an either-or decision, though. Consider hedging your bets by contributing to both, says Cordoba. "Say you're putting $5,000 a year into a 401(k)...then it might be prudent to put another $5,000 into a Roth IRA so you have half of your money tax-free, and on the second half, you pay tax."

SSI

The world is in big trouble.We need to help are own not these immigrants who come here,to collect social security.I have worked here since I was fourteen.I don't get enough from social security to make ends meet.What a shame.They need to stop giving our money to people who don't deserve it.And they need to stop buying them party stores ,gas stations ,and all the other businesses they pay for.What about Americans and veterans,where is there help,big laugh,I am so upset over all this cramp.Lets help our own.Patsy Hansford Clinton Twp .MICH

Patsy Hansford of MI @ Apr 29, 2009 09:42:20 AM

SSI

The world is in big trouble.We need to help are own not these immigrants who come here,to collect social security.I have worked here since I was fourteen.I don't get enough from social security to make ends meet.What a shame.They need to stop giving our money to people who don't deserve it.And they need to stop buying them party stores ,gas stations ,and all the other businesses they pay for.What about Americans and veterans,where is there help,big laugh,I am so upset over all this cramp.Lets help our own.Patsy Hansford Clinton Twp .MICH

Patsy Hansford of MI @ Apr 29, 2009 09:41:47 AM

IRAs and 401(k)s replace SS

GOP day for me...

Our Social Security

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program..

He promised:

1.) That participation in the program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the General Operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are Now receiving a Social Security check every month --

And then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put

Away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------------------------------

Q: Which

Political Party took Social Security from the Independent 'Trust Fund' and

put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A:

It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically Controlled House and Senate.

---------------

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax

Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

---------------

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the 'tie-breaking', deciding vote as

President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

---------------

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving

Annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.

Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments!

The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

----------------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell us that the Republicans want to take our Social Security away!

Mart of KS @ Apr 24, 2009 22:06:39 PM

Add Your Thoughts
About You

advertisement

U.S. News Rankings & Research

Best Places

Search for the perfect place for you and your family.

Best Careers

Careers that offer strong outlooks and high job satisfaction.

Car Rankings & Reviews

Make an informed choice when shopping for your next car.

advertisement

Slide Shows

10 Hard-Hit Housing Markets Ready to Rebound

Even with home prices still falling at the national level, a number of markets are gearing up for a rebound.

advertisement

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

A weekly insider's guide to politics and policy — in a multimedia, digital format. 52 issues for $19.95!

U.S. News & World Report

6 months of U.S. News & World Report's print edition for only $15. Save up to 67% off the cover price!