Support through your toughest HR challenges: A network of 285,000 HR professionals.
Shawn Premer shows how doing the right thing for employees leads to positive business results.
Is your employee handbook keeping up with the changing world of work? With SHRM's Employee Handbook Builder get peace of mind that your handbook is up-to-date.
Build competencies, establish credibility and advance your career—while earning PDCs—at SHRM Seminars in 12 cities across the U.S. this spring.
#SHRM18 will expand your perspective – on your organization, on your career, and on the way you approach HR. Join us in Chicago June 17-20, 2018
Benchmarking plan fees every few years provides negotiating leverage
Members may download one copy of our sample forms and templates for your personal use within your organization. Please note that all such forms and policies should be reviewed by your legal counsel for compliance with applicable law, and should be modified to suit your organization’s culture, industry, and practices. Neither members nor non-members may reproduce such samples in any other way (e.g., to republish in a book or use for a commercial purpose) without SHRM’s permission. To request permission for specific items, click on the “reuse permissions” button on the page where you find the item.
Keeping participant fees in check has become a primary focus of defined contribution plan sponsors, new research shows. Benchmarking fees against what similar plans are paying can provide leverage when negotiating with service providers.
The number of employers that calculated 401(k) and similar plan fees last year rose to 83 percent, up from 79 percent in 2016, according to institutional investment firm Callan's
2018 Defined Contribution (DC) Trends Survey report. Responses were received from 152 large plan sponsors surveyed last fall.
After reviewing their plan management and investment fees, 40.5 percent of plan sponsors took actions such as renegotiating fees with the financial services firm administering their plans or replacing high-cost investment funds with lower-cost alternatives.
"We expect to see continued pressure on fees in 2018—both administrative and investment management fees," said Jamie McAllister, senior vice president at Callan. She noted that:
Despite the focus on reining in fees, "plan sponsors surprisingly didn't rank fee communications [with plan participants] as a high priority," McAllister said. She advised that they do so.
Investment management fees, typically expressed as fund expense ratios, are overwhelmingly paid by plan participants and deducted from their fund assets. The payment of plan administration fees is a bit more complex, the survey found.
Revenue Sharing Is Less Popular
The number of plan sponsors using mutual-fund revenue sharing to pay plan administrative expenses continues to decline, the survey found, dropping to 27.4 percent last year from 38.2 in 2016.
Revenue-sharing arrangements involve the transfer of revenue from select investment funds to service providers, typically through so-called
12b-1 fees, to offset plan expenses.
Asset-Based vs. Participant-Based Fees
Of those plans that are paying plan administration costs solely through an explicit fee, using a per-participant fee continues to be more popular than an asset-based fee, Callan found.
That finding, however, is at odds with recently published results from a 2016
survey of 590 defined contribution plans by the Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA), an employers group. PSCA found that:
One explanation for the different findings is that Callan's survey predominantly sampled large plans as compared with the PSCA survey. If a plan has over $100 million in assets, for instance, as asset-based fee of only a few basis points could end up being excessive.
More than half of companies conduct a formal review of fees annually, PSCA found, and 30.3 percent review them more frequently.
[SHRM members-only toolkit:
Designing and Administering Defined Benefit Retirement Plans]
Benchmarking Plan Fees
"As a plan sponsor, you are required to understand all of the fees that are associated with your organization's retirement plan benefit program," Ed Lynch, founder and CEO of Fiduciary Plan Governance, an employee benefits consultancy in Newbury, Mass.,
explained in a recent blog post. This is a challenge, he wrote, because "plan fee structures are often opaque, complicated (needlessly so) and, sometimes, downright misleading."
Plan sponsors are "also required to ensure the services for which the plan is paying are necessary, meaning the plan wouldn't function (or function as well) without them, and reasonable," he wrote. "Taken together these are one aspect of the 'expert standard' you are expected to meet to fulfill your plan management responsibilities."
The most effective way to meet this fiduciary requirement—and thereby to protect the plan from an excessive-fee lawsuit by plan participants—is by engaging in a request for proposals every three to five years, Lynch advised.
"The 401(k) and 403(b) markets are extremely competitive," he noted. While only a fraction of plans placed out to bid each year end up changing service providers, the process gives plan sponsors information with which to negotiate a better deal with their current providers, Lynch said.
A Range of Fees
According to the 2018 edition of the 401k Averages Book, a benchmarking guide, for a plan with 100 participants and $5 million in assets, average costs per participant last year were:
Combined, the average total bundled cost would be $638, or 1.28 percent of assets per participant.
As the chart below shows, the fees charged for providing services to plans of this size can be substantially higher or lower than the average.
Plan sponsors should benchmark their plan against those with similar characteristics, given that costs vary based on the number of participants and total assets, decreasing on a per-participant basis for larger plans. Fees much higher than the average for a similarly sized plan should be scrutinized.
Benchmarking Beyond Fees
Don't concentrate solely on benchmarking fees to the exclusion of other metrics, advised Michael Webb, CEBS, vice president at Cammack Retirement Group, a consultancy in New York City.
"This is not to say that benchmarking of fees is not extremely important," he noted. "It is, and plan sponsors should absolutely be comprehensively benchmarking fees. However, prudent plan sponsors will cover all of their bases by benchmarking other measures of a plan's success as well."
Plan sponsors that are not already doing so should consider benchmarking:
Related SHRM Articles:
Renegotiated 401(k) Plan Fees Fall to All-Time Low,
SHRM Online Benefits, October 2016
Fearing Lawsuits, 401(k) Plan Sponsors Are Focused on Fees, SHRM Online Benefits, May 2016
Fee Allocation in 401(k) Plans: Choose Your Model,
SHRM Online Benefits, February 2016
401(k)s Shifting to Fixed-Dollar, Per-Head Fees,
SHRM Online Benefits, October 2015
Was this article useful? SHRM offers thousands of tools, templates and other exclusive member benefits, including compliance updates, sample policies, HR expert advice, education discounts, a growing online member community and much more.
Join/Renew Now and let SHRM help you work smarter.
You have successfully saved this page as a bookmark.
Please confirm that you want to proceed with deleting bookmark.
You have successfully removed bookmark.
Please log in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Please sign in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Please purchase a SHRM membership before saving bookmarks.
An error has occurred
Recommended for you
Join SHRM's exclusive peer-to-peer social network
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies