individual retirement account balances, contributions, … multiple independent security audits and...
TRANSCRIPT
A monthly research report from the EBRI Education and Research Fund © 2015 Employee Benefit Research Institute
May 2015 • No. 414
Individual Retirement Account Balances, Contributions, and Rollovers, 2013; With Longitudinal Results 2010–2013: The EBRI IRA Database By Craig Copeland, Ph.D., Employee Benefit Research Institute
A T A G L A N C E
Individual retirement accounts (IRAs) are a vital component of U.S. retirement savings, holding nearly one- quarter of all retirement plan assets in the nation. A substantial portion of these IRA assets originated in other tax-qualified retirement plans, such as defined benefit (pension) and 401(k) plans, and were moved to IRAs through rollovers from those plans.
As part of the EBRI Center for Research on Retirement Income (EBRI CRI), the EBRI IRA Database is an ongoing project that collects data from IRA-plan administrators across the nation. For year-end 2013, it contained information on 25.8 million accounts owned by 20.6 million unique individuals, with total assets of $2.46 trillion.
The average account balance decreased from $91,864 in 2010 to $87,668 in 2011 before increasing to $119,804 in 2013—an increase of 30.4 percent from 2010 to 2013, and 14.1 percent from 2012 to 2013. The median (mid-point) followed the same pattern, going from $25,296 to $23,785 to $32,179, representing increases of 27.2 percent between 2010 and 2013 and 15.0 percent between 2012 and 2013.
The percentage of individuals who contributed to their IRA was relatively consistent ranging from 12.1 percent in 2010 to 13.8 percent in 2013. The percentage of individuals owning Traditional IRAs who contributed to them rose from 5.2 percent in 2010 to 7.0 percent in 2013. In contrast, the percentage of Roth owners who contributed ranged from 24.0 percent to 26.0 percent from 2010–2013.
The percentage of contributors who contributed the maximum rose from 43.5 percent in 2010 to 53.5 percent in 2012. However, with the increase in the maximum allowable contribution in 2013, the percentage contributing the maximum overall fell to 43.3 percent in 2013. The average contribution increased from $3,335 in 2010 to $4,145 in 2013.
When examining the same individuals that were in the database each year from 2010 to 2013, the median percentage change in these individuals’ account balances was a 33.6 percent increase. Furthermore, at the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile, increases of 2.6 percent and 57.1 percent resulted.
The growth rates for Roth IRA balances were higher both overall and by age and gender. The median Roth IRA increase was 51.6 percent from 2010 to 2013, compared with 28.3 percent for all Traditional IRAs. A major factor in these different rates of growth was that new contributions make up a larger portion of the Roth IRAs than they do for Traditional IRAs, which magnified the impact of contributions. In addition, Roth IRAs are not subject to required minimum distributions for those older than 70-½ years, as are Traditional IRAs.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 2
Craig Copeland is senior research associate at the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI). This Issue Brief was written with assistance from the Institute’s research and editorial staffs. Any views expressed in this report are those of the author and should not be ascribed to the officers, trustees, or other sponsors of EBRI, Employee Benefit Research Institute-Education and Research Fund (EBRI-ERF), or their staffs. Neither EBRI nor EBRI-ERF lobbies or takes positions on specific policy proposals. EBRI invites comment on this research.
Copyright Information: This report is copyrighted by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI). It may be used without permission, but citation of the source is required.
Recommended Citation: Craig Copeland, “Individual Retirement Account Balances, Contributions, and Rollovers, 2013; With Longitudinal Results 2010–2013: The EBRI IRA Database,” EBRI Issue Brief, no. 414 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2015).
Report availability: This report is available on the Internet at www.ebri.org
Data Security
The Employee Benefit Research Institute’s (EBRI’s) retirement databases (the EBRI/ICI Participant-Directed Retirement Plan Database, the EBRI IRA Database, the EBRI Integrated Defined Contribution/IRA Database) have been the subject of multiple independent security audits and have been certified to be fully compliant with the ISO-27002 Information Security Audit standard. Moreover, EBRI has obtained a legal opinion that the methodology used meets the privacy standards of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. At no time has any non-public personal information that is personally identifiable, such as Social Security Number, been transferred to or shared with EBRI. None of the three databases allows identification of any individuals or plan sponsors.
Table of Contents Data Security ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Data ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4
IRA Types ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Average IRA Balances ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Contributions ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
Rollovers ............................................................................................................................................................. 11
Comparison of Account Balances and Contributions 2010–2013 .............................................................................. 16
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................................... 28
About IRAs ......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Endnotes ............................................................................................................................................................ 33
Figures Figure 1, Distribution of IRA Types by Accounts and Individuals, 2013 ....................................................................................... 5
Figure 2, Distribution of IRA Ownership, by Various Demographic Characteristics and IRA Type, 2013 ..................................... 6
Figure 3, Average IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by IRA Type, 2013 .................................................................. 8
Figure 4, Median IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by IRA Type, 2013 ................................................................... 8
Figure 5, Average IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by Age, 2013 .......................................................................... 9
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 3
Figure 6, Median IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by Age, 2013 ............................................................................ 9
Figure 7, Average and Median Individual IRA Balance, by IRA Type and Age, 201310
Figure 8, Average and Median IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by Gender, 2013 ............................................... 12
Figure 9, Average and Median Individual IRA Balance, by Gender and Age, 2013 ................................................................... 12
Figure 10, Average and Median Individual IRA Balance, by IRA Type and Gender, 2013 ......................................................... 13
Figure 11, Percentage of Those Owning a Traditional or Roth IRA Who Contributed to It and the Percentage of Those
Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum Allowable Amount, by All Accounts and Individuals, 2013 ..................... 13
Figure 12, Percentage of Traditional or Roth IRA Accounts That Received a Contribution, by Age of Account Owner, 2013 ... 14
Figure 13, Percentage of Traditional or Roth IRA Accounts That Received a Contribution That Received the Maximum
Allowable Contribution, by Age of Account Owner, 2013 ............................................................................................. 14
Figure 14, Percentage of Traditional or Roth IRA Accounts That Received a Contribution, by Gender of Account Owner,
2013 ............................................................................................................................................................................. 15
Figure 15, Percentage of Traditional or Roth IRA Accounts That Received a Contribution That Received the Maximum
Contribution, by Gender of Account Owner, 2013 ........................................................................................................ 15
Figure 16, Distribution of the IRAs Receiving Contributions, by IRA Type and Age and Gender of Account Owner, 2013 ........ 17
Figure 17, Distribution of Traditional and Roth IRAs Receiving Contributions, by Age and Gender of Account Owner, 2013 ... 19
Figure 18, Distribution of Contribution and Rollover Amounts to Traditional and Roth IRAs, 2013 ............................................ 19
Figure 19, Distribution of Traditional and Roth IRAs That Received a Rollover, by Age and Gender of Account Owner,
2013 ............................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 20, Distribution of Those Rolling Over to a Traditional IRA, by Age and Gender, 2013 .................................................. 20
Figure 21, Distribution of Rollovers by Amounts to Traditional IRAs, by Number and Value of the Rollovers, 2013 .................. 21
Figure 22, Distribution of Rollovers by Amounts to Roth IRAs, by Number and Value of the Rollovers, 2013 ........................... 21
Figure 23, Average and Median Individual IRA Balances, by IRA Type, Age, and Gender, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 ......... 22
Figure 24, Percentage of Individuals Contributing to Their IRA and of Those Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum,
2010–2013 ................................................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 25, Average Contributions to a Traditional or Roth IRA, by Age and Gender, 2010–2013 .............................................. 24
Figure 26, Distribution and Average and Median Individual IRA Balances of a Consistent Sample of Individuals, by IRA Type,
Age, and Gender, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 ........................................................................................................... 24
Figure 27, Distribution of Individual IRA Balance Changes for a Consistent Sample of Individuals from 2010 to 2013, by IRA
Type, Age, and Gender ................................................................................................................................................ 25
Figure 28, Distribution of IRA Owners by Account Balance for a Consistent Sample from 2010–2013 ..................................... 25
Figure 29, Percentage of Individuals Contributing to Their IRA and of Those Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum for a
Consistent Sample of Individuals from 2010–2013 ...................................................................................................... 26
Figure 30, Percentage of a Consistent Sample of IRA Owning Individuals from 2010–2013 Who Contribute in Various Number
of Years, by IRA Type, Age, Gender, and Account Balance ........................................................................................ 27
Figure 31, Percentage of Individuals, by IRA Type, Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum for a Different Number of
Years, Depending on Number of Years of Contributing, for a Consistent Sample of IRA Owners from 2010–2013 .... 28
Figure 32, Average IRA Contribution and the Average Contribution of Those Who Contributed in All Four Years for a
Consistent Sample of Individuals from 2010–2013, by IRA Type and Age, Gender, and Account Balance ................ 30
Box Figure A, Sources of Estimated Total U.S. Retirement Plan Assets, 2012 ......................................................................... 31
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 4
Individual Retirement Account Balances, Contributions, and Rollovers, 2013; With Longitudinal Results 2010–2013: The EBRI IRA Database By Craig Copeland, Ph.D., Employee Benefit Research Institute
Introduction Individual retirement accounts (IRAs) are a vital component of U.S. retirement savings, holding nearly one-quarter of all retirement plan assets in the nation.1 A substantial and growing portion of these IRA assets originated in other tax-qualified retirement plans, such as defined benefit (pension) and 401(k) plans, and were moved to IRAs through rollovers from those plans.
The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) has focused on retirement savings since its inception in 1978 and has been particularly detailed in the study of participants in 401(k) plans, and more recently, of IRA holders as well, notably through the creation of, and updates to, the EBRI IRA Database. This database is able to not only link the account(s) of individuals within and across participating data providers in the IRA database, but also with the account(s) of participants in defined contribution (DC) plans. This is done both within a calendar year and longitudinally, which permits the examination of retirement asset holdings both at a point in time and over time as the individuals age and either change jobs or retire.
This Issue Brief, the annual, cross-sectional analysis of the EBRI IRA Database, examines the distribution of IRA owners by IRA type, average and median account balances, and contributions and rollovers to IRAs.2 Added to this cross-sectional study is a longitudinal component that looks at account balance changes and contribution behavior from 2010 to 2013 of a consistent sample of individuals who own IRAs.
Data As part of the EBRI Center for Research on Retirement Income (EBRI CRI), the EBRI IRA Database is an ongoing project that collects data from IRA-plan administrators across the nation. For year-end 2013, it contained information on 25.8 million accounts owned by 20.6 million unique individuals, with total assets of $2.46 trillion.3 For each account within the database, the IRA type, account balance, contributions made and rollovers transferred during the year (if any), the asset allocation, and certain demographic characteristics of the account owner are included (among other items). Based on the richness of the data, the study presents account-level and individual-level results.
IRA Types In the EBRI IRA Database, IRAs are classified into five types: (1) Traditional—originating from contributions (TOFC), (2) Roth, (3) Simplified Employee Pension (SEP)/Savings Incentive Match Plan for Employees (SIMPLE), (4) Traditional—originating from assets rolled over from other tax-qualified plans (TOFR), such as an employment-based pension or a 401(k) plan (although not all the assets in these accounts are exclusively from employment-based sources, so this should not be used as a proxy for the amount of employment-based dollars in IRAs),4 and (5) other/unknown.5 The distribution of the IRA accounts in this database as of year-end 2013 was:
34.7 percent TOFC IRAs.
29.1 percent TOFR IRAs (combined Traditional IRAs, 63.8 percent).
23.1 percent Roth IRAs.
6.8 percent SEPs and SIMPLEs
6.3 percent unknown (Figure 1).6
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 5
On a unique individual basis (combining the accounts owned by the same person into one observation), 41.3 percent of those owning an IRA in the database had a TOFC IRA, 34.7 percent had a TOFR IRA (combined Traditional total of 73.3 percent), 28.5 percent had a Roth, 8.3 percent had a SEP or SIMPLE, and 5.9 percent were unknown.
Among all IRA owners in the database, nearly one-half (46.6 percent) were ages 45–64 (Figure 2). However, the age distribution was very different for those owning a TOFC IRA relative to other IRA types. Of those owning a TOFC IRA, 15.3 percent were under age 45, compared with 39.0 percent of those with a Roth, 25.1 percent of those with a TOFR IRA, and 28.3 percent of those with a SEP or SIMPLE.
IRA owners were more likely to be male. In particular, those having a TOFR IRA or a SEP/SIMPLE IRA were much more likely to be male (57.1 percent of TOFR-IRA owners and 58.1 percent of SEP/SIMPLE owners were male, recalculated from Figure 2 for those in the database with a known gender).
Just over 45 percent of those owning IRAs had less than $25,000 in their accounts at year-end 2013 (Figure 2).7 Roth-IRA owners were more likely to have these lower balances (at 43.8 percent), while 35.1 percent of TOFC-IRA owners were in that category (Figure 2).8 TOFR-IRA owners had the largest percentage of account balances of $100,000 or more at 37.2 percent, while TOFC-IRA and SEP/SIMPLE-IRA owners had the next-highest percentages (33.3 percent and 32.5 percent, respectively). For all IRAs combined, 27.2 percent of individual owners had balances of $100,000 or more.9
34.7%
23.1%
29.1%
6.8%
63.8%
6.3%
41.3%
28.5%
34.7%
8.3%
73.3%
5.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Traditional―Originating from Contributions*
Roth Traditional―Originating from Rollovers*
SEP/SIMPLE All Traditional Unknown
Figure 1Distribution of IRA Types by Accounts and Individuals, 2013
Accounts Individuals
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Both of these accounts could have received contributions or rollovers after their origination, so these are NOT proxies for employment-based dollars vs.IRA-only dollars. The traditional—originating from rollovers (TOFR) do provide an estimate of the dollars that have been moved into a new IRA.Note: The percentages for individuals add up to more than 100 percent, as an individual may own more than one type of IRA.
Acc
t.In
d.A
cct.
Ind.
Acc
t.In
d.A
cct.
Ind.
Acc
t.In
d.A
cct.
Ind.
Acc
t.In
d.
Age U
nder
25
1.2%
1.4%
0.5%
0.5%
3.1%
3.1%
0.3%
0.4%
0.8%
0.8%
0.4%
0.5%
2.2%
3.1%
25–2
92.
93.
41.
41.
56.
06.
12.
42.
53.
23.
31.
82.
02.
63.
5
30–3
45.
15.
62.
72.
98.
89.
05.
05.
25.
96.
03.
84.
13.
74.
6
35–3
96.
46.
83.
94.
29.
79.
87.
07.
27.
77.
85.
35.
74.
04.
6
40–4
48.
48.
65.
96.
210
.911
.09.
59.
810
.410
.57.
67.
94.
65.
5
45–4
99.
910
.08.
08.
311
.011
.011
.311
.512
.812
.89.
59.
86.
16.
8
50–5
412
.012
.011
.311
.611
.511
.513
.213
.315
.615
.512
.212
.38.
79.
5
55–5
913
.012
.713
.913
.911
.311
.313
.113
.015
.515
.413
.513
.411
.711
.8
60–6
412
.711
.914
.314
.010
.310
.212
.512
.212
.612
.413
.513
.113
.312
.1
65–6
911
.310
.213
.312
.48.
38.
011
.110
.78.
58.
412
.311
.514
.811
.1
70 o
r ol
der
15.6
15.7
21.5
21.3
8.2
8.1
14.4
14.1
6.7
6.7
18.3
18.0
25.4
24.7
Unk
now
n1.
61.
73.
33.
30.
90.
90.
00.
00.
30.
41.
81.
92.
92.
6
Gen
der
Fem
ale
31.8
32.4
30.0
30.8
34.7
34.9
37.1
37.4
37.1
37.2
33.2
33.7
1.0
2.7
Mal
e38
.938
.632
.433
.141
.041
.050
.349
.852
.051
.740
.640
.21.
23.
1
Unk
now
n29
.329
.137
.636
.224
.424
.112
.712
.810
.911
.226
.226
.197
.894
.3
Acc
ount
Bal
ance
Less
tha
n $5
,000
22.7
21.3
15.7
13.2
22.5
15.4
24.3
22.0
27.9
23.5
19.6
17.8
48.5
41.2
$5,0
00–$
9,99
910
.48.
89.
07.
316
.510
.85.
75.
29.
87.
57.
56.
517
.412
.6
$10,
000–
$24,
999
16.6
15.1
16.4
14.6
24.4
17.6
11.4
10.6
16.3
12.7
14.1
13.1
13.5
15.4
$25,
000–
$49,
999
14.2
13.6
15.6
15.0
17.6
15.3
11.5
11.2
13.1
11.3
13.7
13.5
7.0
9.9
$50,
000–
$99,
999
13.6
14.0
16.1
16.7
12.6
15.1
13.6
13.8
12.3
12.5
15.0
15.4
4.8
7.4
$100
,000
–$14
9,99
96.
77.
38.
59.
03.
27.
18.
38.
56.
47.
58.
48.
72.
23.
2
$150
,000
–$24
9,99
96.
57.
68.
19.
31.
87.
29.
410
.06.
69.
18.
79.
42.
13.
2
$250
,000
or
mor
e9.
412
.410
.614
.91.
411
.615
.918
.87.
615
.913
.015
.64.
57.
2S
ourc
e: E
BR
I IR
A D
atab
ase.
Acc
t.―A
ccou
nts;
Ind.―
Indi
vidu
als.
* T
radi
tiona
l―C
onts
.=T
radi
tiona
l―O
rigin
atin
g fr
om C
ontr
ibut
ions
(T
OF
C).
Tra
ditio
nal―
Rlv
r=T
radi
tiona
l―O
rigin
atin
g fr
om R
ollo
vers
(T
OF
R).
Bot
h of
thes
e ac
coun
ts c
ould
hav
e re
ceiv
ed c
ontr
ibut
ions
or
rollo
vers
afte
r th
eir
orig
inat
ion,
so
thes
e ar
e N
OT
pro
xies
for
empl
oym
ent-
base
d do
llars
vs.
IRA
-onl
y do
llars
. The
Tra
ditio
nal―
Orig
inat
ing
from
Rol
love
rs d
o pr
ovid
e an
est
imat
e of
the
dolla
rs th
at h
ave
been
mov
ed in
to a
new
IRA
.
Fig
ure
2D
istr
ibu
tio
n o
f IR
A O
wn
ersh
ip, b
y V
ario
us
Dem
og
rap
hic
Ch
arac
teri
stic
s an
d IR
A T
ype,
201
3(A
ll ac
coun
ts v
ersu
s in
divi
dual
s)
All
Tra
ditio
nal—
Con
ts.*
Rot
hT
radi
tiona
l—R
lvr*
SE
P/S
IMP
LEA
ll T
radi
tiona
lU
nkno
wn
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 6
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 7
Average IRA Balances The average IRA account balance in 2013 was $95,363, while the average IRA individual balance (all accounts from the same person combined) was $119,804 (Figure 3). TOFR IRAs had the highest average individual balance at $150,261, while Roth IRAs had the lowest at $37,010.10 The median account IRA balance was $25,438, while the median individual IRA balance was $32,179 (Figure 4). The median TOFR IRA balance was higher than the balances of the other plan types.
The overall average and median individual balances (all accounts from the same person combined) were 26 percent higher than the overall average and median account balances. The individual balances exceeded the account balances by smaller percentages for each of the plan types, ranging from 2 percent for the Roth average balances to 6 percent for TOFC IRAs. This suggests that individuals with more than one IRA typically had more than one type of IRA—and that not taking into account all IRA holdings would miss at least 26 percent of the average individual’s cumulative IRA assets.
The average individual IRA balance increased with age for owners ages 25 or older (Figure 5). This balance increased from $12,537 for those ages 25–29 to $219,790 for those ages 70 or older. The median individual balance also increased with the owner’s age. In particular, the median individual balance increased from $3,708 for those under age 25 to $75,627 for those ages 70 or older (Figure 6).
Across each plan type, the average and median individual IRA balances increased with the owner’s age at least above age 25 (Figure 7). However, for TOFC IRAs, the average balance declined for those ages 70 or older, while the median balance declined for all Traditional IRAs for those ages 70 or older. For individuals ages 40 and older, the average and median balances for TOFR IRAs were higher than for each of the other plan types.11
Males had higher individual average and median balances than females: $160,589 and $43,449 for males, respectively, vs., $96,339 and $30,660 for females (Figure 8). Across all ages, males had both higher individual average and median balances than females (Figure 9). The median balance for males reached $118,729 for those ages 70 or older, compared with $66,157 for females of that age.
Males had larger average and median balances across each of the plan types as well, with the largest differences being among those with a TOFR IRA, at $193,536 average and $61,835 median for males vs. $108,979 average and $34,149 median for females (Figure 10). For Roth IRAs, average and median individual balances were much closer: $45,337 and $17,284 for males vs. $33,998 and $16,037, respectively, for females.
Contributions12 Focusing only on Roth and Traditional IRAs, 11.5 percent of the accounts were contributed to, and 13.8 percent of the individuals owning these IRA types contributed to them in 2013 (Figure 11). Among Traditional-IRA owners, 7.0 percent contributed, while 25.8 percent of those owning a Roth IRA contributed to it. Of those individuals contributing to an IRA in 2013, 43.3 percent contributed the maximum amount. Almost half (46.3 percent) of those contributing to a Traditional IRA contributed the maximum, while 39.9 percent did so with a Roth IRA.13, 14, 15
When looking at the age of the owners of the IRAs, younger Roth-IRA owners were more likely to contribute to their Roth IRA than were older Roth-IRA owners (Figure 12): 47 percent of Roth accounts owned by those ages 25–29 received a contribution in 2013, compared with 22 percent of Roths owned by those ages 60–64. However, the percentage of Traditional IRA accounts being contributed to did not significantly vary by the owner’s age, as the percentage receiving a contribution ranged from 13 percent to 6 percent for account owners up through age 69.
In contrast, the percentage of those accounts receiving the maximum contribution in both Roth and Traditional IRAs was higher for account owners who were older (Figure 13). For Roth accounts, the percentage receiving the maximum contribution was highest for accounts owned by those over age 45. Specifically, for Roth accounts owned by individuals
$95,363
$106,947
$36,350
$142,587
$77,148
$123,195
$49,864
$119,804$112,943
$37,010
$150,261
$79,424
$134,791
$66,950
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
All Traditional―Originating from Contributions*
Roth Traditional―Originating from Rollovers*
SEP/SIMPLE All Traditional Unknown
IRA Type
Figure 3Average IRA Balance for All Accounts
and Individuals, by IRA Type, 2013
Accounts Individuals
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional―Conts.=Traditional―Originating from Contributions (TOFC). Traditional―Rlvr=Traditional―Originating from Rollovers (TOFR). Both of theseaccounts could have received contributions or rollovers after their origination, so these are NOT proxies for employment-based dollars vs.IRA-only dollars.The Traditional—Originating from Rollovers (TOFR) do provide an estimate of the dollars that have been moved into a new IRA.
$25,438
$37,468
$15,018
$42,579
$20,139
$39,401
$5,095
$32,179
$37,611
$15,190
$43,535
$20,257
$40,996
$6,318
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
$50,000
All Traditional―Originating from Contributions*
Roth Traditional―Originating from Rollovers*
SEP/SIMPLE All Traditional Unknown
IRA Type
Figure 4Median IRA Balance for All Accounts
and Individuals, by IRA Type, 2013
Accounts Individuals
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional―Conts.=Traditional―Originating from Contributions (TOFC). Traditional―Rlvr=Traditional―Originating from Rollovers (TOFR). Both of theseaccounts could have received contributions or rollovers after their origination, so these are NOT proxies for employment-based dollars vs.IRA-only dollars.The Traditional—Originating from Rollovers (TOFR) do provide an estimate of the dollars that have been moved into a new IRA.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 8
$12,
713
$11,
527
$17,
826
$28,
065
$40,
398
$54,
725 $7
2,28
5 $94,
156
$123
,209
$156
,581 $1
75,9
34
$107
,644
$13,
103
$12,
537
$20,
456
$33,
784 $4
9,94
8
$68,
683 $9
1,97
6
$122
,957
$165
,139
$212
,812
$219
,790
$126
,759
$0
$25,000
$50,000
$75,000
$100,000
$125,000
$150,000
$175,000
$200,000
$225,000
$250,000
Under 25 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70 or older Unknown
Age
Figure 5Average IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by Age, 2013
Accounts Individuals
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
$3,7
10
$4,8
56
$6,9
81 $10,
765
$14,
441
$18,
865
$24,
011
$30,
239
$39,
319
$51,
242 $5
9,25
3
$38,
738
$3,7
08
$5,0
00
$7,6
61 $12,
325
$17,
745 $2
4,26
4 $31,
692
$41,
149
$55,
807
$75,
277
$75,
627
$45,
801
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
Under 25 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70 or older Unknown
Age
Figure 6Median IRA Balance for All Accounts and Individuals, by Age, 2013
Accounts Individuals
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 9
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Ave
rage
Med
ian
All
$112
,943
$37,
611
$37,
010
$15,
190
$150
,261
$43,
535
$79,
424
$20,
257
$134
,791
$40,
996
$66,
950
$6,3
18
Age U
nder
25
38,2
915,
000
10,0
755,
273
5,49
81,
658
5,88
01,
551
26,1
352,
802
4,07
657
1
25–2
913
,389
3,90
914
,301
8,16
78,
220
2,73
08,
377
3,06
310
,396
3,14
23,
112
1,04
0
30–3
418
,256
5,84
219
,768
11,6
3018
,418
4,93
415
,994
5,38
818
,539
5,42
55,
556
1,72
5
35–3
929
,651
10,1
1323
,620
13,2
6336
,231
11,7
9628
,532
8,57
834
,186
11,0
998,
632
2,13
1
40–4
443
,418
15,1
4326
,597
13,9
9556
,036
20,2
9744
,600
13,3
1752
,030
18,0
8614
,365
2,73
4
45–4
958
,037
21,3
6130
,138
14,7
9979
,774
30,7
0060
,550
18,7
0672
,287
26,3
5621
,303
3,39
5
50–5
475
,961
28,6
4634
,493
16,0
0111
0,98
443
,093
78,1
8924
,698
97,2
1435
,588
29,3
504,
418
55–5
910
0,47
638
,124
39,9
2817
,871
154,
159
58,2
5299
,463
32,1
2512
9,91
346
,648
43,7
306,
011
60–6
413
4,42
750
,380
46,8
1520
,919
209,
748
82,7
3311
9,06
638
,550
174,
095
63,3
1167
,497
8,38
7
65–6
917
2,23
266
,410
59,0
3423
,750
266,
208
110,
565
136,
962
45,3
5122
1,54
684
,877
102,
707
13,0
05
70 o
r ol
der
172,
007
67,3
9589
,522
28,1
3430
3,10
012
2,97
714
2,29
348
,578
226,
871
84,6
2211
3,97
118
,037
Unk
now
n11
4,51
352
,167
30,6
4814
,701
144,
963
43,0
1746
,854
15,7
7011
4,82
052
,148
311,
288
32,6
10S
ourc
e: E
BR
I IR
A D
atab
ase.
* T
radi
tiona
l―C
onts
.=T
radi
tiona
l―O
rigin
atin
g fr
om C
ontr
ibut
ions
(T
OF
C).
Tra
ditio
nal―
Rlv
r=T
radi
tiona
l―O
rigin
atin
g R
ollo
vers
(T
OF
R).
Bot
h of
thes
e ac
coun
ts c
ould
hav
e re
ceiv
ed c
ontr
ibut
ions
or
rollo
vers
afte
r th
eir
orig
inat
ion,
so
thes
e ar
e N
OT
pro
xies
for
empl
oym
ent-
base
d do
llars
vs.
IRA
-onl
y do
llars
. The
Tra
ditio
nal—
Orig
inat
ing
from
Rol
love
rs d
o pr
ovid
e an
est
imat
e of
the
dolla
rs th
at h
ave
been
mov
ed in
to a
new
IRA
.
Fig
ure
7A
vera
ge
and
Med
ian
In
div
idu
al I
RA
Bal
ance
, b
y IR
A T
ype
and
Ag
e, 2
013
Unk
now
nA
ll T
radi
tiona
lT
radi
tiona
l—C
onts
.*R
oth
Tra
ditio
nal—
Rlv
r*S
EP
/SIM
PLE
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 10
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 11
ages 25–29, 37 percent received the maximum contribution, compared with 38 percent for Roth accounts owned by individuals ages 45–49, the lowest percentage for Roth accounts owned by individuals ages 45 or older. The percentage of Traditional IRAs receiving the maximum contribution had a jump up in this percentage for owners ages 35 or older. The percentage of Traditional IRAs receiving the maximum was no lower than 42 percent for owners ages 35 or older compared with at most 35 percent for those accounts owned by individuals younger than age 35.
The likelihood of contributing to an IRA did not significantly differ by gender within the database, as both Roth and Traditional IRAs owned by either males or females (as well as those without a gender identified in the database) had similar probabilities of receiving contributions. For example, 6.7 percent of Traditional IRAs owned by females were contributed to in 2013, as were 6.4 percent of accounts owned by males (Figure 14).16 However, accounting for both types of IRAs, the percentage of accounts receiving a contribution by both genders was 11.4 percent. Furthermore, the percentage of accounts receiving a contribution that received the maximum contribution was also very similar between the genders: 45.0 percent for females and 45.6 percent for males (Figure 15).
In 2013 almost 2.6 million IRA accounts in the database were contributed to (Figure 16), and the average amount contributed was $4,145. More than one quarter (25.6 percent) of the accounts receiving contributions were owned by individuals in their 50s. Additionally, more accounts owned by males were contributed to than those owned by females, since there are more male account owners (this is different from the likelihood of contributing, as described above). The average contribution was highest for accounts owned by those ages 65–69. In fact, there was a steady increase in the average contribution up through that age, with a noticeable jump when the owners reached age 50, where the maximum allowable contribution is higher under the catch-up contribution rules. Accounts owned by males received slightly higher average contributions ($4,260) than did those owned by females ($4,243).
More contributions were made to Roth accounts than to all Traditional accounts (both types of Traditional accounts combined into one category) (Figure 16). However, at $4,338, the average contribution to a Traditional account was higher than the $4,009 to a Roth account. Yet, a higher overall aggregate amount was contributed to Roth IRAs ($6.08 billion for Roths, compared with $4.61 billion for Traditional accounts) due to the fact that there were substantially more Roth owners making any level of contribution.
Roth IRAs had a higher percentage of younger individuals contribute to them, as 23.9 percent of the Roth accounts receiving contributions were owned by individuals ages 25–34. In contrast, only 7.5 percent of the Traditional accounts that received contributions were owned by those ages 25–34. Furthermore, both Roth and Traditional accounts receiving contributions were more frequently owned by males, and the average contribution was higher for male account owners to both of the IRA types, albeit at a very small amount.
Even when accounting for age, the average contributions to accounts owned by males were larger than those to accounts owned by females, except for those ages 45–49 and 70 or older (Figure 17), although at some ages the average contributions were nearly equal. Yet, the age distributions for the male- and female-owned accounts that received contributions were very similar. For example, 28.3 percent of the female-owned accounts that received a contribution were owned by those in their 50s, compared with 25.8 percent of the male-owned accounts that received a contribution.
Rollovers When comparing contributions to IRAs with rollovers to IRAs, rollovers overwhelmingly outweighed new contributions in dollar terms. While almost 2.6 million accounts in the database received contributions compared with the 1.7 million accounts that received rollovers in 2013, 14.5 times the amount of dollars were moved to IRAs through rollovers than were contributed to IRAs (Figure 18). This is not surprising, given the annual contribution limit of $5,500 ($6,500 for those ages 50 or older) to IRAs in 2013, relative to the theoretically unlimited amount that could be added via a rollover. Almost 30 percent of contributions made to IRAs were in the $5,501 to $6,500 range (the maximum amount allowed) compared with 74.3 percent of the rollovers being $5,000 or larger (including 9.4 percent of $250,000 or more).
$77,385
$96,339
$24,650$30,660
$125,348
$160,589
$33,471
$43,449
$75,004
$91,853
$18,319$23,576
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
Accounts Individuals Accounts Individuals
Average Median
Figure 8Average and Median IRA Balance for All
Accounts and Individuals, by Gender, 2013
Female Male Unknown
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
Average Median Average Median Average Median
All $96,339 $30,660 $160,589 $43,449 $91,853 $23,576
Age
Under 25 14,497 4,748 15,250 4,826 10,373 2,521
25–29 12,689 5,014 14,828 5,816 9,745 3,991
30–34 19,880 8,129 23,970 9,386 16,609 5,944
35–39 31,860 12,857 39,807 14,520 28,036 9,786
40–44 45,158 17,869 60,419 21,523 40,815 13,518
45–49 61,245 23,756 84,738 30,743 53,603 17,580
50–54 81,057 30,423 116,178 42,087 68,540 21,977
55–59 105,786 39,114 159,408 56,323 89,413 27,767
60–64 134,516 50,667 219,045 79,581 122,969 38,310
65–69 161,653 64,958 289,139 110,100 161,715 53,924
70 or older 164,747 66,157 313,426 118,729 159,016 51,995
Unknown 70,399 19,947 91,937 19,867 127,248 46,166Source: EBRI IRA Database.
Figure 9Average and Median Individual IRA Balance,
Female Male Unknown
by Gender and Age, 2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 12
$33,
998
$45,
337
$27,
190
$16,
037
$17,
284
$11,
870
$57,
698
$99,
810
$57,
458
$15,
381 $2
7,51
3
$13,
385
$104
,961
$176
,984
$108
,301
$34,
203 $5
2,63
6
$37,
234
$92,
836
$137
,217
$107
,873
$32,
505
$40,
728
$39,
914
$108
,979
$193
,536
$102
,690
$34,
149
$61,
835
$24,
006
$70,
904
$122
,476
$65,
042
$15,
776
$27,
401
$6,0
44
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
Female Male Unknown Female Male Unknown
Average Median
Figure 10Average and Median Individual IRA Balance,
by IRA Type and Gender, 2013
Roth
SEP/SIMPLE
All Traditional
Traditional-Conts.*
Traditional-Rlvr*
Unknown
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional―Conts.=Traditional―Originating from Contributions (TOFC). Traditional―Rlvr=Traditional―Originating Rollovers (TOFR).Both of these accounts could have received contributions or rollovers after their origination, so these are NOT proxies for employment-based dollars vs.IRA-only dollars. The traditional-originating from rollovers do provide an estimate of the dollars that have been moved into a new IRA.
11.5%13.8%
41.8%43.3%
6.5% 7.0%
44.7%46.3%
25.4% 25.8%
39.7% 39.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Accounts Individuals Accounts Individuals
Contributing Of Those Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum
Figure 11Percentage of Those Owning a Traditional* or Roth IRA
Who Contributed to It, and the Percentage of Those Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum Allowable Amount,
by All Accounts and Individuals, 2013
All Traditional* Roth
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 13
41%
30%
22%
16%
14%12% 12% 12%
10%
8%
3%
6%
51%
47%
37%
28%
24%23% 24% 24%
22%
15%
9%
21%
13%
9% 9% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7%6%
2%3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Under 25 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70 or older Unknown
All Roth Traditional*
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 12Percentage of Traditional* or Roth IRA Accounts That
Received a Contribution, by Age of Account Owner, 2013
27
%
36
%
36
% 37
% 39
%
42
% 43
%
47
%
49
%
50
%
54
%
27%
37%
36%
34%
34%
38%
41%
47%
52%
55%
53%
26
%
27
%
35
%
42
%
45
% 46
%
45
% 47
%
47
%
46
%
56
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Under 25 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70 or older
All Roth Traditional*
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 13Percentage of Traditional* or Roth IRA Accounts That Received a Contribution That Received the Maximum Allowable Contribution,
by Age of Account Owner, 2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 14
11.4%
6.7%
23.7%
11.4%
6.4%
25.0%
11.8%
6.2%
28.6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
All Traditional* Roth
Female Male Unknown
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 14Percentage of Traditional* or Roth IRA Accounts That
Received a Contribution, by Gender of Account Owner, 2013
45.0%
49.1%
41.9%
45.6%
49.5%
43.0%
31.8% 31.0%32.3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
All Traditional* Roth
Female Male Unknown
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 15Percentage of Traditional* or Roth IRA Accounts That Received
a Contribution That Received the Maximum Contribution, by Gender of Account Owner, 2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 15
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 16
The average and median rollover amounts to Traditional IRAs were $96,660 and $27,967, respectively, and to Roth IRAs were $22,915 and $8,291 (Figure 19). In addition, nearly 1.6 million rollovers to Traditional IRAs occurred in 2013 compared with 0.1 million rollovers to Roths.
Average and median rollover amounts increased with the owner’s age through age 69 for Traditional IRAs and ages 70 or older for Roth IRAs (except for the median decline for ages 45–49), respectively. Furthermore, the average and median rollover amounts from male-owned accounts were higher than those from female-owned accounts, e.g., for Traditional IRAs, $120,414 and $34,363, respectively for males, compared with $74,774 and $21,441 for females (Figure 19). Controlling for age, the average and median rollover amounts to Traditional IRAs were still higher among male account-owners than among female account-owners (Figure 20). The age distribution of those making a rollover was very similar between males and females.
The distribution of rollover dollars and distribution of the number of rollovers are dramatically different for Traditional IRAs. Nearly 13 percent of the rollovers in 2013 were less than $2,000, but the value of those rollovers represented only 0.1 percent of the assets rolled over to Traditional IRAs in 2013 (Figure 21). In contrast, 10.2 percent of the rollovers were $250,000 or more, but the value of those rollovers represented 57.2 percent of the assets rolled to Traditional IRAs. However, for rollovers to Roth IRAs, the distribution of the values of the rollovers was not as skewed to the largest rollover amounts (Figure 22). For example, 23.0 percent of the rollovers to Roth IRAs were in the amount of $10,000–$24,999, but these represented 16.0 percent of the value of the dollars rolled over to IRAs. The value of the largest rollovers to Roth IRAs was 16.4 percent of the dollars rolled over.
Comparison of Account Balances and Contributions 2010–2013 While each year’s database is a unique snapshot (cross section) of that year’s IRA balances and contributions, it is informative to compare the results between years to consider changes in account balances and contribution trends. The first comparison conducted is by examining each year’s snapshot. The second comparison focuses only on those individuals who have an account in the database in each year of the analysis (2010–2013). This not only allows the analysis to focus on the activity within these accounts over an extended period of time, but also controls for changes in the aggregate and averages resulting from the additions and subtractions from the database because of new data providers into the database, as well as accounts being closed. Furthermore, the distribution of the growth in the balances across each account holder in the study can be deduced, as well as the persistence of contributions by these individuals.17
Snapshot Comparison—The average balance for each year’s full sample decreased from $91,864 in 2010 to $87,668 in 2011 before increasing to $105,001 in 2012 and $119,804 in 2013—an increase of 30.4 percent from 2010 to 2013, and 14.1 percent from 2012 to 2013 (Figure 23). The median followed the same pattern, going from $25,296 to $23,785 to $27,987 to $32,179, representing increases of 27.2 percent between 2010 and 2013, and 15.0 percent between 2012 and 2013. This same down-then-up pattern in average balances occurred for each gender and among Traditional IRAs. However, the average balance continued up in 2011–2013 for those accounts owned by 35- to 49-year-olds. Above that age, the pattern of a decrease in average balance in 2011 and an increase in average balance in 2012 and 2013 resulted. Below age 35, another year of declines resulted before increasing in 2013. The average balance for Roths and SEP/SIMPLEs increased each year.
The percentage of individuals who contributed to their IRA in each year was relatively consistent across years at 12.1 percent in 2010, 13.2 percent in 2011, 13.1 percent in 2012, and 13.8 percent in 2013 (Figure 24). The percentage of individuals owning Traditional IRAs who contributed to them rose from 5.2 percent in 2010 to 7.0 per-cent in 2013. In contrast, Roth owners had the highest percentage contributing in 2011: 26.0 percent, compared with 24.0 percent in 2010 and 25.1 percent in 2012, before an increase to 25.8 percent in 2013.
While the percentage of individuals contributing remained relatively consistent across the four years, the percentage of contributors who contributed the maximum rose from 43.5 percent in 2010 to 53.5 percent in 2012 (Figure 24). Increases during that time occurred for each IRA type, with owners of Traditional IRAs having higher likelihoods of
Num
ber
Per
cent
Ave
rage
Tot
alN
umbe
rP
erce
ntA
vera
geT
otal
Num
ber
Per
cent
Ave
rage
Tot
al(in
thou
sand
s)(in
mill
ions
)(in
thou
sand
s)(in
mill
ions
)(in
thou
sand
s)(in
mill
ions
)A
ll2,
579
100%
$4,1
45$1
0,69
196
010
0%$4
,338
$4,6
111,
517
100%
$4,0
09$6
,080
Age U
nder
25
102
3.9
3,05
531
19
0.9
2,85
126
936.
13,
075
285
25–2
919
67.
63,
429
671
252.
62,
892
8316
711
.03,
521
588
30–3
425
09.
73,
445
862
474.
93,
299
181
195
12.9
3,48
768
135
–39
237
9.2
3,52
483
463
6.6
3,65
626
916
310
.83,
465
565
40–4
425
810
.03,
653
941
889.
23,
863
388
157
10.4
3,51
955
345
–49
276
10.7
3,82
71,
056
111
11.6
3,97
549
615
110
.03,
705
560
50–5
432
012
.44,
533
1,45
014
214
.84,
611
728
162
10.7
4,45
772
255
–59
341
13.2
4,77
61,
630
162
16.9
4,74
484
516
310
.84,
810
785
60–6
429
611
.54,
948
1,46
414
915
.54,
832
784
134
8.8
5,08
968
065
–69
191
7.4
4,97
595
110
611
.04,
825
555
765.
05,
201
396
70 o
r ol
der
943.
64,
755
445
495.
14,
474
222
442.
95,
072
223
Unk
now
n20
0.8
3,83
476
80.
93,
989
3311
0.7
3,72
042
Gen
der
Fem
ale
858
33.3
4,24
33,
639
330
34.4
4,43
51,
628
491
32.3
4,09
92,
011
Mal
e1,
040
40.3
4,26
04,
432
380
39.6
4,45
51,
914
611
40.3
4,12
22,
517
Unk
now
n68
126
.43,
846
2,62
125
026
.04,
016
1,06
941
527
.43,
737
1,55
2S
ourc
e: E
BR
I IR
A D
atab
ase.
* T
radi
tiona
l IR
As
in th
is fi
gure
incl
ude
all T
radi
tiona
l IR
As.
All
Con
trib
utio
nsT
radi
tiona
l Con
trib
utio
ns*
Rot
h C
ontr
ibut
ions
Fig
ure
16D
istr
ibu
tio
n o
f th
e IR
As
Rec
eivi
ng
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns,
by
IRA
Typ
e an
d A
ge
and
Gen
der
of
Acc
ou
nt
Ow
ner
, 201
3
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 17
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 18
contributing the maximum in each year. However, in 2013, with the increase in the maximum allowable contribution, the percentage contributing the maximum overall fell from 53.5 percent in 2012 to 43.3 percent in 2013. Similar percentage-point drops occurred for both Traditional and Roth IRAs.
The average contribution increased each year including 2013. In 2010, the average contribution was $3,335, increasing to $3,723 in 2011, to $3,904 in 2012, and to $4,145 in 2013 (Figure 25). This increase in the average contribution occurred for each known age and gender group of the contributing owners of IRAs. Furthermore, the average contribution increased with the age of the IRA owners through ages 65–69 for each year, with the exception of 2011, when the increase stopped at ages 60–64 and in 2010 for those ages 30–34.
Consistent Sample Comparison—In order to compare the experience of the same account owners longitudinally, only the individuals owning an IRA with a positive account balance in the database in each year (2010–2013) were included to form a consistent sample of individuals.18 Each individual’s accounts were studied to determine the change in his or her IRA balances and contribution behavior during 2010–2013. This provides a more accurate picture of account growth, rather than relying on aggregate database totals, which might include new individuals or might exclude individuals who no longer have an account. This allows for a better understanding of how accounts grow for those maintaining their IRAs, as well as the contribution activity.
For this consistent sample, the overall average balance increased each year—from $89,427 in 2010, to $90,232 in 2011, to $101,649 in 2012, and to $118,185 in 2013 (Figure 26). This increase occurred across each known owner age group and IRA type, except for owners ages 70 or older and for TOFR owners, who experienced a decline of their balances in 2011 preceding increases in 2012 and 2013. Average balances for each gender grouping also increased each year. The median values also followed a continual upward trend across all IRA owners, except for those ages 70 or older and for TOFR IRAs.
The comparison of the averages and medians, while instructive, does not show the distribution of the changes in the individuals’ IRA balances, an important consideration as different individuals could experience significantly different changes between years, particularly in view of the varying levels of contributions to and withdrawals from the accounts as well as the asset allocation within the accounts. Using the experiences of these same individuals in the consistent sample, the 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile of the resulting percentage changes of these individuals’ balances are presented in Figure 27. The median percentage change in the account balances for all individuals was an increase of 33.6 percent from 2010 to 2013. This means that half of the individuals had an increase greater than that amount and the other half either had a smaller increase, no change, or a decline. Furthermore, at the 25th percentile, a 2.6 percent increase resulted, meaning that 25 percent of the individuals who consistently owned an IRA had an increase smaller than 2.6 percent. The highest (fourth) quartile of balance changes experienced growth surpassing 57.1 percent.
The growth rates for Roth IRA balances were higher both overall and for each age and gender. The median Roth IRA increase was 51.6 percent from 2010 to 2013, compared with 28.3 percent for all Traditional IRAs. A major factor in these different rates of increase was that new contributions make up a larger portion of the Roth IRAs than they do for Traditional IRAs, which magnified the impact of contributions.
The significant differences in the distribution of percentage change in the balances at ages 70 or older is due to the required minimum distribution (RMD) rules that require individuals to make withdrawals out of Traditional IRAs starting April 1 of the year following the calendar year in which they reach age 70-½. These rules do not apply to Roth IRAs, which explains the continued increases found at this age for the Roth owners. Even with the required withdrawals, more than half of these Traditional owners had balances in 2013 that were larger than they were in 2010, meaning that the returns they received during those years were equal to, or larger than, the amount they may have withdrawn.19
As would be expected given the distribution of the percentage changes in the account balances, the distribution of the account balances has shifted to higher-balance categories from 2010 to 2013 (Figure 28). In 2010, 21.2 percent of the individuals in the consistent sample had balances of less than $5,000. By 2013, this number was down to 18.7 percent.
Nu
mb
er
Pe
rce
nt
Ave
rag
eT
ota
lN
um
be
rP
erc
en
tA
vera
ge
To
tal
Nu
mb
er
Pe
rce
nt
Ave
rag
eT
ota
l(in
th
ou
san
ds)
(in m
illio
ns)
(in t
ho
usa
nd
s)(in
mill
ion
s)(in
th
ou
san
ds)
(in m
illio
ns)
All
85
81
00
%$
4,2
43
$3
,63
91
,04
01
00
%$
4,2
60
$4
,43
26
81
10
0%
$3
,84
6$
2,6
21
Ag
e Un
de
r 2
52
73
.23
,07
08
43
93
.83
,19
41
26
35
5.1
2,8
87
10
02
5–
29
54
6.3
3,4
28
18
47
67
.33
,56
52
72
66
9.6
3,2
72
21
53
0–
34
74
8.7
3,4
62
25
89
89
.43
,55
33
48
78
11
.43
,29
52
57
35
–3
97
48
.63
,56
42
64
91
8.8
3,5
80
32
77
11
0.5
3,4
12
24
34
0–
44
86
10
.13
,70
53
20
10
19
.73
,70
93
74
70
10
.33
,51
12
47
45
–4
99
81
1.4
3,8
90
38
11
10
10
.63
,88
44
27
68
10
.03
,64
52
49
50
–5
41
17
13
.64
,62
05
41
12
91
2.4
4,6
42
60
07
41
0.8
4,2
03
31
05
5–
59
12
61
4.7
4,8
55
61
11
39
13
.44
,86
46
77
76
11
.24
,48
43
43
60
–6
41
06
12
.34
,99
95
29
12
41
2.0
5,0
53
62
96
69
.64
,66
53
07
65
–6
96
47
.44
,99
33
17
84
8.1
5,0
69
42
54
46
.44
,77
12
09
70
or
old
er
32
3.7
4,7
63
15
14
84
.64
,74
32
27
14
2.0
4,7
77
67
Un
kno
wn
00
.03
,93
50
00
.03
,86
40
20
2.9
3,8
34
75
So
urc
e:
EB
RI
IRA
Da
tab
ase
.
*Tra
diti
on
al I
RA
s in
th
is f
igu
re in
clu
de
all
Tra
diti
on
al I
RA
s.
Fe
ma
leM
ale
Un
kow
n
Fig
ure
17D
istr
ibu
tio
n o
f T
rad
itio
nal
* an
d R
oth
IR
As
Rec
eivi
ng
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
, b
y A
ge
an
d G
end
er o
f A
cco
un
t O
wn
er,
2013
Num
be
rP
erce
nt
(in
tho
usa
nd
s)C
on
trib
utio
ns
All
2,5
79
10
0.0
%L
ess
th
an
$1
,000
41
81
6.2
$1
,00
0-$
1,9
99
27
61
0.7
$2
,00
0-$
3,9
99
32
81
2.7
$4
,00
0-$
5,5
00
79
93
1.0
$5
,50
1-$
6,5
00
75
92
9.4
To
tal C
on
trib
utio
ns
(in
mill
ion
s)$1
0,6
91R
ollo
vers
All
1,7
12
10
0.0
Le
ss t
ha
n $
2,0
002
27
13
.2$
2,0
00
-$4,
99
92
14
12
.5$
5,0
00
-$9,
99
91
50
8.8
$1
0,0
00
-$2
4,9
992
66
15
.5$
25,
00
0-$
49
,999
23
51
3.7
$5
0,0
00
-$7
4,9
991
37
8.0
$7
5,0
00
-$9
9,9
998
85
.1$
100
,00
0-$
14
9,9
99
11
76
.8$
150
,00
0-$
24
9,9
99
11
86
.9$
250
,00
0 o
r m
ore
16
29
.4T
ota
l Ro
llove
rs (
in m
illio
ns)
$15
5,6
74S
ou
rce
: E
BR
I IR
A D
ata
ba
se.
* T
rad
itio
na
l IR
As
incl
ud
e a
ll T
rad
itio
na
l IR
As.
Fig
ure
18
Dis
trib
uti
on
of
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
n a
nd
Ro
llo
ver
Am
ou
nts
to
Tra
dit
ion
al*
an
d R
oth
IRA
s,
20
13
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 19
Num
ber
Per
cent
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Tot
alN
umbe
rP
erce
ntA
vera
geM
edia
nT
otal
(in th
ousa
nds)
(in m
illio
ns)
(in th
ousa
nds)
(in m
illio
ns)
All
1,57
910
0%$9
6,66
0$2
7,96
7$1
52,6
1613
310
0%$2
2,91
5$8
,291
$3,0
59A
ge Und
er 2
523
1.5
5,66
71,
848
131
32.
65,
076
1,98
617
25–2
990
5.7
9,31
43,
256
836
139.
58,
689
4,33
911
130
–34
118
7.5
21,1
597,
647
2,49
815
11.1
12,4
285,
870
185
35–3
912
27.
737
,851
15,2
544,
619
139.
615
,714
7,01
320
240
–44
140
8.8
54,3
7322
,347
7,58
813
9.5
16,8
387,
665
214
45–4
915
39.
769
,206
27,6
0010
,601
129.
320
,749
7,60
025
850
–54
182
11.5
88,6
1632
,651
16,1
1514
10.2
22,2
098,
883
302
55–5
919
412
.312
5,38
342
,377
24,3
1114
10.7
26,8
0810
,398
382
60–6
422
614
.315
6,26
959
,552
35,3
1015
11.2
33,3
4913
,000
496
65–6
918
011
.416
0,88
861
,501
28,9
9412
8.8
36,4
4615
,000
430
70 o
r ol
der
140
8.9
146,
097
49,5
2020
,471
96.
649
,184
16,0
0043
6U
nkno
wn
110.
710
2,06
834
,861
1,14
21
0.8
24,0
389,
993
25G
ende
rF
emal
e44
528
.274
,774
21,4
4133
,242
3223
.917
,692
6,27
156
4M
ale
605
38.3
120,
414
34,3
6372
,827
5239
.325
,909
8,62
01,
357
Unk
now
n53
033
.587
,904
27,9
6746
,547
4936
.923
,109
9,94
91,
137
Sou
rce:
EB
RI I
RA
Dat
abas
e.
* T
radi
tiona
l IR
As
in th
is fi
gure
incl
ude
all T
radi
tiona
l IR
As.
Num
ber
Per
cent
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Tot
alN
umbe
rP
erce
ntA
vera
geM
edia
nT
otal
Num
ber
Per
cent
Ave
rage
Med
ian
Tot
al(t
hous
ands
)(m
illio
ns)
(tho
usan
ds)
(mill
ions
)(t
hous
ands
)(m
illio
ns)
All
444.
610
0%$7
4,77
4$2
1,44
1$3
3,24
260
4.8
100%
$120
,414
$34,
363
$72,
827
529.
510
0%$8
7,90
4$2
7,96
7$4
6,54
7A
ge Und
er 2
56.
51.
54,
931
1,80
632
8.7
1.4
5,08
11,
889
447.
81.
56,
934
1,83
854
25–2
928
.46.
48,
114
3,09
323
032
.45.
410
,852
3,53
335
229
.05.
58,
769
3,14
025
430
–34
36.5
8.2
18,9
106,
334
690
43.1
7.1
24,4
929,
070
1,05
538
.57.
319
,561
7,59
775
435
–39
35.4
8.0
33,9
6313
,165
1,20
446
.37.
743
,124
17,9
661,
999
40.2
7.6
35,2
0314
,727
1,41
640
–44
40.4
9.1
47,0
2218
,207
1,90
255
.29.
163
,203
27,1
213,
491
43.9
8.3
50,0
3121
,210
2,19
545
–49
44.7
10.1
58,3
2221
,474
2,60
761
.810
.280
,689
33,9
364,
984
46.7
8.8
64,4
3526
,911
3,00
950
–54
54.1
12.2
73,0
6725
,387
3,95
373
.012
.110
7,60
741
,004
7,85
354
.810
.378
,671
31,0
664,
309
55–5
956
.512
.710
1,39
832
,533
5,73
177
.912
.915
8,35
054
,836
12,3
3059
.511
.210
5,02
739
,156
6,25
060
–64
64.4
14.5
121,
244
47,3
167,
804
91.4
15.1
197,
449
78,3
8018
,055
70.1
13.2
134,
725
54,2
829,
450
65–6
946
.410
.412
0,65
349
,030
5,60
266
.711
.020
5,56
677
,999
13,7
0267
.112
.714
4,35
259
,555
9,69
070
or
olde
r31
.27.
011
1,84
738
,681
3,48
648
.38.
018
5,52
154
,017
8,96
060
.711
.513
2,30
850
,775
8,02
5U
nkno
wn
0.0
0.0
19,1
5211
,109
00.
00.
046
,040
7,77
41
11.2
2.1
102,
218
34,9
821,
141
Sou
rce:
EB
RI I
RA
Dat
abas
e.
* T
radi
tiona
l IR
As
in th
is fi
gure
incl
ude
all T
radi
tiona
l IR
As.
Fig
ure
20D
istr
ibu
tio
n o
f T
ho
se R
olli
ng
Ove
r to
a T
rad
itio
nal
* IR
A, b
y A
ge
and
Gen
der
, 201
3
Fem
ale
Mal
eU
nkow
n
Fig
ure
19D
istr
ibu
tio
n o
f T
rad
itio
nal
* an
d R
oth
IRA
s T
hat
Rec
eive
d a
Ro
llove
r,b
y A
ge
and
Gen
der
of
Acc
ou
nt
Ow
ner
, 201
3
Tra
ditio
nal*
Rot
h
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 20
12.9% 12.3%
7.7%
14.9%13.8%
8.3%
5.4%7.3% 7.4%
10.2%
0.1% 0.4% 0.6%2.6%
5.2% 5.2% 4.8%
9.1%
14.7%
57.2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Number of Rollovers
Value of Rollovers
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 21Distribution of Rollovers by Amounts to Traditional* IRAs,
by Number and Value of the Rollovers, 2013
17.7%
15.3%
21.1%
23.0%
12.3%
4.8%
2.0% 1.9%1.1%
0.7%0.6%
2.3%
6.2%
16.0%
18.8%
12.6%
7.6%
10.2%9.2%
16.4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Number of Rollovers
Value of Rollovers
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
Figure 22Distribution of Rollovers by Amounts to Roth IRAs,
by Number and Value of the Rollovers, 2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 21
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 22
Correspondingly, the percentage of individuals with account balances of $250,000 or more increased from 8.7 percent in 2010 to 12.2 percent in 2013.
The likelihood of contributing by the owners of IRAs in the consistent sample decreased from 13.7 percent in 2010 to 13.1 percent in 2011, to 12.4 percent in 2012, and to 12.3 percent in 2013 (Figure 29). For Traditional owners, the likelihood of contributing was virtually unchanged, moving from 6.4 percent in 2010 to 6.2 percent in 2012 to 6.3 per-cent in 2013. Among Roth owners, there was a continuous decrease from 25.8 percent in 2010 to 22.5 percent in 2013. Of those contributing in each year, the likelihood of contributing the maximum increased each year through 2012 among both IRA types, reaching 53.1 percent for Traditional-IRA owners and 45.3 percent for Roth owners. However, the percentage of those contributing the maximum decreased in 2013 for both IRA types, since the maximum allowed contribution increased. The percentage contributing the maximum decreased for contributing-Traditional-IRA owners to 43.7 percent and for Roth contributors to 38.5 percent.
Using the longitudinal nature of the consistent sample, the persistence of contributing to IRAs and the number of years each individual in the sample contributed was investigated. First, the percentage of these consistent account owners who did not contribute to their IRA in any of the years 2010–2013 was 79.4 percent (Figure 30). The remainder broke down as follows: 6.6 percent contributed in only one year, 3.8 percent contributed in two years, 3.6 percent contributed in three years, and 6.7 percent contributed in all four years.
2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013All $91,864 $87,668 $105,001 $119,804 $25,296 $23,785 $27,987 $32,179Type
Traditional-Conts.^ 88,403 78,051 97,286 112,943 29,756 24,721 32,161 37,611Roth 24,798 25,741 31,288 37,010 11,471 11,344 12,796 15,190Traditional-Rlvrs^ 123,426 110,918 134,354 150,261 38,138 31,944 39,172 43,535SEP/SIMPLE 55,733 56,479 67,457 79,424 15,471 15,711 17,794 20,257All Traditional 103,346 98,797 118,645 134,791 32,647 28,457 35,803 40,996Unknow n 96,441 83,062 60,212 66,950 18,815 21,982 6,443 6,318
AgeUnder 25 21,986 11,434 11,165 13,103 5,782 3,238 3,360 3,70825–29 10,290 12,278 11,009 12,537 4,769 4,488 4,721 5,00030–34 16,236 18,106 17,704 20,456 7,229 6,612 7,036 7,66135–39 25,683 27,664 29,202 33,784 10,819 10,072 11,003 12,32540–44 36,968 38,354 42,826 49,948 14,745 13,751 15,770 17,74545–49 50,998 51,006 59,471 68,683 19,329 18,312 21,463 24,26450–54 74,046 66,771 80,525 91,976 24,505 23,216 28,056 31,69255–59 92,196 86,572 108,074 122,957 31,762 29,080 36,363 41,14960–64 129,976 116,415 147,739 165,139 42,998 38,838 49,899 55,80765–69 170,672 145,575 191,208 212,812 58,965 50,122 66,852 75,27770 or older 162,857 144,252 192,961 219,790 56,198 49,994 65,419 75,627Unknow n 108,765 280,290 160,233 126,759 35,255 116,475 43,666 45,801
GenderFemale 71,112 66,529 81,700 96,339 23,246 21,642 27,826 30,660Male 120,719 114,745 139,467 160,589 32,752 30,704 40,103 43,449Unknow n 85,037 76,604 85,230 91,853 22,820 19,916 26,589 23,576
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
^ Traditional―Conts.=Traditional―Originating from Contributions (TOFC). Traditional―Rlvr=Traditional―Originating Rollovers (TOFR).
Both of these accounts could have received contributions or ro llovers after their origination, so these are N OT proxies for employment-based dollars vs.
IRA-only do llars. The traditional—Originating from Rollovers (TOFR) do provide an estimate of the do llars that have been moved into a new IRA.
Figure 23Average and Median Individual IRA Balances, by IRA Type,
Age, and Gender, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013
Average Median
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 23
Looking at the different IRA types, considerable differences resulted in the likelihood of contributing to the IRA and in the number of years contributions were made. Among Traditional-IRA owners, 88.6 percent did not contribute to the IRA in any year, while 2.6 percent contributed in all four years. In contrast, 62.6 percent of Roth-IRA owners did not contribute in any year and 13.0 percent contributed in all four years.20
Roth-IRA owners ages 25–29 were the most likely to contribute in any year and in all four years, at 59.9 percent and 20.8 percent, respectively. These percentages continued downward as the age of the Roth-IRA owners increased, reaching 14.9 percent contributed in any year, and 3.1 percent contributed in all four years among those ages 70 or older. There were no major differences by age below age 65 for Traditional-IRA owners, as 2.4 percent to 3.7 percent contributed in all four years and 12.6 percent to 17.3 percent contributed in any year.
Furthermore, no significant gender differences were found in the number of years contributed. However, by account balance, those with balances in the $25,000–$149,999 range exhibited the highest likelihood of contributing in all four years, while the account balance groups above and just below these amounts had the next-highest levels of contributing in all four years. Those IRA owners with the lowest (less than $10,000) balances were the least likely to contribute.
Roth-IRA owners were more likely to contribute any amount, but Traditional-IRA owners who do contribute are more likely to contribute the maximum allowed amount, except for those that only contributed in one year, where the percentages are virtually identical (Figure 31). Of the Traditional-IRA owners who contributed in all four years, 32.9 percent contributed the maximum in all four years. For comparison, 24.4 percent of the Roth-IRA owners who contributed in all four years contributed the maximum amount all four years. This same result followed for those who contributed in three years and for those contributing in two years.
2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013All 100.0% $89,427 $90,232 $101,649 $118,185 $25,881 $26,416 $30,374 $36,124Type#
Traditional-Conts.^ 39.2 75,379 77,025 87,339 103,378 24,833 25,480 29,368 35,489Roth 34.1 24,906 25,974 31,456 39,288 11,118 11,978 14,636 18,503Traditional-Rlvrs^ 39.2 110,660 110,326 122,599 142,469 32,292 32,105 36,218 42,911SEP/SIMPLE 10.0 56,503 59,566 68,961 83,919 15,758 17,529 20,804 25,666All Traditional 74.6 99,366 99,855 111,628 129,158 29,742 29,884 33,861 40,030
AgeUnder 25 0.8 9,115 10,071 12,448 16,335 4,117 4,906 6,285 8,417
25–29 2.9 9,177 10,413 13,262 17,774 4,753 5,317 6,644 8,57630–34 5.8 14,501 15,793 19,614 25,550 6,962 7,768 9,341 11,66835–39 7.7 24,331 25,595 30,947 39,220 10,769 11,305 13,442 16,51240–44 10.1 36,056 37,248 44,105 54,842 15,005 15,427 17,959 21,95045–49 11.8 50,977 51,955 60,635 74,351 20,392 20,767 23,998 29,01550–54 13.4 69,413 70,531 81,537 98,566 26,431 26,885 30,966 37,16055–59 13.4 92,480 94,506 108,817 129,419 33,858 34,572 39,687 46,90560–64 12.1 128,653 130,901 148,406 172,220 46,497 47,065 53,148 61,62865–69 9.7 170,601 172,451 192,525 218,986 63,523 63,912 71,148 80,66570 or older 12.2 187,502 183,266 195,596 213,586 69,767 67,352 71,419 77,321Unknown 0.1 112,183 110,773 123,569 141,994 31,958 32,712 36,942 43,090
GenderFemale 36.1 69,226 70,559 80,029 94,210 25,038 25,577 29,404 35,074Male 43.6 123,385 123,946 139,043 160,438 36,222 36,549 41,894 49,690Unknown 20.3 52,387 52,778 59,747 70,038 13,975 14,669 16,897 20,149
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
Traditional―Conts.=Traditional―Originating from Contributions (TOFC). Traditional―Rlvr=Traditional―Originating from Rollovers (TOFR). Both of these accounts could have received contributions or rollovers after their origination, so these are NOT proxies for employment-
based dollars vs. IRA-only dollars. The Traditional—Originating from Rollovers do provide an estimate of The dollars that have been moved intoa new IRA.# The IRA types add to more than 100 percent, since individuals can own more than one type.
Average Median
Figure 26Distribution and Average and Median Individual IRA Balances of aConsistent Sample* of Individuals, by IRA Type, Age, and Gender,
2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013
2010 2011 2012 2013All $3,335 $3,723 $3,904 $4,145Age
Under 25 2,496 2,814 2,909 3,05525–29 2,754 3,095 3,182 3,42930–34 2,752 3,135 3,194 3,44535–39 2,794 3,209 3,284 3,52440–44 2,923 3,315 3,424 3,65345–49 3,078 3,466 3,595 3,82750–54 3,667 4,122 4,295 4,53355–59 3,970 4,347 4,532 4,77660–64 4,205 4,500 4,713 4,94865–69 4,319 4,471 4,759 4,97570 or older 4,192 4,360 4,625 4,755Unknown 3,282 4,110 3,549 3,834
GenderFemale 3,453 3,755 3,995 4,243Male 3,630 3,831 4,023 4,260Unknown 3,096 3,431 3,584 3,846
Source: EBRI IRA Database.
* Traditional IRAs in this figure include all Traditional IRAs.
Figure 25Average Contributions to a
by Age and Gender, 2010–2013Traditional* or Roth IRA,
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 24
25th Median 75th 25th Median 75th 25th Median 75thAll 2.6% 33.6% 57.1% 0.0% 28.3% 52.2% 26.7% 51.6% 84.5%Age#
Under 25 28.1 57.1 155.0 0.0 23.6 59.0 35.5 72.2 165.325–29 0.1 47.9 126.5 0.0 21.1 72.3 34.8 64.4 137.530–34 0.1 42.2 91.4 0.0 31.6 60.0 32.2 56.5 102.035–39 3.1 40.3 69.8 0.0 33.4 56.7 29.8 53.4 87.940–44 7.3 40.1 61.9 0.0 35.3 56.5 28.9 52.1 78.345–49 9.6 39.3 59.4 2.2 35.5 56.2 28.2 51.5 76.150–54 10.7 37.8 58.1 6.2 34.5 55.8 27.1 52.1 81.155–59 10.4 35.7 57.1 7.4 33.0 55.3 25.0 50.7 82.460–64 3.7 31.2 55.7 0.9 28.3 52.5 22.4 47.5 78.965–69 1.2 26.3 49.8 0.1 24.0 46.4 20.6 44.1 70.270 or older -5.5 12.9 32.5 -7.4 10.5 28.8 18.6 40.8 58.6Unknown 0.4 34.3 57.8 0.0 29.9 54.1 33.1 54.6 83.2
GenderFemale 5.5 34.2 56.7 0.1 29.3 52.7 28.1 52.0 82.4Male 0.7 31.7 56.5 0.0 26.5 50.3 25.1 51.0 84.3Unknown 1.1 37.8 62.6 0.0 31.5 55.1 27.5 52.1 92.7
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* The consistent sample has only the individuals with at least one account in each year (2010–2013) of the database. Includes all traditional IRAs.
# The individual's age is from 2012.
Percentile Percentile
Figure 27Distribution of Individual IRA Balance Changes for a Consistent Sample*
of Individuals from 2010 to 2013, by IRA Type, Age, and Gender
Total Traditional^ RothPercentile
2010 2011 2012 2013All 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%Account Balance
Less than $5,000 21.2 21.2 20.0 18.7$5,000–$9,999 10.3 9.9 9.1 8.2$10,000–$24,999 17.8 17.8 16.8 15.5$25,000–$49,999 15.3 15.4 15.3 14.8$50,000–$99,999 13.7 13.9 14.6 15.2$100,000–$149,999 6.7 6.7 7.0 7.6$150,000–$249,999 6.5 6.5 7.1 7.8$250,000 or more 8.7 8.8 10.2 12.2
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* The consistent sample has only the individuals with at least one account in each year (2010–2013) of the database.
Figure 28Distribution of IRA Owners by Account Balance
for a Consistent Sample* from 2010–2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 25
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 26
The higher average IRA contribution for Traditional IRAs relative to Roths is due to more IRA contributors maxing out their contribution amount and the relative age distributions of the contributors to the IRAs (older contributors have larger average contribution amounts). The average Traditional IRA contribution in 2013 for all those making a contribution was $4,436, compared with $4,031 for all Roth IRA contributions (Figure 32). The average Traditional IRA contribution was also higher than the Roth average in 2010–2012. In addition, the average contribution for each IRA type increased from 2010–2013. Traditional-IRA owners who contributed in all four years had a slightly higher average contribution in 2013 than that of all Traditional-IRA owners who contributed in 2013. However, for Roth-IRA owners, the average contribution in 2013 for those contributing in all four years was lower than the contribution for all those that contributed to a Roth IRA in 2013.
Among Traditional-IRA owners at each age group, the average contribution in 2013 for those contributing in all four years was higher than that of all who contributed in 2013 for those ages 45 or older, while the opposite was true for those younger than age 45. For Roth owners, the youngest owners (under age 30) and the oldest (ages 70 or older) who contributed in all four years had higher average contributions in 2013 than all those that age that contributed in 2013, whereas in between, the all-contributors’ average contributions were higher.
IRA owners identified as males had slightly larger average contributions than those identified as females for both IRA types. Furthermore, for accounts with a male owner, the average contribution in 2013 was higher for those who contributed in all four years than for anyone contributing in 2013. The larger the account balance, the higher the average contribution was, and those with the largest account balances ($100,000 or larger) had higher average contributions in 2013 among those contributing in all four years. In contrast, among those with the lower balances, the all-four-years contributors had lower average contributions in 2013 than anyone who contributed in 2013 with the lower account balances.
13.7
%
6.4
%
25.
8%
48
.6% 51
.2%
43.9
%
13
.1%
6.4
%
24
.6%
49.
7%
51
.5%
44
.3%
12.
4%
6.2
%
23
.0%
51
.1%
53
.1%
45
.3%
12
.3%
6.3
%
22
.5%
43
.3%
43
.7%
38
.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
All Traditional Roth All Traditional Roth
Contributing Of Those Contributing, Contributing the Maximum
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure 29Percentage of Individuals Contributing to Their IRA and of Those
Contributing Who Contributed the Maximum for a Consistent Sample* of Individuals from 2010–2013
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* The consistent sample has only the individuals with at least one account in each year (2010–2013) of the database. Traditional includes all traditional IRAs.
One
Tw
oT
hree
Con
trib
utin
g
in A
ll F
our
One
Tw
oT
hree
Con
trib
utin
g
All
Fou
rO
neT
wo
Thr
eeC
ontr
ibut
ing
in
All
Fou
r
Non
eY
ear
Yea
rsY
ears
Yea
rsN
one
Yea
rY
ears
Yea
rsY
ears
Non
eY
ear
Yea
rsY
ears
Yea
rs
All
79.4
%6.
6%3.
8%3.
6%6.
7%88
.6%
4.8%
2.2%
1.9%
2.6%
62.6
%11
.3%
6.8%
6.4%
13.0
%A
ge#
Und
er 2
550
.314
.710
.410
.614
.082
.78.
23.
82.
72.
640
.817
.512
.312
.616
.8
25–2
957
.111
.78.
18.
514
.683
.87.
83.
42.
62.
440
.115
.811
.311
.920
.8
30–3
465
.09.
96.
36.
312
.584
.56.
93.
22.
62.
848
.214
.09.
29.
219
.4
35–3
972
.08.
34.
94.
810
.185
.26.
12.
92.
53.
358
.611
.67.
16.
815
.9
40–4
476
.27.
14.
04.
08.
785
.95.
42.
62.
43.
763
.710
.36.
05.
814
.2
45–4
978
.56.
63.
73.
67.
786
.45.
22.
52.
33.
764
.910
.35.
95.
713
.4
50–5
479
.56.
43.
63.
56.
986
.75.
22.
42.
23.
564
.210
.76.
35.
912
.9
55–5
979
.36.
83.
83.
66.
686
.55.
42.
52.
33.
363
.111
.56.
76.
312
.4
60–6
480
.47.
03.
83.
55.
387
.45.
42.
52.
02.
765
.211
.86.
96.
110
.0
65–6
985
.56.
03.
12.
53.
090
.74.
41.
91.
51.
574
.110
.35.
54.
45.
7
70 o
r ol
der
95.6
2.2
0.9
0.6
0.7
98.3
1.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
85.1
6.3
3.1
2.5
3.1
Unk
now
n84
.54.
62.
92.
95.
191
.93.
21.
61.
51.
970
.68.
95.
25.
110
.2
Gen
der
Fem
ale
79.6
6.7
3.8
3.6
6.4
88.6
4.8
2.2
1.9
2.6
64.2
11.2
6.7
6.2
11.7
Mal
e79
.56.
73.
83.
66.
489
.04.
72.
11.
82.
562
.611
.46.
96.
612
.6
Unk
now
n78
.86.
43.
73.
67.
787
.65.
02.
42.
03.
159
.611
.16.
76.
516
.1
Acc
ount
Bal
ance
Less
than
$5,
000
92.6
3.9
1.3
0.9
1.3
95.8
2.6
0.7
0.4
0.5
81.9
8.7
3.3
2.3
3.8
$5,0
00–$
9,99
985
.66.
62.
51.
93.
492
.14.
71.
30.
81.
174
.810
.44.
43.
56.
9
$10,
000–
$24,
999
79.5
7.6
4.1
3.3
5.4
89.2
5.3
2.3
1.5
1.8
63.5
12.3
7.2
6.1
11.0
$25,
000–
$49,
999
72.8
7.7
5.0
5.1
9.3
85.9
5.6
2.8
2.5
3.2
53.4
12.2
8.4
8.6
17.4
$50,
000–
$99,
999
70.3
7.4
5.0
5.5
11.8
84.5
5.5
3.0
2.8
4.3
50.1
11.6
8.3
8.8
21.2
$100
,000
–$14
9,99
973
.87.
04.
44.
810
.185
.45.
22.
72.
64.
155
.611
.47.
57.
817
.7
$150
,000
–$24
9,99
976
.57.
04.
34.
47.
986
.65.
12.
52.
33.
560
.511
.77.
37.
213
.3
$250
,000
or
mor
e79
.36.
84.
03.
96.
188
.24.
82.
32.
02.
866
.811
.16.
66.
29.
4S
ourc
e: E
BR
I IR
A D
atab
ase.
* T
he c
onsi
sten
t sam
ple
has
only
the
indi
vidu
als
with
at l
east
one
acc
ount
in e
ach
year
(20
10–2
013)
of t
he d
atab
ase.
^ T
radi
tiona
l inc
lude
s bo
th c
ontr
ibut
ory
and
rollo
ver
in th
is fi
gure
.# A
ge is
of 2
012
and
acco
unt b
alan
ce is
of 2
013.
Fig
ure
30P
erce
nta
ge
of
a C
on
sist
ent
Sam
ple
* o
f IR
A O
wn
ing
Ind
ivid
ual
s fr
om
201
0–20
13
Wh
o C
on
trib
ute
d in
Var
iou
s N
um
ber
of
Yea
rs, b
y IR
A T
ype,
Ag
e, G
end
er, a
nd
Acc
ou
nt
Bal
ance
Tra
ditio
nal^
Rot
hT
otal
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 27
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 28
Conclusion This study provides results for the fifth year (2013) of data available from the EBRI IRA Database, with the last four years being contiguous. The results show the importance of being able to measure not only account balances, but also an individual’s combined account balances to determine the potential total retirement savings he or she has by the aggregation of multiple accounts. Indeed, the overall, cumulative IRA average balance was 26 percent larger than the unique account balance. Therefore, databases that are not able to link accounts owned by the same individual within and across data providers will likely understate the total IRA assets owned by that individual, and thus the total retirement accumulations held by individuals.
With four years of contiguous data now available in the database, a more detailed examination of the longitudinal changes in these individuals’ IRAs was possible. While the overall average balance increased 32.2 percent for those individuals with an account in each year from 2010–2013, 25 percent (regardless of age) had increases less than 2.6 percent since 2010. On the other hand, the highest 25 percent of balance changes exceeded 57.1 percent. Roth-IRA owners experienced a much higher distribution of increases, with the lowest 25 percent of the balance changes for IRAs topping out at 26.7 percent, and the highest 25 percent exceeding 84.5 percent.
An annual-snapshot percentage of those contributing to IRAs doesn’t show whether the same individuals were contributing over time, or if different people contributed in different years. However, a consistent longitudinal sample allows for this examination. For example, among Traditional-IRA owners, approximately 6 percent contributed to the IRA annually, but over a four-year period just over 11 percent of Traditional-IRA owners contributed. The percentage contributing also increased for Roth-IRA owners, from approximately 25 percent in any one year to over 37 percent over the four-year period.
As the EBRI IRA Database continues to expand and mature, further examinations of the longitudinal changes will be conducted. The first such examinations included in this study were an investigation of the changes in IRA balances for
32.9
%
24.
4%
17.6
%
13.8
%
35.7
%
30.
7%
6.7%
7.3%
20.5
%
18.6
%
38.4
%
35.0
%
6.2
%
7.6
%
11.2
%
12.8
%
22.3
%
22.8
%
44.0
%
44.3
%
36.6%
47.0%
32.6%
37.9%39.3%
42.2%
56.0% 55.7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Traditional Roth Traditional Roth Traditional Roth Traditional Roth
Of Those Contributing Four Years,Contributing the Maximum
Of Those Contributing ThreeYears, Contributing the Maximum
Of Those Contributing Only TwoYears, Contributing the Maximum
Of Those Contributing Only OneYear, Contributing the Maximum
4 Years
3 Years
2 Years
1 Year
None
Figure 31Percentage of Individuals, by IRA Type, Contributing Who Contributed
the Maximum for a Different Number of Years, Depending on Number of Years Contributing, for a Consistent Sample* of IRA Owners from 2010–2013
Source: EBRI IRA Database.* The consistent sample has only the individuals with at least one account in each year (2010–2013) of the database. Traditional includes all Traditional IRAs.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 29
the same set of individuals, as well as the persistence of contributions among these same individuals. Now that the linking of the IRA Database with DC account data is underway, results on the combination of individuals’ assets in these accounts can be determined, along with the growth and movement of dollars both within and between these accounts. Ultimately, the tracking of dollars from DC plan accumulations, to IRA rollovers, and eventually through decumulation will be measured to assess whether retirees seem positioned for a remaining lifetime of financial well-being.
2010
2011
2012
2010
2011
2012
All
All
All
All
Con
trib
utin
g in
All
Yea
rsA
llA
llA
llA
llC
ontr
ibut
ing
in A
ll Y
ears
All
$4,0
00$4
,057
$4,1
28$4
,436
$4,4
60$3
,689
$3,7
46$3
,769
$4,0
31$3
,931
Age
#
Und
er 2
52,
574
2,58
42,
665
2,96
62,
812
2,61
32,
853
3,04
83,
391
3,43
4
25-2
92,
665
2,62
22,
780
3,11
42,
813
3,16
33,
216
3,27
23,
529
3,55
3
30-3
42,
986
3,01
63,
115
3,53
73,
214
3,22
73,
249
3,24
53,
466
3,45
6
35-3
93,
390
3,41
43,
485
3,88
13,
713
3,20
53,
229
3,21
23,
428
3,38
5
40-4
43,
546
3,59
63,
648
4,01
23,
952
3,24
63,
282
3,28
23,
497
3,42
0
45-4
93,
671
3,71
03,
844
4,23
14,
234
3,40
13,
440
3,50
53,
805
3,70
5
50–5
44,
035
4,25
84,
371
4,72
54,
761
3,87
04,
082
4,14
84,
470
4,35
6
55–5
94,
430
4,48
34,
534
4,82
54,
888
4,42
84,
498
4,52
84,
834
4,72
5
60–6
44,
567
4,59
94,
644
4,89
84,
970
4,75
54,
793
4,79
25,
086
4,98
8
65–6
94,
648
4,65
14,
705
4,95
45,
092
4,88
94,
898
4,88
85,
163
5,10
5
70 o
r ol
der
4,42
74,
552
4,73
94,
563
4,91
44,
781
4,75
64,
756
4,99
05,
084
Unk
now
n4,
390
4,40
24,
455
4,67
74,
771
3,82
43,
963
3,82
64,
244
3,92
6
Gen
der
Fem
ale
4,05
54,
088
4,16
24,
474
4,55
43,
831
3,86
23,
888
4,14
64,
107
Mal
e4,
174
4,21
44,
284
4,59
34,
716
3,89
33,
925
3,94
64,
210
4,22
0
Unk
now
n3,
550
3,69
03,
751
4,04
53,
818
3,07
03,
218
3,23
43,
496
3,18
5
Acc
ount
Bal
ance
Less
than
$5,
000
1,82
91,
521
1,37
21,
499
1,28
81,
574
1,33
61,
179
1,21
51,
051
$5,0
00–$
9,99
92,
341
1,69
11,
794
2,24
61,
262
1,89
11,
390
1,38
41,
694
1,14
2
$10,
000–
$24,
999
2,78
92,
686
2,79
73,
119
2,06
22,
519
2,47
02,
511
2,77
22,
085
$25,
000–
$49,
999
3,67
63,
769
3,84
84,
176
3,82
43,
599
3,71
83,
746
4,01
23,
786
$50,
000–
$99,
999
4,25
84,
354
4,42
64,
778
4,75
84,
292
4,36
74,
385
4,69
34,
665
$100
,000
–$14
9,99
94,
603
4,68
54,
739
5,09
55,
210
4,62
04,
678
4,71
45,
040
5,10
6
$150
,000
–$24
9,99
94,
763
4,81
54,
876
5,21
75,
421
4,69
64,
767
4,78
05,
132
5,17
9
$250
,000
or
mor
e5,
075
5,11
55,
187
5,52
75,
757
5,06
65,
108
5,12
85,
493
5,54
7S
ourc
e: E
BR
I IR
A D
atab
ase.
* T
he c
onsi
sten
t sam
ple
has
only
the
indi
vidu
als
with
at l
east
one
acc
ount
in e
ach
year
(20
10–
2013
) of
the
data
base
.
^ In
clud
es a
ll tr
aditi
onal
IRA
s.# A
ge is
of 2
012
and
acco
unt b
alan
ce is
of 2
013.
2013
Fig
ure
32A
vera
ge
IRA
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
n 2
010–
2013
an
d t
he
Ave
rag
e C
on
trib
uti
on
of
Th
ose
Wh
o
C
on
trib
ute
d in
All
Fo
ur
Yea
rs f
or
a C
on
sist
ent
Sam
ple
* o
f In
div
idu
als
2013
,B
y IR
A T
ype
and
Ag
e, G
end
er, a
nd
Acc
ou
nt
Bal
ance
Tra
ditio
nal^
Rot
h
2013
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 30
Private Defined Benefit12%
Private Defined Contribution (including 401(k)s)
19%
Individual Retirement Accounts
27%
Private Insured9%
State & Local Government20%
Federal Government13%
Box Figure A Sources of Estimated Total U.S. Retirement Plan Assets, 2013
(Total $26.2 trillion)
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, "Financial Accounts of the Untied States: Flow of Funds, Balance Sheets,and Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts." Fourth Quarter 2014.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 31
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 32
About IRAs
Individual retirement accounts (IRAs) were created by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) as a way to provide workers who did not have employment-based pensions an opportunity to save for retirement on a tax-deferred basis. The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) extended the availability of IRAs to all workers with earned income, including those with pension coverage. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA ’86) restricted the tax deductibility of IRA contributions to those with incomes below certain levels and created nondeductible IRAs (where contributions are not tax-deductible but earnings still accrue tax-deferred), and partially (or wholly) deductible IRAs, depending on income. The Taxpayer’s Relief Act of 1997 (TRA ’97) created a new type of nondeductible IRA—the Roth IRA—and allowed nonworking spouses to contribute to an IRA, subject to certain income restrictions. As an account type, IRAs currently hold the largest single share of U.S. retirement plan assets, largely from rollovers from other types of plans (see Box Figure A).
Nonemployment-based IRAs. There are two basic types:
Traditional IRAs: Anyone with earned income, as well as a nonearning spouse of an earner under certain conditions, can contribute. Contributions are tax deductible (or not) depending upon the contributor’s income and participation in an employment-based retirement plan. Earnings in these IRAs accrue tax-deferred, and withdrawals after age 59-½ are taxed as ordinary income. Minimum withdrawals from a Traditional IRA must commence by April 1 of the calendar year after the year the individual turns age 70-½.
Roth IRAs: This type of IRA offers tax-free investing for retirement: No taxes are paid on investment returns or on withdrawals made after age 59-½, as long as the Roth IRA has been held for at least five years. Contributions to Roth IRAs are not tax-deductible, but there are no mandatory withdrawals after age 70-½ (as there are with Traditional IRAs). Certain income limits restrict eligibility for contributing to a Roth IRA.
The current, maximum, annual contribution to a Traditional or Roth IRA is $5,500 for those under age 50 at the end of 2015. This limit can be split between a Traditional and a Roth IRA, but the combined limit is $5,500. Those age 50 or older in 2015 can make an additional $1,000 “catch-up” contribution, for a combined annual limit of $6,500. The maximum contribution to a Roth IRA and the maximum deductible contribution to a Traditional IRA may be reduced depending upon an individual’s modified, adjusted gross income.
Employment-based IRAs
Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) plans allow employers to make contributions on a tax-deferred basis for their employees and allow self-employed individuals to make contributions for their own retirement.
Savings Incentive Match Plans for Employees (SIMPLE) plans also allow for tax-deferred, employer contributions plus allow salary-reduction contributions by the employees. The employers must make matching contributions or nonelective contributions to the plans.
Traditional–originating from rollovers (TOFR) IRAs or Traditional—originating from contributions (TOFC) IRAs: In the EBRI IRA Database, Traditional IRAs are separated into two categories to highlight the amount of IRA assets that have moved from other tax-qualified plans (including defined benefit (DB), defined contribution (DC), and prior IRA plans) and were subsequently rolled over to new IRAs―those originating from rollovers and those originating from contributions. However, this in no instance should be construed as an estimate of the dollars originating in the employment-based system and transferred to the IRA system, as both types of accounts could have received rollovers or contributions subsequent to their establishment. Additionally, a rollover could have been an IRA-to-IRA rollover without any money originating in the employment-based system. This distinction is important for those interested in seeing the relative contribution of the employment-based retirement system vs. that funded solely by IRA contributions. As the longitudinal aspect of this database is developed, a more refined measure of these dollars will be established. The Internal Revenue Service reports these accounts as a single category called Traditional IRAs. The tax treatment is the same for these IRAs once the dollars are in the IRA.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 33
Endnotes 1 See Box Figure A at the end of this study.
2 See Craig Copeland, “Individual Retirement Account Balances, Contributions, and Rollovers, 2012; With Longitudinal Results 2010–2012: The EBRI IRA Database,” EBRI Issue Brief, no. 399 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2014) for the most recent prior year of the database.
3 Below is a comparison of the EBRI IRA Database with numbers from the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Reserve’s Financial Accounts report as referenced in the Box Figure A.
EBRI IRA
Database 2010
EBRI IRA
Database 2013
Internal Revenue
Service 2010 Data
Flow of Funds
2013 Data
Total Assets $1.00 trillion $2.46 trillion $5.03 trillion $6.97 trillion
Percentage Traditional Assets 85.9% 85.3% 86.3%
Average Rollover Amount $69,012 $90,912 $68,123
Average Account Balance $89,427 $118,185 $92,404
The above percentage of Traditional assets is adjusted for known assets. With the unknown assets included, the Traditional IRA asset percentage is 82.5 percent. Based on this asset comparison, the database includes about 35 percent of the 2013 assets. The number of individuals owning IRAs in the database represents about one-third of all IRA owners, accounting for growth from the 54.5 million individuals the Internal Revenue Service reported owning an IRA in 2010. See Victoria L. Bryant and Jon Gober, “Accumulation and Distribution of Individual Account Arrangements, 2010.” Statistics of Income Bulletin, Fall 2013, pp. 1-18 for complete IRS tabs of IRAs. Also see the discussion in the About IRAs box about the differences in IRA types.
4 Traditional IRAs are broken down into categories based on how the accounts originated with the data providers either through contributions made by the account owners or through rollovers from other tax-qualified vehicles, such as traditional pension or 401(k) plans. Since both of these account categories could have received contributions or rollovers at some point after their origination, these are NOT proxies for employment-based dollars vs. IRA-only dollars. The TOFR IRAs do provide an estimate of the dollars that have been moved into new IRAs.
5 Some of the IRAs could not be classified into the four stated categories by the data providers. Consequently, these accounts are classified as “unknown” in this database.
6 For those with a known account, 37.1 percent were TOFC IRAs, 31.0 percent TOFR IRAs (combined 68.1 percent), 24.7 percent Roth, and 7.2 percent SEP/SIMPLE.
7 IRAs in the unknown category had a significantly larger percentage with these lower balances at 69.1 percent pushing the overall percentage above 45 percent, as the next highest category with these lower balances is Roth-IRA owners who had 43.8 percent with a balance below $25,000.
8 This isn’t surprising considering that Roth IRAs didn’t exist until 1998. Furthermore, Roth IRAs have a higher percentage of younger contributors who, on average, contribute less annually. Additionally, Roth IRAs have generally not received large rollovers from other tax-qualified plans, such as 401(k) plans, that Traditional rollover IRAs have received. However, this could change over time with the growing availability of a Roth option in 401(k) plans and changes in tax laws that allow for more ease in converting Traditional IRAs into Roth IRAs.
9 The individual account-balance distribution could shift toward a larger percentage of individuals having balances greater than $100,000 in the future as the database expands to include other data providers. However, this will depend on the number of new individuals added relative to the number of new accounts added for individuals already in the database.
ebri.org Issue Brief • May 2015 • No. 414 34
10 In 2010, the ability of individuals to convert their Traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs was significantly eased. As a result, after 2010, the differences in the average balances between TOFR, TOFC, and Roth IRAs could become smaller, depending on the number of individuals taking advantage of these new Roth-conversion rules.
11 TOFR IRAs and those of unknown type, where owner age was unknown, had significantly higher average balances than those of all other ages for those IRA types. This reflects a specific segment of the market for which some of the data administrators do not have age records. The likelihood of having more than one IRA was also much higher among this group with an unknown age.
12 Contributions to SEP and SIMPLE IRAs are not considered in this section due to the differing limits in them relative to the nonemployment-based IRAs and the potential incentives to contribute to SIMPLEs through matching contributions.
13 In 2013, the maximum contribution to an IRA was $5,500 for those younger than age 50 and $6,500 for those ages 50 or older, due to the additional $1,000 catch-up contribution allowed individuals of that age.
14 In 2001, 69.9 percent of those making a contribution to a deductible, Traditional IRA made the maximum contribution ($2,000), but in 2005, only 26.8 percent were found to have made the maximum contribution ($4,000 for those under age 50 and $4,500 for those ages 50 or older) to this IRA type. See Craig Copeland, “Ownership of Individual Retirement Accounts and 401(k)-Type Plans,” EBRI Notes, no. 5 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2008): 2–12. In 2012, when the limits were $5,000 and $6,000, 51.9 percent of accounts received the maximum contribution and 53.5 percent of individuals made the maximum contribution from the IRA database See Copeland 2014.
15 The individuals making the maximum contribution could be higher if individuals are contributing to more than one account and the other account(s) is (are) not in the database. However, within the database, of those contributing to a Roth IRA in 2013, only 4.3 percent also contributed to a Traditional IRA. Of those contributing to a Traditional IRA, only 6.0 percent contributed to a Roth IRA. Furthermore, 97.4 percent of those contributing to either a Traditional or Roth IRA in 2013 contributed to only that IRA. Thus, virtually all of those contributing to an IRA contribute to only one account.
16 Those accounts owned by individuals with an unspecified gender in the database had a similar overall likelihood of receiving contributions than that of those with a known gender. However, Roth accounts of those with a unknown gender were slightly more likely and Traditional accounts of those with a unknown gender slightly less likely to receive a contribution than were accounts owned by those with a known gender. Yet, overall the results are very similar across gender possibilities in the database, so there is no conclusive evidence that the male–female split is not overall representative despite the percentage without a known gender.
17 All of the values in the longitudinal section are nominal dollars.
18 This sample includes 9.9 million individuals with $1.17 trillion (2013 value). Compare Figures 2 and 26 to see the distribution of the individual owners by age and gender. The distributions are very similar.
19 The distribution of the percentage IRA balance changes became more negative for the oldest owners. For example, those owners ages 70–74 had a 25th percentile of change at -1.4 percent and a median of 16.6 percent, owners ages 75–84 had a 25th percentile of -6.5 percent and a median of 11.4 percent, and those ages 85 or older a 25th percentile of -13.6 percent and 4.1 percent for a median.
20 In an earlier EBRI publication, the persistence of contributions was investigated. A different formulation of the persistence statistic based on the current-year contributors to see what percentage of those contributed in both of the prior years was used. It was found that 21.8 percent of those making deductible contributions to an IRA in 1998 also made them in 1996 and 1997. Furthermore, three–fourths of those who contributed all three years made the maximum contribution in 1998, compared with 70.4 percent of those who made a deductible contribution in 1998. See Craig Copeland, “IRA Assets and Characteristics of IRA Owners,” EBRI Notes, no. 12 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, December 2002): 1–9.
1100 13th Street NW · Suite 878 Washington, DC 20005
(202) 659-0670 www.ebri.org
www.choosetosave.org
Where the world turns for the facts on U.S. employee benefits. Retirement and health benefits are at the heart of workers’, employers’, and our nation’s economic security. Founded in 1978, EBRI is the most authoritative and objective source of information on these critical, complex issues. EBRI focuses solely on employee benefits research — no lobbying or advocacy.
EBRI stands alone in employee benefits research as an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan organization. It analyzes and reports research data without spin or underlying agenda. All findings, whether on financial data, options, or trends, are revealing and reliable — the reason EBRI information is the gold standard for private analysts and decision makers, government policymakers, the media, and the public.
EBRI explores the breadth of employee benefits and related issues.
EBRI studies the world of health and retirement benefits — issues such as 401(k)s, IRAs, retirement income adequacy, consumer-driven benefits, Social Security, tax treatment of both retirement and health benefits, cost management, worker and employer attitudes, policy reform proposals, and pension assets and funding. There is widespread recognition that if employee benefits data exist, EBRI knows it.
EBRI delivers a steady stream of invaluable research and analysis.
EBRI publications include in-depth coverage of key issues and trends; summaries of research findings and policy developments; timely factsheets on hot topics; regular updates on legislative and regulatory developments; comprehensive reference resources on benefit programs and workforce issues; and major surveys of public attitudes.
EBRI meetings present and explore issues with thought leaders from all sectors. EBRI regularly provides congressional testimony, and briefs policymakers, member organizations,
and the media on employer benefits. EBRI issues press releases on newsworthy developments, and is among the most widely quoted
sources on employee benefits by all media. EBRI directs members and other constituencies to the information they need and undertakes new
research on an ongoing basis. EBRI maintains and analyzes the most comprehensive database of 401(k)-type programs in the
world. Its computer simulation analyses on Social Security reform and retirement income adequacy are unique.
EBRI makes information freely available to all.
EBRI assumes a public service responsibility to make its findings completely accessible at www.ebri.org — so that all decisions that relate to employee benefits, whether made in Congress or board rooms or families’ homes, are based on the highest quality, most dependable information. EBRI’s Web site posts all research findings, publications, and news alerts. EBRI also extends its education and public service role to improving Americans’ financial knowledge through its award-winning public service campaign ChoosetoSave® and the companion site www.choosetosave.org
EBRI is supported by organizations from all industries and sectors that appreciate the value of unbiased, reliable information on employee benefits. Visit www.ebri.org/about/join/ for more.
EBRI Employee Benefit Research Institute Issue Brief (ISSN 0887137X) is published monthly by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC, 20005-4051, at $300 per year or is included as part of a membership subscription. Periodi-cals postage rate paid in Washington, DC, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: EBRI Issue Brief, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC, 20005-4051. Copyright 2015 by Employee Benefit Research Institute. All rights reserved. No. 414.
The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) was founded in 1978. Its mission is to contribute to, to encourage, and to enhance the development of sound employee benefit programs and sound public policy through objective research and education. EBRI is the only private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, Washington, DC-based organization committed exclusively to public policy research and education on economic security and employee benefit issues. EBRI’s membership includes a cross-section of pension funds; businesses; trade associations; labor unions; health care providers and insurers; government organizations; and service firms.
EBRI’s work advances knowledge and understanding of employee benefits and their importance to the nation’s economy among policymakers, the news media, and the public. It does this by conducting and publishing policy research, analysis, and special reports on employee benefits issues; holding educational briefings for EBRI members, congressional and federal agency staff, and the news media; and sponsoring public opinion surveys on employee benefit issues. EBRI’s Education and Research Fund (EBRI-ERF) performs the charitable, educational, and scientific functions of the Institute. EBRI-ERF is a tax-exempt organization supported by contributions and grants.
EBRI Issue Briefs is a monthly periodical with in-depth evaluation of employee benefit issues and trends, as well as critical analyses of employee benefit policies and proposals. EBRI Notes is a monthly periodical providing current information on a variety of employee benefit topics. EBRIef is a weekly roundup of EBRI research and insights, as well as updates on surveys, studies, litigation, legislation and regulation affecting employee benefit plans, while EBRI’s Blog supplements our regular publications, offering commentary on questions received from news reporters, policymakers, and others. The EBRI Databook on Employee Benefits is a statistical reference work on employee benefit programs and work force-related issues.
Contact EBRI Publications, (202) 659-0670; fax publication orders to (202) 775-6312. Subscriptions to EBRI Issue Briefs are included as part of EBRI membership, or as part of a $199 annual subscription to EBRI Notes and EBRI Issue Briefs. Change of Address: EBRI, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC, 20005-4051, (202) 659-0670; fax number, (202) 775-6312; e-mail: [email protected] Membership Information: Inquiries regarding EBRI membership and/or contributions to EBRI-ERF should be directed to EBRI President Dallas Salisbury at the above address, (202) 659-0670; e-mail: [email protected]
Editorial Board: Dallas L. Salisbury, publisher; Stephen Blakely, editor. Any views expressed in this publication and those of the authors should not be ascribed to the officers, trustees, members, or other sponsors of the Employee Benefit Research Institute, the EBRI Education and Research Fund, or their staffs. Nothing herein is to be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the adoption of any pending legislation, regulation, or interpretative rule, or as legal, accounting, actuarial, or other such professional advice. www.ebri.org
EBRI Issue Brief is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. ISSN: 0887137X/90 0887137X/90 $ .50+.50
© 2015, Employee Benefit Research InstituteEducation and Research Fund. All rights reserved.
Who we are
What we do
Our publications
Orders/ Subscriptions