The Biden administration has proposed a rule to help people save more in retirement and avoid "junk" fees from unscrupulous financial advisers.

According to the White House, a financial adviser may receive a commission as high as 6.5% to recommend some insurance products, posing a conflict of interest.

Melondia Franklin Corpus, an educator for 36 years, finally reached her retirement milestone last May. But as soon as she filed for retirement six months prior, she said a flood of calls and solicitation started to pour in from financial advisers pitching retirement services and plans with few details.

"One guy called me, and it was almost a pressure-sale type thing, you know; 'This offer is only going to be good for this week,' blah, blah, blah - and I'm, like, 'No, I don't make a commitment based on that, please send me some information, let me look at it,'" she said.

While Corpus avoided falling into a bad situation, she said a friend who retired right before went into an investment without realizing he couldn't touch his funds for five years without penalty. The new proposal is intended to standardize the rules for everyone paid to offer retirement advice and sell retirement products.

A statement from the Insured Retirement Institute attacked Biden's proposal, claiming the "fiduciary rule will harm the very consumers he wants to help and deepen the nation's retirement crisis by limiting access to sound financial advice."

Existing fiduciary rules from the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the Securities and Exchange Commission do not comprehensively cover all investment products, such as one-time rollovers from a 401(k) to an IRA.

Corpus says the new protections are a step in the right direction and should be expanded to all consumers.

"An advisor should never be recommending something to any client regardless of their status based on his commission. So I think retirees, definitely, but I think it should be across the board," Corpus explained.

The White House uses the investment product, fixed-index annuities, as an example of where junk fees may cost savers as much as $5 billion annually. Meanwhile, the Insured Retirement Institute claims, "Biden and the Department of Labor showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the insurance industry and annuity products work for the benefit of consumers," and offered to provide education and information.

The proposal is open for public comment for 60 days before any potential revisions are made.


get more stories like this via email

New research released by AARP Iowa shows how important Social Security benefits are to people who receive them - and the numbers reveal women are far more likely to list those benefits as critical.

About 700,000 Iowans receive Social Security benefits, and 55% are women.

AARP Iowa State Director Brad Anderson said he dug into the data, to find out why women see this as an important issue in their lives - in far greater numbers than men.

He said it's because women tend to have far smaller Social Security checks - due to factors like receiving lower wages than men, and taking on unpaid family care-giving responsibilities during their lives.

"In addition to that, women have fewer resources of retirement income than men," said Anderson. "And so, what that means is, men can rely more on stocks and bonds and pensions - whereas women really rely more heavily on Social Security."

Anderson and other advocates are calling on Congress to address the dwindling Social Security Trust Fund, which could be forced to cut benefits by 2035 unless Congress acts to address the funding shortfall.

In addition to earning less and qualifying for fewer benefits, women also typically live longer than men - which, Anderson says, means they have to stretch their Social Security income even further.

"When you put it all together," said Anderson, "it makes a lot of sense that women find Social Security and the strength of Social Security an extremely important issue, when it comes to the polls that we've seen."

AARP Iowa released its findings on the heels of a national report on the financial health of Medicare and Social Security.

Twenty percent of older adults in central Ohio either were not prepared or did not know if they were prepared for extreme weather, according to a recent study by Ohio State University researchers.

The analysis relied on data from the 2021 Central Ohio Regional Assessment on Aging Survey, which included more than 1,400 adults over age 65 in eight central Ohio counties.

OSU Assistant Professor in the College of Social Work Smitha Rao said the research is meant to be a conversation starter about how older adults are faring, and a launching point for area agencies on aging to help determine who is most vulnerable.

"To get a sense of where the emphasis of service delivery needs to be and who's missed out," said Rao, "because on the face of it you can say that almost 80% of the older adults are prepared, but it is those 20% who are unsure or who are not prepared that we should be focused on."

In counties where greater proportions of older adults had a lower income, lived in subsidized housing, and reported having a disability, higher percentages of respondents also reported not being prepared.

Nearly one fifth of older residents in Fayette County reported missing health appointments or not being able to get medicine, reach their job or place of volunteering, or get to family and friends because of severe weather conditions.

Rao added that the data also show that in some counties, older adults face daily barriers meeting basic needs - not just during extreme weather.

"Those were interesting results that showed up for us, in terms of how many people said that there were everyday disruptions," said Rao, "especially when we looked at the different counties and the differences within that."

Climate projections suggest that Ohioan can expect more heavy rainfall, extreme heat and air pollution days in the coming decades.

Rao said she and her colleagues have started a new project to talk directly to older adults and learn from their experiences, hoping to develop tools that can help them better prepare for emergencies.

A new national survey says one in five Americans 50 and older has nothing in savings for retirement.

Wisconsin workers young and old are being urged to take action now, to avoid added financial stress in their later years.

The survey results were issued by AARP this month.

Just affording basic expenses right now is a concern for many. But AARP Wisconsin's Communications Director Jim Flaherty said you don't want to be caught off guard when retirement nears.

He acknowledged that it can be hard for younger adults to plan that far ahead, when they're juggling expenses like student loan debt - or for older individuals managing costly medications, and higher grocery bills.

"A lot of times, because they're just trying to get by and they do have to live paycheck-to-paycheck," said Flaherty. "But this is one way to say, 'Hey, if you can live with a little less from your paycheck every week, that will sure grow.'"

Researchers note that 57 million Americans don't have access to a retirement plan through their work.

Wisconsin has not yet joined the list of states that have created state-operated retirement accounts, where employers and their workers can contribute money each pay period.

Supporters hope the issue is revisited next legislative session.

Flaherty said a combination of individuals being proactive and policymakers easing household budget pressure can hopefully put more people on a path toward a healthy retirement.

He said making progress can deter them from looking elsewhere to spend their golden years.

"Let's have an infrastructure that makes drugs affordable, that makes healthcare affordable, that makes retirement savings something that's part of their plan," said Flaherty. "And that'll keep Wisconsinites here."

And groups like AARP have encouraged Congress to address long-term stability concerns for Social Security, so that younger workers can anticipate full benefits.

Some Republican lawmakers have floated cuts, but senior advocates contend any solutions to make the program stronger should not be tied to deficit talks.