Dow-17.24down-0.17%
10,433.71
Nasdaq-6.83down-0.31%
2,169.18
S&P-0.59down-0.05%
1,105.65

MSN Money Video

Video on MSN Money
This video requires an updated version of the free Adobe Flash Player.
More video on MSN Money
Retirement © Corbis

Extra11/3/2009 12:01 AM ET

Retirement: How does the US compare?

A new study ranks the retirement systems of 11 nations, and the findings aren't all that good for Americans.

By MarketWatch

We're No. 6! OK, so it's not really something worth boasting about, but at least the U.S. can claim its retirement-income system is better than at least five others, according to a first-of-its-kind study ranking the retirement-income systems of 11 countries.

The Melbourne Mercer Global Pension Index ranked countries based on the adequacy, sustainability and integrity of their public and private pension systems. The Netherlands topped the rankings, followed by Australia, Sweden, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. Chile came in at No. 7, followed by Singapore, Germany, China and Japan.

Adequacy refers to whether projected retirement benefits will provide a reasonable standard of living in old age, said Charles Salmans, a spokesman at Mercer. Sustainability regards whether a country's pension programs will pay benefits in decades to come as current workers retire and life expectancy improves. (See the Mercer news release.)

In measuring sustainability, Mercer evaluated such factors as the demographics of the population (the ratio of productive workers to retirees), the funding status of pension plans relative to pension liabilities and the level of government debt. And integrity speaks to matters of governance -- whether systems of prudent regulation, risk protection and oversight are in place.

None is perfect

Not one of the 11 countries studied scored an A for its retirement-income system. No country has a "first-class and robust retirement-income system that delivers good benefits, is sustainable and has a level of integrity," according to Mercer. But the index did confirm what experts have long thought to be true: The Netherlands and Australia have the top two retirement-income systems in the world, a fact noted in a previous column.

Of note, Sweden and Canada have the third- and fourth-best systems in the world, according to the study. As for the U.S., Mercer gives it high marks for the sustainability of its pension plans but low marks for the adequacy of retirement income.

Video: Retirement savings and spending strategy

"The largest single element of a shortfall for the U.S. is in the adequacy of projected retirement income for our retirees, particularly at the lower income levels," Salmans said via e-mail. "U.S. companies are freezing or closing their defined-benefit plans and cutting or eliminating their 401(k) matches."

What's more, Americans aren't saving enough for retirement, and a large percentage won't have enough assets and income to maintain their lifestyle in retirement. The average American household will have only 63% of the income needed in retirement, according to a new report from consulting firm McKinsey, which took into account Social Security, defined-benefit plans, defined-contribution plans and personal savings.

"The funding of defined-benefit plans in the U.S. remains a challenge," wrote Arthur Noonan, a senior consultant and actuary at Mercer. "We anticipate that many plan sponsors will face substantial increases in their required cash contributions in 2010. Funding issues also affect public-sector pension plans, and, longer term, the funding of Social Security is an issue.

"Clearly, U.S. policymakers and the private sector are grappling with the challenge of balancing the adequacy of benefits with the sustainability of public and private pension plans, a matter of special concern during a difficult global financial and economic environment," Noonan added. "Thus, even though the sustainability of U.S. pension plans is greater than in countries with a more rapidly aging population or more generous benefits, the funded status of U.S. defined-benefit plans remains a concern. Expense and cash funding of defined-benefit plans is likely to continue at historically high levels."

Moreover, Noonan said, the U.S. is challenged to improve the adequacy of pensions as its work force reaches retirement age and as the tough economic climate causes companies to reduce or suspend 401k matching contributions and freeze or close defined-benefit plans.

Continued: Getting to No. 1

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 132
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:21:45 AM
And we all thought our country is number one in the world for everything? We have truly lost our position in the global sense. As we continue to go broke welcome to the new emerging US third world country. 
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:28:20 AM
Most importantly, don't depend on the government to take care of your retirement.  Save enough to retire without government aid, so if you do end up getting it it will be a bonus.  Also, the idea about raising the retirement age would definitely help.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:31:01 AM
It is as usual, more rules and regulation to boycott what you do , how and when with your money.  Allow people to work longer! What a joke, your body wears down and a lot of people are happy to retire and enjoy a few golden years, not to mention that a lot of young people don't have jobs.  This whole thing is just another scam to hold on to the people's money.  There was more then adequate money in SS, Johnson should have kept his hands out of the treasury chest and the government whom by the way voted itself a 30% raise in congress should do the same for SS retirement incomes. Dirty politicians, don't tell me what I can and cannot with my money and give our elders decent income!
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:41:28 AM
Stop government waste, control medicare/medicaid fraud, mandate term limits and pass line item veto...not all that complicated!
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:47:44 AM
Usually when I read an article related to retirement planning the fixes are what others (government and employers) can do for people for their retirement.  People need to take care of themselves and stop looking for help.  The only help they should need is from a financial planner.  The main reason people don't plan for retirement is they are unwilling to do without "things" during their working life.  Stop buying houses you can't afford, stop buying cars you can't afford, stop buying toys you can't afford, and start saving.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:56:25 AM
If you didn't catch which the "best" countries are for retirement, note that they are, for the most part, socialist democracies.  Of course they have better retirement systems-most beneficial to the poor.  They have no incentive to work and save for retirement because the government will come to the rescue.  However, those that have worked for a living are not much better off than those who didn't.  That's exactly what Obombo wants. 
Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:58:25 AM

I have another proposal:  Lower the fees that us working class folks have to pay for 'management' and 'trades'. 

 

Large institutional investors pay fractions of a penny for each share traded.  We should be allowed the same fee structure.

 

That 1% fee per year equals 68% or so off your returns by the time you retire.  That should be .001% like the big boys get.  The Rich have adjusted the playing field to prevent the poor from saving enough for retirement.  It's time we set the fee and management structure to match what they get.

 

Also, we no longer have pensions in this country since !@#$ Congress passed the 401(K) legislation.  This allows rich people to 'defer' compensation, but when you're making 30K per year and barely able to cover bills, you're not going to be making enough to 'max out' your contributions.  Why are Pensions bad for bankrupting companies like GM, but GREAT for AIG because they retain the top MORONS Who created Credit Default SWAPS???????????????

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:58:46 AM

As most of the above have already said in one way or another:  People - you need to save, and a lot.

 

The government (i.e., your neighbors) is not going to take care of you, and shame on you for even asking!  Grow up and earn your keep - for life.  Guess what, that means you probably can't have everything you want today, or even tomorrow.  What you can have is a life full of the satisfaction derived from having taken care of yourself.  You can't buy that, but you can earn it.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:00:38 AM

Let's remember how we got into this mess, or rather these messes:

 

Barry Goldwater must be writhing in his grave to see how his GOP has been highjacked from genuine conservatism, which preached fiscal responsibility (Reagan, Bush, and Bush ran up the debt by $8.5 trillion in 20 years, when it had taken 200 years to get to $1 trillion in debt), staying out of foreign politics (Iraq), and leaving people's private lives alone (anti-gay fervor). At least Bush Sr had the sense to call Reagan's Supply Side what it is: "Voodoo Economics". Before he caved in and jumped on board, that is. He also had the sense to stay out of Iraq. 

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:01:50 AM
The problem with this analysis is that the authors don't take account for scale and demography.  The US has a population of 308 million and a varied ethnicity and considerable immigration to absorb.  The 1st five nations have a combined population of 142 million and typically have a homogeneous population of some 80 - 85%.  Just the scale issue makes the analysis flawed.  It's like living in a small town versus NYC.  And the demographics and cultures further complicates the validity of the findings.  Sweden (9 million and 80+% Swedish)  Come on ???Sad 
1 - 10 of 132
To add a comment, pleasesign in