07-07-2005, 06:11 PM
|
#2934
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
|
Administrative costs -- for sebby
Quote:
Originally posted by ltl/fb - As congressional aides consider the details of personal accounts legislation, they must choose between starkly different approaches. Employers could be required to treat the accounts like 401(k) plans, separating employee contributions from Social Security taxes each paycheck, earmarking those contributions to reflect employee investment choices and sending them either to the government or directly to an investment manager each pay cycle. Or the system can be kept simple, with employers calculating account contributions only when they calculate individual tax payments, once a year with employees' W-2 forms.
The first option was chosen by Chile and other Latin American countries when they established systems of personal accounts for their state pension systems beginning in the 1980s. It offers employees a strong sense of ownership and the gratification of watching their accounts grow with each paycheck, but it comes at a price -- paperwork for employers and administrative costs for employees. Last year, insurance and commission costs ate up 18.5 percent of contributions to Chilean accounts, according to Chilean pension data.
The second option was adopted by Sweden for its private accounts system in 2000. At a cost of 0.7 percent of an average participant's assets, the administrative burdens are low, according to a recent analysis by three Swedish economists. But because contributions are tabulated only once a year, after tax data is sent to the government, contributions on average are not credited to accounts for 18 months.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070602004.html
|
Now you're just wallowing in your self satisfaction. I can't get the chocolates there any faster than FedEx.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
|
|
|