{"id":316,"date":"2014-08-20T11:14:00","date_gmt":"2014-08-20T17:14:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2014\/08\/why-should-employers-provide-retirement-benefits-a-semi-rhetorical-question.html"},"modified":"2016-08-16T09:46:15","modified_gmt":"2016-08-16T15:46:15","slug":"why-should-employers-provide-retirement-benefits-a-semi-rhetorical-question","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2014\/08\/why-should-employers-provide-retirement-benefits-a-semi-rhetorical-question.html","title":{"rendered":"Why should employers provide retirement benefits? (A semi-rhetorical question)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

A little bit ago, I observed<\/a> that in the same way as there\u2019s a tax penalty for buying individual health insurance, as opposed to having employer-provided insurance, there\u2019s a similar tax disadvantage for investing in an IRA vs. an employer-sponsored 401(k). \u00a0For no good reason that I know of, except as a strong incentive for employers to offer retirement plans, an employee can invest a lot more tax-deferred money in a 401(k) than in an IRA.<\/p>\n

And, of course, the book I summarized the other day, Social Insecurity<\/a><\/i>, starts with the premise that employers have not just a historical practice of providing retirement benefits, but pretty much have a moral obligation to do so.<\/p>\n

So my question today is: \u00a0why?<\/p>\n

In a tabula rasa<\/i> situation, would it make sense for employers to provide retirement benefits? \u00a0Why not have a retirement plan sponsored by your church, or community group, or a large national organization that you belong to? <\/p>\n

Historically, employers have offered retirement benefits for a couple reasons, which aren\u2019t particularly the case any longer:<\/p>\n