The temporary’s key findings are:
- Uninsured healthcare prices in retirement may be substantial, so older households want a superb understanding of the potential dangers.
- New survey outcomes present that many underestimate their healthcare wants and know little in regards to the prices of medical or long-term care providers.
- In distinction, monetary advisors have a greater sense of wants and prices, however households with advisors don’t appear to know greater than these with out.
- Consequently, many retirees might not shield themselves towards well being shocks, forcing them to make tough adjustments to cowl shocks after they do happen.
Introduction
Households approaching retirement face all kinds of dangers to their monetary safety. They might stay longer than deliberate and deplete their sources; they might expertise unexpectedly excessive inflation; or they might obtain unusually poor returns on their investments. Equally consequential is the danger that households will face main bills to cowl medical and long-term care (LTC) prices.
This temporary, which relies on a latest paper, investigates how older households and monetary advisors understand medical and LTC dangers in retirement, how these perceptions examine to actuality when it comes to incidence and prices, and the way households plan to reply if their sources show insufficient.1
The dialogue proceeds as follows. The primary part introduces the 2 elements of medical and LTC dangers – particular person danger and basic worth danger – and discusses the extent to which every is roofed by insurance coverage. The second part describes a brand new family survey and compares households’ beliefs to precise experiences from the Well being and Retirement Examine (HRS), a big longitudinal survey. The third part, utilizing outcomes from a brand new advisor survey, explores advisors’ information of medical and LTC dangers and their means to transmit that info to their shoppers. The fourth part assesses the reasonableness of households’ deliberate responses ought to sources show inadequate. The ultimate part concludes that older households are inclined to underestimate medical and LTC dangers and prices in retirement. Advisors, alternatively, have a greater sense of those dangers and prices, however their older shoppers don’t seem to know greater than households with out advisors.
Healthcare Dangers in Retirement
On this temporary, we use “healthcare” to check with any health-related prices, whether or not they contain periodic medical care or long-term care. Medical and LTC dangers have totally different implications for retirement planning, as a result of they differ when it comes to particular person danger and basic worth danger. Particular person danger is the chance {that a} retiree will truly face a medical shock or want LTC. Basic worth danger is the chance that the rising value of the providers will erode a family’s monetary safety. The distinction between these two elements is that particular person danger can, theoretically, be insured by danger pooling, whereas basic worth danger impacts everybody and thus can’t be dealt with by pooling.
Medical Dangers
Medical dangers are basically excessive and unsure. Happily, a lot of this danger is insured by Medicare (and Medicaid for these eligible for each packages), which limits out-of-pocket funds. That mentioned, for middle-income retirees, medical premiums and copays eat up about one-third of Social Safety revenue and one-fifth of whole revenue.2 The danger that can’t be insured is that of premiums rising. The premiums for Medicare Half B (physician visits) have a tendency to extend sooner than inflation. Consequently, whereas retirees could also be reasonably well-insured towards a big medical expense in a given 12 months, compounding will increase of unpredictable dimension in premiums can erode their disposable revenue over time.
LTC Dangers
Along with medical dangers, most older adults can have some LTC wants. Actually, solely about 20 % will get by scot-free (see Desk 1). Nevertheless, among the many 80 % who would require some LTC, wants range dramatically in each depth and length. About 40 % can have high-intensity wants for greater than a 12 months.3 Many on this group have Alzheimer’s illness or associated dementias – they usually want around-the-clock supervision and might stay for a few years with the illness.
In contrast to medical dangers, particular person LTC dangers will not be nicely insured. Regardless of the excessive chance and value of LTC, solely about 7.5 million individuals have LTC insurance coverage, representing round 3 % of all U.S. adults or 15 % of these ages 65+.4 Medicaid, the general public insurance coverage program focused at low-income people, has turn into a default insurer for catastrophic prices. For middle-income households, nevertheless, qualifying for Medicaid would require spending down to satisfy this system’s stringent revenue and asset assessments.5 In 2024, the month-to-month revenue restrict for Medicaid eligibility for these over age 65 is often round $2,800 ($5,600 for {couples}) and the asset restrict is often $2,000 ($3,000 for {couples}), however varies by state.
Members of the family usually cowl nearly all of care hours for individuals with low and average wants and complement the efforts with paid caregivers as wants improve.6 Traditionally, ladies, significantly spouses and daughters, have supplied the majority of household care. Going ahead, adjustments within the labor drive participation of ladies might influence the provision of household caregivers.7
Paid LTC could be very costly – in 2023, the median annual prices had been $116,800 for a non-public room in a nursing residence, $75,500 for residence well being aides, and $64,200 for an assisted residing facility.8 The extent of the overall worth danger households face sooner or later is unclear. The scarcity of certified staff and rising want for specialised care has pushed up the overall worth of paid LTC.9 Albeit, some research counsel that the shift from nursing residence care to home-and-community-based providers in latest a long time might assist sluggish the worth traits for formal care.10
In brief, households face the prospect of huge outlays for healthcare prices in retirement. The query is the extent to which households and their advisors understand these dangers and have plans to handle them. To reply these questions, the following part turns to the outcomes of two latest surveys carried out by Greenwald Analysis in July and August of 2024.
Perceptions of Healthcare Dangers
For the family survey, Greenwald Analysis interviewed on-line 508 people ages 48-78 with at the very least $100,000 in investable property in July 2024. Within the case of married/partnered people, the survey participant should at the very least share monetary decision-making duties. The survey requested individuals about their perceived chance of experiencing a medical shock or needing in depth LTC, in addition to the potential value of those occasions. The responses had been then in comparison with the precise experiences of older adults within the HRS to find out whether or not households have a superb sense of the chance of their shocks and their uninsured dangers.
Earlier than trying on the particular responses, it’s attention-grabbing to notice that medical and LTC wants had been low on most respondents’ checklist of issues (see Determine 1). This discovering is in keeping with different research exhibiting older households rank healthcare worries fairly low.11
Respondents had been then requested whether or not they had been involved about having a serious sickness, growing LTC wants, or having cognitive impairment. Curiously, solely a few third of them had been involved with any of those dangers.
In actuality, households are more likely to expertise a serious sickness than the 35 % predicted by survey individuals (see Determine 2).12 However the monetary implications for households in underestimating their danger of a medical shock will not be that extreme as a result of most of those prices are insured.
LTC prices, alternatively, will not be nicely insured, and solely 32 % of households are nervous about growing LTC wants. In actuality, over half of households ages 65+ will want some high-intensity care (see Determine 3).13 Then again, individuals’ evaluation of the danger of cognitive impairment could be very near actuality.
Having a superb estimate of the chance of healthcare wants as one ages is barely half of the retirement planning equation. The opposite essential element is having a superb sense of how a lot these wants may cost.
As famous earlier, particular person medical danger is nicely insured; the large danger is basic worth danger. Certainly, Medicare Half B premiums have grown 20 % sooner than the Client Value Index (CPI) within the final 10 years, 70 % sooner within the final 20 years, and greater than twice as quick within the final 30 years (see Desk 2). Solely a 3rd of survey respondents, nevertheless, had been nervous about rising Medicare prices. Happily, Half D (prescription drug) premiums have remained comparatively low in greenback phrases.
LTC prices, in fact, will not be nicely insured, which makes it extra essential that people have a way of the prices they might face. Determine 4 reveals that solely 39 % of older households might accurately estimate the price of a nursing residence, 34 % for residence care providers, and solely 15 % for assisted residing services.14
One cause that households have such large misperceptions about each the dangers and the prices of LTC is that survey after survey has discovered that many mistakenly imagine that Medicare covers LTC. The newest complete survey on LTC affordability was carried out by KFF in 2022. The outcomes, introduced in Desk 3, present that 45 % of respondents ages 65+ assume that Medicare can pay for his or her LTC. One other 9 % assume that their personal medical health insurance will.15
In brief, misperceptions about who bears the price of LTC might play an essential function in how households plan for dangers in retirement. The remaining questions are whether or not monetary advisors have a greater sense of healthcare dangers and prices and whether or not their recommendation impacts their shoppers’ perceptions.
The Function of Monetary Advisors
About two-thirds of the households surveyed work with a monetary advisor. An essential query is whether or not advisors have a greater sense of healthcare dangers and prices. And if that’s the case, do households with an advisor have a greater sense of their dangers and make higher plans? To reply this query, Greenwald Analysis fielded a survey on-line of 401 monetary advisorsin late July and early August of 2024.16
In contrast to the households, monetary advisors surveyed assume that LTC affordability or protecting medical prices are the largest dangers their shoppers face to making sure a safe retirement (see Determine 5). Virtually three-fifths of advisors imagine that LTC affordability is a serious danger in comparison with simply 33 % of older households. Equally, virtually half of advisors are nervous about their shoppers protecting medical bills in comparison with simply 24 % of survey respondents. Advisors additionally rank these two dangers as the best for his or her older shoppers, whereas traders themselves rank them among the many lowest.
Lengthy-term care affordability heads the checklist of the foremost dangers going through shoppers. Certainly, near 60 % of advisors assume that at the very least 1 / 4 of their shoppers will want 3+ years of LTC in retirement. The advisors even have a reasonably good sense of how a lot varied LTC providers value, with over 80 % estimating the right vary for nursing residence and assisted residing prices (see Determine 6). Advisors had been barely much less educated about residence care prices however, even then, almost three-quarters of advisors supplied a superb estimate. Furthermore, roughly 90 % of advisors had been at the very least considerably assured about their value estimates.
Do Advisors Affect Their Shopper’s Threat Perceptions?
Even if monetary advisors have a reasonably good sense of prices, older households with advisors don’t appear to have a greater sense of their dangers. Actually, these with advisors are even much less nervous about their dangers and their means to cowl the price of main healthcare shocks (see Desk 4).
One cause could also be that households with a monetary advisor are extra ready to deal with the dangers. For instance, they might have LTC insurance coverage, be wealthier, and/or be married and have youngsters who might be able to deal with them. Nevertheless, regression evaluation reveals that even after controlling for LTC insurance coverage, wealth, marital standing, and different demographic traits, these with an advisor are nonetheless much less involved about their healthcare dangers than these with out.
A second cause could also be that monetary advisors will not be discussing these dangers with their shoppers. Nevertheless, the survey outcomes present that the overwhelming majority of advisors at the very least focus on LTC dangers with their shoppers and over 60 % both advocate a coverage or advocate their shoppers to knowledgeable who’s extra educated about LTC insurance coverage merchandise (see Determine 7).
If advisors do certainly focus on LTC dangers with shoppers, a 3rd cause for low shopper information might be that they depend on the advisors to grasp these points for them and don’t deal with absorbing the data.
A key query is why advisors, regardless of their very own information and consciousness, have little or no influence on how older households view these dangers. Research on the influence of economic advisors on retirement safety have largely centered on their roles in serving to shoppers make funding choices.17 A couple of restricted research have proven that monetary advisors may be useful in guiding households to set financial savings targets.18 Nevertheless, nearly no analysis has centered on how monetary advisors might help their shoppers handle the big spending dangers from medical and, significantly, LTC wants in retirement. This space is ripe for future analysis.
Implications of Underestimating Healthcare Dangers
The implications of households underestimating their healthcare dangers are that they might not plan nicely to guard themselves towards these dangers. The principle causes advisors cite for his or her shoppers not shopping for LTC insurance coverage is that they “underestimate the price of LTC” or they “would somewhat not take into consideration needing LTC.”
With out the suitable insurance coverage or sources, older households might must make substantial changes or contemplate less-preferred choices. When requested what contingency plans they might contemplate if they might not afford their medical or LTC bills, over 60 % mentioned they might contemplate spending right down to Medicaid, whereas solely 30 % mentioned they might think about using their residence fairness or transferring in with their youngsters (see Determine 8). Nevertheless, many of those preferences will not be real looking.
Spend All the way down to Medicaid
Many older households who imagine they will all the time fall again on Medicaid might not notice that this system’s revenue and asset limits require impoverishment. Amongst households with greater than $100,000 in investable property, like these in our survey, virtually none would qualify primarily based on the usual revenue guidelines as a result of their Social Safety profit and outlined profit revenue would put them above the restrict. A number of states have particular revenue guidelines for long-term care with barely greater limits. Even then, 70 % of households in our pattern wouldn’t qualify. In actuality, solely 15 % of households with greater than $100,000 in preliminary property will truly find yourself on Medicaid, in comparison with the 60 % of households who assume that spending right down to Medicaid is an choice for them (see Determine 9).
Tapping Dwelling Fairness
One of many least well-liked contingency choices for financing healthcare prices is tapping residence fairness. Lower than a 3rd of households mentioned they might contemplate it. Nevertheless, in actuality, over 40 % will faucet residence fairness in retirement – both by getting a second mortgage, making use of for a house fairness line of credit score or different loans towards the home, or downsizing and transferring to a much less helpful home (see Determine 10).19
Residing with Kids
Lastly, one other unpopular choice for managing healthcare wants amongst respondents is transferring in with youngsters. Once more, lower than a 3rd say they might contemplate this selection. Curiously, in the actual world, solely a few quarter of older households in our wealth group find yourself residing with their youngsters (see Determine 11). So, this selection does look like the least most well-liked back-up if plans fail.
Conclusion
The uninsured elements of healthcare prices in retirement may be substantial, and older households have to have an correct notion of those dangers to plan their spending appropriately.
The outcomes of latest surveys present that older households are inclined to underestimate their healthcare dangers in retirement and have little or no sense of how a lot medical shocks or LTC providers might value. Advisors, alternatively, have a greater sense of the prevalence and prices. Curiously, older households who work with advisors don’t appear to know extra about these dangers or prices than these with out an advisor. It’s not clear why advisors have little influence on their shoppers’ perceptions.
The implications of older households underestimating healthcare dangers are that many might must make substantial changes or contemplate unpalatable choices. Nearly all of older households say they might spend right down to Medicaid and like to protect their residence fairness. In actuality, many find yourself tapping residence fairness and solely a minority find yourself on Medicaid.
References
American Affiliation for Lengthy-term Care Insurance coverage. 2020. Lengthy-Time period Care Insurance coverage Information – Knowledge – Statistics – 2020 Studies. Westlake Village, CA.
Belbase, Anek, Anqi Chen, Patrick Hubbard, and Alicia H. Munnell. 2021. “Who Will Have Unmet Lengthy-Time period Care Wants and How Does Medicaid Assist?” Subject in Temporary 21-18. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Facilities for Medicare & Medicaid Companies. 2024. Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance coverage and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance coverage Belief Funds. Washington, DC: U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies.
Chalmers, John and Jonathan Reuter. 2020. “Is Conflicted Funding Recommendation Higher Than No Recommendation?” Journal of Monetary Economics 138(2): 366-387.
Chen, Anqi, Alicia H. Munnell, and Gal Wettstein. 2025. “Do Retirement Traders Precisely Understand Healthcare Dangers, and Do Advisors Assist?” Working Paper 2025-3. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Chen, Anqi, Alicia H. Munnell, and Gal Wettstein. 2025 (forthcoming). “How Do Retirees Address Uninsured Healthcare Prices?” Working Paper. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Chen, Anqi, Alicia H. Munnell, and Nilufer Gok. 2025 (forthcoming). “Do Households have a Good Sense of Their Lengthy-Time period Care Dangers?” Working Paper. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Chokshi, Niraj. 2017. “Out of the Workplace: Extra Folks Are Working Remotely, Survey Finds.” (February 15). New York, NY: The New York Instances.
Favreault, Melissa and Judith Dey. 2015. “Lengthy-Time period Companies and Helps for Older People: Dangers and Financing Analysis Temporary.” Washington, DC: U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Analysis.
Freedman, Vicki and Brenda Spillman. 2014. “The Residential Continuum From Dwelling to Nursing Dwelling: Measurement, Traits and Unmet Wants of Older Adults.” The Journals of Gerontology: Collection B 69(1) S42-S50.
French, Kenneth R. and James M. Poterba. 1991. “Investor Diversification and Worldwide Fairness Markets.” The American Financial Evaluate 81(2): 222-226.
Genworth Monetary. 2023. “Genworth Releases Price of Care Survey Outcomes for 2023: Twenty Years of Monitoring Lengthy-Time period Care Prices.” Richmond, VA.
Grinblatt, Mark and Matti Keloharju. 2001. “How Distance, Language, and Tradition Affect Stockholdings and Trades.” The Journal of Finance 56(3): 1053-1073.
Goetzmann, William N. and Alok Kumar. 2008. “Fairness Portfolio Diversification.” Evaluate of Finance 12(3): 433-463.
Gohringer, Kimberly. 2017. “Telecommuting and Dependent Care: Work Options for Caregivers.” Eugene, OR: Digital Vocations web site.
Gruber, Jonathan and Kathleen M. McGarry. 2023. “Lengthy-term Care in the USA.” Working Paper 31881. Cambridge, MA: Nationwide Bureau of Financial Analysis.
Hackethal, Andreas, Michael Haliassos, and Tullio Jappelli. 2012. “Monetary Advisors: A Case of Babysitters?” Journal of Banking & Finance 36(2): 509-524.
Hamel, Liz and Alex Montero. 2023. “The Affordability of Lengthy-Time period Care and Assist Companies: Findings from a KFF Survey.” San Francisco, CA: KFF.
Hou, Wenliang. 2020. “How Correct Are Retirees’ Assessments of Their Retirement Threat?” Working Paper 2020-14. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Johnson, Richard W. and Joshua M. Wiener. 2006. “A Profile of Frail Older People and Their Caregivers.” Occasional Paper Quantity 8. Washington, DC: City Institute.
Johnson, Richard W. and Judith Dey. 2022. “Lengthy-Time period Companies and Helps for Older People: Dangers and Financing, 2022.” Analysis Temporary. Washington, DC: U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies, Workplace of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Analysis.
Kramer, Marc M. 2012. “Monetary Recommendation and Particular person Investor Portfolio Efficiency.” Monetary Administration 41(2): 395-428.
Kim, Kyoung T., Tae-Younger Pak, Su H. Shin, and Sherman D. Hanna. 2018. “The Relationship Between Monetary Planner Use and Holding a Retirement Saving Objective: A Propensity Rating Matching Evaluation.” Monetary Planning Evaluate 1(1-2): e1008.
Liu, Zhikun, Michael Finke, and David Blanchett. 2024. “Skilled Monetary Recommendation and Investor Habits Through the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Monetary Planning Evaluate 7(1): e1172.
Marsden, Mitchell, Cathleen D. Zick, and Robert N. Mayer. 2011. “The Worth of Looking for Monetary Recommendation.” Journal of Household and Financial Points 32: 625-643.
McInerney, Melissa, Matthew S. Rutledge, and Sara Ellen King. 2022. “How A lot Does Well being Spending Eat Away at Retirement Earnings?” Subject in Temporary 22-12. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Radu, Sintia. 2018. “How Quickly Will You Be Working from Dwelling? Telecommuting May Not Simply Be A Firm Perk within the Subsequent Decade.” (February 16). Washington, DC: U.S. Information & World Report.
RAND. Well being and Retirement Examine Longitudinal File, 1992-2020v2. Santa Monica, CA.
Shapira, Zur and Itzhak Venezia. 2001. “Patterns of Habits of Professionally Managed and Unbiased Traders.” Journal of Banking & Finance 25(8): 1573-1587.
Spillman, Brenda C. 2009. “Coverage Analyses Utilizing the 2004 Nationwide Lengthy-Time period Care Survey.” Washington, DC: U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies, Workplace of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Analysis.
Spillman, Brenda C., Eva H. Allen, and Melissa Favreault. 2021. “Casual Caregiver Provide and Demographic Adjustments: Evaluate of the Literature.” Washington, DC: U.S. Division of Well being and Human Companies, Workplace of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Analysis.
Spillman, Brenda and Liliana Pezzin. 2000. “Potential and Lively Household Caregivers: Altering Networks and the ‘Sandwich Technology.’” The Milbank Quarterly 78(3): 347-374.
Spillman, Brenda, Vicki Freedman, Judith Kasper, and Jennifer Wolff. 2020. “Change Over Time in Caregiving Networks for Older Adults With and With out Dementia.” The Journals of Gerontology: Collection B 75(7): 1563-1572.
U.S. Congress Joint Financial Committee. 2019. An Invisible Tsunami: “Getting older Alone” and Its Impact on Older People, Households, and Taxpayers. SCP Report No. 1-19. Washington, DC.
College of Michigan. Well being and Retirement Examine, 1992-2020. Ann Arbor, MI.
von Gaudecker, Hans-Martin. 2015. “How Does Family Portfolio Diversification Fluctuate with Monetary Literacy and Monetary Recommendation?” The Journal of Finance 70(2): 489-507.
Wettstein, Gal and Alice Zulkarnain. 2019. “Will Fewer Kids Enhance Demand for Formal Caregiving?” Working Paper 2019-6. Chestnut Hill, MA: Middle for Retirement Analysis at Boston School.
Wolff, Jennifer and Judith Kasper. 2006. “Caregivers of Frail Elders: Updating a Nationwide Profile.” The Gerontologist 46(3): 344-356.