H.R. 1578,
introduced by Rep. Jon Porter (R-NV) with 177 cosponsors, would
require the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP), a part of the federal
government's employee retirement system, to offer a stock index
fund based on Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs). Forcing TSP to
include a real estate investment fund would set a very dangerous
precedent that could severely damage TSP's future. Decisions to
include investment options in TSP should be made based on the needs
of TSP members and not politics. Political imposition of
investments on TSP risks losses for federal workers and
retirees.
REITs are publicly
traded companies that own and usually manage commercial real estate
such as office buildings, apartments, hotels, shopping centers and
warehouses. Currently, the approximately 200 REITs own about $400
billion worth of commercial properties. During the period between
1988 and 2004 REITs have, on average, outperformed stocks and
bonds. However, REITs have often been more volatile than stock
indexes and carry comparatively higher administrative fees than
TSP's current funds do.
TSP and How it
Operates
TSP is one element
of the Federal Employees' Retirement System and manages almost $175
billion of retirement savings for almost three-and-a-half million
federal civilian employees and military service people. Since its
creation in 1986, TSP has grown from one fund that invested in
federal government bonds to five individual funds and a "lifestyle
portfolio" that includes investments in all five funds. TSP members
control how their retirement savings are invested in the funds and
have the ability to move their savings at will.
At the end of
2005, almost 40 percent of TSP's assets were invested in an S&P
500 stock index fund, while 38 percent were invested in government
bonds, 8 percent each in an international stock index fund and a
small and medium sized company fund, and 6 percent in a bond index
fund. Funds have been added to TSP slowly, with the government bond
fund opening in April 1987, the stock and bond index funds in
January 1988, and the international stock index fund and the small
cap fund in May 2001. The lifestyle portfolios incorporating
various proportions of the five funds appeared in August 2005.
TSP administrative
fees are extremely low, averaging about 60 cents for every $1,000
invested. While these fees are artificially low because federal
agencies absorb some of the cost, federal employees receive one of
the best bargains in retirement investing. Management of the funds
is contracted out to private sector investment managers based on a
periodic bidding process. Currently, all of the funds except for
the government bond fund are managed by Barclays Global
Investors.
A key factor in
TSP's success is the limited number of funds that it makes
available to members. Recent research shows that many participants
in 401(k) plans become confused when the plan offers too many
investment choices. Too many funds can actually reduce
participation. TSP probably has room for a couple more funds, but
it should choose them carefully and only after careful
consideration. Its next changes should probably be to make the
lifestyle fund (L Fund) the automatic investment choice for members
who do not choose to actively manage their funds and to move to an
automatic enrollment process by which a federal worker enrolls in
TSP at a certain investment amount unless he or she actively choose
not to join.
Congress Should Not
Interfere in TSP Governance
While REITs are
appropriate as part of larger retirement portfolio, H.R. 1578 opens
the way for TSP's investments to be determined by political
pressure instead of by the needs of federal workers. Until now,
funds have been added to TSP only after being recommended by the
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB), which manages
TSP and has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that it operates
solely for the benefit of federal workers. The FRTIB opposes the
addition of a REIT fund at this time, as does TSP's Employee Thrift
Advisory Council.
This is not the
first time that the FRTIB has opposed congressional efforts to
create new TSP funds. It has also opposed attempts to politicize
TSP investment policies by urging TSP not to invest in companies
that do business in particular countries. Wisely, the FRTIB has
retained its exclusive focus on the retirement needs of its
members, and it should continue to do so in the face of pressure to
accept H.R. 1587. In return, Congress should not force TSP to
include any specific funds.
If Congress
successfully forces a REIT fund on TSP, the balance of power will
shift from FRTIB's focus on the needs of TSP members to political
interests dedicated to advancing the interests of a particular
industry or interest group. This would eventually lead to efforts
to force TSP to invest in certain "worthy" projects that might or
might not earn adequate returns. Many state and local government
employee retirement plans have been forced to make investments for
political reasons, and most of them have sustained serious losses
as a result.
This is not to
imply that TSP is beyond criticism. A January 2005 Government
Accountability Office report, "Federal Thrift Savings Plan:
Customer Service Practices Adopted by Private Sector Plan
Managers," makes a number of constructive suggestions for ways that
TSP could improve customer service and better measure members
satisfaction. However, the FRTIB is much better positioned than
Congress to focus on the plan's structure and services. Except in
extreme situations, Congress should defer to the FRTIB's expertise
and approve additional investment options only if they are
requested by that agency.
Conclusion
TSP is one of the
most successful retirement investment vehicles ever created. In a
large part, it has succeeded because its governing board only
considers the need of its members to build adequate retirement
savings. As a result, federal employees can have full confidence
that their interests will come before whatever political winds are
currently blowing in Washington. Funds should be added to TSP only
if they are recommended by the FRTIB. There is no compelling need
to add a REIT-based fund to TSP at this time, and the potential
damage to TSP if one is imposed could be serious. Congress should
drop efforts to dictate which investment choices TSP can offer and
continue the tradition of leaving TSP's guidance to the
FRTIB.
David C. John is Senior
Research Fellow in Social Security and Financial Institutions in
the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The
Heritage Foundation.