Furthermore, retirement income data needs keep changing, in part, as a  result of trends in the pension industry and the labor force. Much of the data needed to assess retirement income and wealth are  subject to federal laws protecting the confidentiality of information  reported to the federal government. Experts Cited Need for Better Data and Better Data Set Linkage

Experts we consulted cited priorities for improving retirement data that fit  into two broad categories: (1) obtaining better data from employers on  employee benefits and (2) obtaining better data from individual and  household surveys by linking them with administrative data. The kinds of  information concerning employers and employer-sponsored benefit plans  that analysts sought included the features of their pension plans, such as  minimum and maximum allowable contributions, or formulas for  calculating benefits from defined benefit pension plans. As a result, analysis of  pension offerings by demographic groups is limited. Our expert panelists made several suggestions for linking individual and  household survey data with administrative data sources to help improve  the analysis of retirement income and projections of the effects of policy  changes on future retirement income. Many Factors Limit Needed Retirement Income and Wealth Data

Experts we consulted believed that data needed for the study of  retirement income are not collected or made available because of factors  that include the fragmentation of data collection responsibility, the burden  of data collection on respondents, and confidentiality considerations that  restrict access. Fragmentation stems from no single agency having a  statutory mandate to collect and analyze all the data needed to support a  more comprehensive study of retirement income and wealth. Some  information is no longer collected out of concern that it was an  unnecessary burden on the firms having to submit it and because it was  only being used to a limited extent by the government. For  example, Labor has the authority to obtain existing documents describing  the features of private pension plans. Similar  efforts have been undertaken with other surveys, such as the National  Longitudinal Study of Mature Women. HRS investigators have compared employee responses about retirement  income to employer provided data and Social Security records and found  wide discrepancies.
Why GAO Did This Study

Future demographic trends include a doubling of the nation's retiree population and only modest labor force growth, leading to concerns about retirement income adequacy for future generations. Credible projections of the effects of policy proposals on federal spending and future retirees' income are necessary. Because adequate data is critical to the analysis of retirement income and wealth, GAO was asked to identify data improvements that experts say are a priority for the study of retirement income and wealth, as well as factors limiting efforts to obtain the needed information.

What GAO Found

Experts consulted by GAO cited priorities for improving retirement data that fit into two broad categories: (1) obtaining better data from employers on employee benefits and (2) obtaining better data by linking more individual and household surveys with administrative data (such as employer records, and Social Security earnings history records). Information from employers, such as documents describing the features of their pension plans, would enable analysts to forecast future retirement income of pension holders, based on the specific features of their pension plans and the likely distribution of pension income and wealth for different segments of the population. Linking individual and household surveys with administrative data creates new information, such as the demographic characteristics of employees whose pensions are affected by the formulas that employers use to calculate contributions or pension payments. Analysts attribute the shortcomings in retirement income data primarily to fragmentation of the responsibility for data collection and analysis, the burden of data collection on respondents, and confidentiality considerations that restrict access to these data. Fragmentation of responsibility occurs, in their view, because no single agency has a statutory mandate to collect or to analyze all the data needed to support a more comprehensive study of retirement income and wealth. With regard to respondent burden, some information on pension plans is no longer collected, in part, out of concern that it was an unnecessary burden on the firms having to submit it. Finally, certain kinds of data needed to make projections are not widely available to all analysts because of the confidentiality laws that authorize their collection.