Connect with us

Accounting

HSA study examines how much health care costs in retirement

Published

on

The goal of amassing $1 million in a health savings account by retirement will elude the vast majority of clients, but financial advisors could still put these optimistic projections to good use.

HSA holders would need to contribute the maximum legal amount each year, including catch-ups, for four decades, avoid any distributions until they’re 65 years old and net a healthy rate of return of 7.5%, according to a study released last month by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, an industry research organization. Those rosy assumptions won’t reflect the reality for most HSA savers. However, advisors can nevertheless nudge clients toward saving in their HSA with a wealth of statistical estimates showing their massive health care needs in retirement and the corresponding potential of the accounts as a savings vehicle, experts said.

To have a “high chance” of covering their medical expenses during their retirement, a 65-year-old couple must plan for $351,000 worth of Medicare premiums, deductibles and prescription drugs, according to the Institute’s calculations. To boost the likelihood above 90%, that savings number grows closer to $400,000, said Jake Spiegel, a research associate with the organization and co-author of a larger report from the institute and health, wealth, retirement and employee benefits firm Inspira Financial last year that crunched the overall figures.

“After 40 years, you can end up with a significant chunk of change,” Spiegel said. “HSAs could actually be pretty well positioned to help people to, one, save for retirement and, two, pay for medical expenditures in retirement which can be pretty significant.”

READ MORE: How to help clients plan for the high costs of long-term health care

Those expenses can mount well before retirement, too. As advisors encourage clients to set aside the current maximum of $4,300 in 2025, take advantage of any employers’ matching contributions and tap into the pretax savings, untaxed accumulation and tax-free withdrawals for qualifying medical costs, they should also remind them of the potential challenges, said Sarin Barsoumian, founder of Burlington, Massachusetts-based SMB Financial Strategies. Those include a huge potential tax hit to non-spouse heirs receiving any leftover assets after the clients’ deaths and shortcomings in the investment menus and interest yields of many HSAs.

“Many clients use HSA funds for current medical expenses, but if they can afford to pay out-of-pocket, they should let the HSA grow tax-free for retirement. If they have a sufficient emergency fund and can cover medical costs without touching the HSA, they should consider investing the balance in a diversified portfolio,” Barsoumian said in an email. “If clients withdraw funds for non-medical expenses before age 65, they’ll owe income tax plus a 20% penalty — a much harsher penalty than early withdrawals from a traditional IRA or 401(k), which are just subject to income tax plus a 10% penalty. After age 65, non-medical withdrawals are taxed like a traditional IRA, but there’s no penalty — so it’s not as flexible as a Roth IRA for tax-free withdrawals.”

Here are some of the most interesting takeaways from the EBRI research paper:

  • Medicare paid for 61% of health care costs in retirement in 2021, with private insurance covering 18% and consumers paying out of their pocket for 12% of the expenses.
  • A 65-year-old man using a Medigap plan that adds supplemental private health insurance for costs that aren’t paid for by Medicare should expect to pay $184,000 for medical care in retirement, while a woman of the same age needs $217,000 and a couple should anticipate expenses of $351,000.
  • Assuming the clients save the maximum each year in their HSAs and tack on $1,000 more in the permitted “catch-up” contribution years between ages 55 and 64 without withdrawing anything from the accounts, a 7.5% annual return on their assets would yield a nest egg of $78,000 in only 10 years. A 5% rate would add up to $68,000, and a 2.5% return would amass $59,000.
  • With the same assumptions, the HSA balances would reach: 20-year totals of $120,000 (2.5% returns), $157,000 (5%) or $208,000 (7.5%); 30-year totals of $198,000 (2.5%), $303,000 (5%) or $476,000 (7.5%); or 40-year totals of $298,000 (2.5%), $540,000 (5%) or $1,029,000 (7.5%).
  • Under less optimistic calculations that still incorporate a 7.5% return but assume the client withdraws half of the deductible amount from their HSA each year, the account would still have $56,000 after 10 years, $139,000 after 20 years, $311,000 after 30 years and $665,000 after 40.
  • In terms of tax savings on their contribution, higher income HSA holders net $13,000 in lower payments to Uncle Sam over a decade, $24,000 over two decades, $34,000 over three and $45,000 over four. In terms of their savings on yields of 7.5%, they would avoid another $7,000 in taxes during the first 10 years, $29,000 over 20, $87,000 over 30 and $217,000 over 40.

The numbers shift significantly based on any number of factors, such as when a client opens an HSA and how long they are contributing to it, their tax bracket and the extent that they do spend the money on health costs before retirement.
“Past EBRI research has found that the longer someone has owned their HSA, the larger their balance tends to be, because the higher their contributions tend to be, and the more likely they are to invest their HSA in assets other than cash,” Spiegel and the co-author, Paul Fronstin, wrote in the report. “These strategies better position accountholders to withdraw larger sums when unexpected major health expenses occur and can leave accountholders more prepared to cover their sizable health care expenses in retirement.”

READ MORE: How HSAs pay off in retirement — with caveats

For advisors and their clients, the problem is “that does not appear to be a strategy that is widely deployed right now,” Spiegel noted, citing another finding from the institute’s research that only 13% of HSAs have invested assets in something other than cash.

“That number has been trending up every year that we’ve done our analyses,” he said. “It’s still nowhere near what you might expect it to be, given the enormous tax advantages that HSAs offer and the really unique position they offer as a triple-tax-advantaged vehicle.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

Accounting firms seeing increased profits

Published

on

Accounting firms are reporting bigger profits and more clients, according to a new report.

The report, released Monday by Xero, found that nearly three-quarters (73%) of firms reported increased profits over the past year and 56% added new clients thanks to operational efficiency and expanded service offerings.

Some 85% of firms now offer client advisory services, a big spike from 41% in 2023, indicating a strategic shift toward delivering forward-looking financial guidance that clients increasingly expect.

AI adoption is also reshaping the profession, with 80% of firms confident it will positively affect their practice. Currently, the most common use cases for AI include: delivering faster and more responsive client services (33%), enhancing accuracy by reducing bookkeeping and accounting errors (33%), and streamlining workflows through the automation of routine tasks (32%).

“The widespread adoption of AI has been a turning point for the accounting profession, giving accountants an opportunity to scale their impact and take on a more strategic advisory role,” said Ben Richmond, managing director, North America, at Xero, in a statement. “The real value lies not just in working more efficiently, but working smarter, freeing up time to elevate the human element of the profession and in turn, strengthen client relationships.”

Some of the main challenges faced by firms include economic uncertainty (38%), mastering AI (36%) and rising client expectations for strategic advice (35%). 

While 85% of firms have embraced cloud platforms, a sizable number still lag behind, missing out on benefits such as easier data access from anywhere (40%) and enhanced security (36%).

Continue Reading

Accounting

Private equity is investing in accounting: What does that mean for the future of the business?

Published

on

Private equity firms have bought five of the top 26 accounting firms in the past three years as they mount a concerted strategy to reshape the industry. 

The trend should not come as a surprise. It’s one we’ve seen play out in several industries from health care to insurance, where a combination of low-risk, recurring revenue, scalability and an aging population of owners create a target-rich environment. For small to midsized accounting firms, the trend is exacerbated by a technological revolution that’s truly transforming the way accounting work is done, and a growing talent crisis that is threatening tried-and-true business models.

How will this type of consolidation affect the accounting business, and what do firms and their clients need to be on the lookout for as the marketplace evolves?

Assessing the opportunity… and the risk

First and foremost, accounting firm owners need to be aware of just how desirable they are right now. While there has been some buzz in the industry about the growing presence of private equity firms, most of the activity to date has focused on larger, privately held firms. In fact, when we recently asked tax professionals about their exposure to private equity funding in our 2025 State of Tax Professionals Report, we found that just 5% of firms have actually inked a deal and only 11% said they are planning to look, or are currently looking, for a deal with a private equity firm. Another 8% said they are open to discussion. On the one hand, that’s almost a quarter of firms feeling open to private equity investments in some way. But the lion’s share of respondents —  87% — said they were not interested.

Recent private equity deal volume suggests that the holdouts might change their minds when they have a real offer on the table. According to S&P Global, private equity and venture capital-backed deal value in the accounting, auditing and taxation services sector reached more than $6.3 billion in 2024, the highest level since 2015, and the trend shows no signs of slowing. Firm owners would be wise to start watching this trend to see how it might affect their businesses — whether they are interested in selling or not.

Focus on tech and efficiencies of scale

The reason this trend is so important to everyone in the industry right now is that the private equity firms entering this space are not trying to become accountants. They are looking for profitable exits. And they will do that by seizing on a critical inflection point in the industry that’s making it possible to scale accounting firms more rapidly than ever before by leveraging technology to deliver a much wider range of services at a much lower cost. So, whether your firm is interested in partnering with private equity or dead set on going it alone, the hyperscaling that’s happening throughout the industry will affect you one way or another.

Private equity thrives in fragmented businesses where the ability to roll up companies with complementary skill sets and specialized services creates an outsized growth opportunity. Andrew Dodson, managing partner at Parthenon Capital, recently commented after his firm took a stake in the tax and advisory firm Cherry Bekaert, “We think that for firms to thrive, they need to make investments in people and technology, and, obviously, regulatory adherence, to really differentiate themselves in the market. And that’s going to require scale and capital to do it. That’s what gets us excited.”

Over time, this could reshape the industry’s market dynamics by creating the accounting firm equivalent of the Traveling Wilburys — supergroups capable of delivering a wide range of specialized services that smaller, more narrowly focused firms could never previously deliver. It could also put downward pressure on pricing as these larger, platform-style firms start finding economies of scale to deliver services more cost-effectively.

The technology factor

The great equalizer in all of this is technology. Consistently, when I speak to tax professionals actively working in the market today, their top priorities are increased efficiency, growth and talent. Firms recognize they need to streamline workflows and processes through more effective use of technology, and they are investing heavily in AI, automation and data analytics capabilities to do that. Private equity firms, of course, are also investing in tech as they assemble their tax and accounting dream teams, in many cases raising the bar for the industry.

The question is: Can independent firms leverage technology fast enough to keep up with their deep-pocketed competition?

Many firms believe they can, with some even going so far as to publicly declare their independence.  Regardless of the path small to midsized firms take to get there, technology-enabled growth is going to play a key role in the future of the industry. Market dynamics that have been unfolding for the last decade have been accelerated with the introduction of serious investors, and everyone in the industry — large and small — is going to need to up their games to stay competitive.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Trump tax bill would help the richest, hurt the poorest, CBO says

Published

on

The House-passed version of President Donald Trump’s massive tax and spending bill would deliver a financial blow to the poorest Americans but be a boon for higher-income households, according to a new analysis from the Congressional Budget Office.

The bottom 10% of households would lose an average of about $1,600 in resources per year, amounting to a 3.9% cut in their income, according to the analysis released Thursday. Those decreases are largely attributable to cuts in the Medicaid health insurance program and food aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Households in the highest 10% of incomes would see an average $12,000 boost in resources, amounting to a 2.3% increase in their incomes. Those increases are mainly attributable to reductions in taxes owed, according to the report from the nonpartisan CBO.

Households in the middle of the income distribution would see an increase in resources of $500 to $1,000, or between 0.5% and 0.8% of their income. 

The projections are based on the version of the tax legislation that House Republicans passed last month, which includes much of Trump’s economic agenda. The bill would extend tax cuts passed under Trump in 2017 otherwise due to expire at the end of the year and create several new tax breaks. It also imposes new changes to the Medicaid and SNAP programs in an effort to cut spending.

Overall, the legislation would add $2.4 trillion to US deficits over the next 10 years, not accounting for dynamic effects, the CBO previously forecast.

The Senate is considering changes to the legislation including efforts by some Republican senators to scale back cuts to Medicaid.

The projected loss of safety-net resources for low-income families come against the backdrop of higher tariffs, which economists have warned would also disproportionately impact lower-income families. While recent inflation data has shown limited impact from the import duties so far, low-income families tend to spend a larger portion of their income on necessities, such as food, so price increases hit them harder.

The House-passed bill requires that able-bodied individuals without dependents document at least 80 hours of “community engagement” a month, including working a job or participating in an educational program to qualify for Medicaid. It also includes increased costs for health care for enrollees, among other provisions.

More older adults also would have to prove they are working to continue to receive SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps. The legislation helps pay for tax cuts by raising the age for which able bodied adults must work to receive benefits to 64, up from 54. Under the current law, some parents with dependent children under age 18 are exempt from work requirements, but the bill lowers the age for the exemption for dependent children to 7 years old. 

The legislation also shifts a portion of the cost for federal food aid onto state governments.

CBO previously estimated that the expanded work requirements on SNAP would reduce participation in the program by roughly 3.2 million people, and more could lose or face a reduction in benefits due to other changes to the program. A separate analysis from the organization found that 7.8 million people would lose health insurance because of the changes to Medicaid.

Continue Reading

Trending