Accounting

Morningstar report names only one HSA provider high quality

Published

6 months ago

October 28, 2024

Morningstar’s annual report card for the providers on the menu of so-called “triple-tax-free” health savings accounts is in, and most did not earn very high grades.

Only one HSA firm — Fidelity Investments — out of 11 reviewed by the independent investment research firm as part of its yearly “Health Savings Account Landscape” report last month got an assessment of being “high” quality for the purposes of paying for medical costs and acting as a long-term investment account. Just three others — HealthEquity, HSA Bank and Saturna — received “above average” ratings on both measures.

First American Bank, Lively, UMB, Associated Bank, NueSynergy, Optum and Bank of America came out “average” or “below average” in covering health costs or being a long-term investment account. Importantly, Morningstar used public data and a survey, so the report noted that it was not evaluating specific employer-offered HSAs that vary based on their size and relationships with providers.

Low interest rates for client cash holdings and higher relative fees for custody and the underlying investments drove the poor grades for most of the providers, according to Greg Carlson, a senior manager research analyst for equity strategy with Morningstar and one of the authors of the report. An average expense ratio of 24 basis points on the available investment funds in the plans offered one bright spot from the report, since the decline from 29 bps last year added up to “a significant one-year decline” and “the biggest change we’ve seen,” he said.

“Part of it is Fidelity just beating everyone in terms of fees pretty much, and that’s a big advantage,” Carlson said. “They have come down across the board. Just like in other areas of asset management, competition has intensified on the fee side.”

The often-discussed advantages of HSAs from getting pretax contributions, untaxed investment returns and tax- and penalty-free withdrawals for medical purposes come with some challenges. Only high-deductible health insurance plans are eligible, every provider besides Fidelity and Lively require participants to put a minimum level of assets into the HSA before they can do any investing, and Fidelity is the only one out of the group of 11 to pay interest rates on cash assets above 1%.

HSAs are often “sub-par regarding interest on cash balances,” said planner Autumn Knutson of Tulsa, Oklahoma-based Styled Wealth.

“HSAs are a powerful vehicle for tax-advantaged healthcare savings, but most consumers are stuck with whatever provider their employer chooses if they want to benefit from payroll deductions toward their HSA,” Knutson said in an email. “As if the nuances of understanding how to qualify for, contribute to and invest within an HSA were not tricky enough, an additional layer of complexity for HSA providers is within the interface, navigating minimum cash balance requirements and fees for other services or selections.”

HSA assets have soared by a factor of 22 between 2006 and 2023 to $123 billion as the share of workers using employer-sponsored plans that have high-deductible health insurance plans jumped from 7% to 31%. HSAs started in 2003 as an effort “to make high-deductible plans more attractive,” according to the report.

In another finding that’s consistent with other studies but crucial to financial advisors and tax professionals working with clients who have HSAs, an average of 74% of the plan participants among surveyed providers used the accounts to cover medical expenses but didn’t take advantage of the ability to invest through them.

The participants “may not be able to meet and maintain the minimum investment account balances most providers require” or have enough left over for stocks and bonds after paying medical bills, the report said. The average American had about $13,500 in healthcare expenses in 2022, according to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services figures cited by Morningstar.

“Plans have gotten better in important ways,” the report said. “Both investment and spending account fees have continued to decline, for example, and investment option quality keeps improving. HSA transparency and ease of use could still improve, though, and costs — particularly investing and custodial fees — could drop further. The process of investigating, signing up for and funding accounts remains complicated. Fewer top providers charge maintenance fees, but some still do — and they often require minimum account balances before participants can invest. Most providers also pay paltry interest rates on spending account balances below relatively lofty levels, even two years after rates began rising.”

While high-deductible plan participants can use a different HSA provider than the one chosen by their employer, that one is “likely most convenient and financially advantageous” because “your contributions are deducted before Social Security and Medicare taxes,” Knutson noted. More often, the participants will move to an alternate provider once they change employers.

As for the investing side of HSAs — or the lack thereof — “some of the biggest problems I see” in the accounts are savers who are “accruing large balances and not investing the cash amounts at all,” Knutson said.

“This is a function less on the HSA provider and more on investors understanding that funds in an HSA are not invested by default, but rather need to be invested after they are contributed,” she said. “Just as 401(k)’s now have a default investment option to protect investors from having decades of funds accidentally uninvested, an idea for improving HSAs could be to have any excess beyond a planned out-of-pocket max be invested, as this would cover any expenses incurred through health insurance and allow any excess amounts saved into an HSA to be invested for longer term goals.”

Companies and lawmakers “can do more to motivate HSA participants to take advantage of their plans’ investment features,” according to the Morningstar report.

“While employers can automatically enroll employees in employer-sponsored retirement plans, the government has not yet allowed them to do the same for employees who are eligible for HSAs. Automatic enrollment has boosted retirement plan participation,” the report said. “Another barrier to increased HSA investing is that participants sometimes aren’t aware of investment-account options. Providers could simplify the account-opening process and better teach participants both how to transfer between the two account types and about the benefits of long-term investing. Providers that offer better guidance and tools tend to have higher average investment account balances.”

In addition, Morningstar gave advisors, tax pros and their clients some best practices to seek out from their providers when using HSAs. For medical expenses, they should look for “no ongoing maintenance fees,” “competitive interest rates on account balances,” “few or no additional fees” and “FDIC insurance on the spending account.”

When thinking about the long-term investment side of HSAs, they should find providers who have “investment menus that cover core areas and limit overlap and volatile or niche strategies,” “investment options that earn Morningstar Medalist Ratings of bronze or higher,” “low fees” and “no minimum balance in a spending account required before investing.”

Advisors can guide clients through their HSA decisions with an eye toward the lowest-cost investments and an understanding that even a core bond fund could bring higher return than cash, according to Carlson. One method to lock in some intermediate and longer-term gains would be to set aside the “money you’ll need in the short term,” he said.

“Obviously, health care costs are high and rising, so you do want to make sure that, first and foremost, you’re not taking a lot of risk with money you may need to use immediately or in the short term,” Carlson said. “You want to probably try to separate pools of money.”

Accounting

IAASB tweaks standards on working with outside experts

Published

14 hours ago

April 25, 2025

Business Finance News

The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board is proposing to tailor some of its standards to align with recent additions to the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants’ International Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants when it comes to using the work of an external expert.

The proposed narrow-scope amendments involve minor changes to several IAASB standards:

ISA 620, Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert;
ISRE 2400 (Revised), Engagements to Review Historical Financial Statements;
ISAE 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information;
ISRS 4400 (Revised), Agreed-upon Procedures Engagements.

The IAASB is asking for comments via a digital response template that can be found on the IAASB website by July 24, 2025.

In December 2023, the IESBA approved an exposure draft for proposed revisions to the IESBA’s Code of Ethics related to using the work of an external expert. The proposals included three new sections to the Code of Ethics, including provisions for professional accountants in public practice; professional accountants in business and sustainability assurance practitioners. The IESBA approved the provisions on using the work of an external expert at its December 2024 meeting, establishing an ethical framework to guide accountants and sustainability assurance practitioners in evaluating whether an external expert has the necessary competence, capabilities and objectivity to use their work, as well as provisions on applying the Ethics Code’s conceptual framework when using the work of an outside expert.

Accounting

Tariffs will hit low-income Americans harder than richest, report says

Published

15 hours ago

April 25, 2025

Business Finance News

President Donald Trump’s tariffs would effectively cause a tax increase for low-income families that is more than three times higher than what wealthier Americans would pay, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

The report from the progressive think tank outlined the outcomes for Americans of all backgrounds if the tariffs currently in effect remain in place next year. Those making $28,600 or less would have to spend 6.2% more of their income due to higher prices, while the richest Americans with income of at least $914,900 are expected to spend 1.7% more. Middle-income families making between $55,100 and $94,100 would pay 5% more of their earnings.

Trump has imposed the steepest U.S. duties in more than a century, including a 145% tariff on many products from China, a 25% rate on most imports from Canada and Mexico, duties on some sectors such as steel and aluminum and a baseline 10% tariff on the rest of the country’s trading partners. He suspended higher, customized tariffs on most countries for 90 days.

Economists have warned that costs from tariff increases would ultimately be passed on to U.S. consumers. And while prices will rise for everyone, lower-income families are expected to lose a larger portion of their budgets because they tend to spend more of their earnings on goods, including food and other necessities, compared to wealthier individuals.

Food prices could rise by 2.6% in the short run due to tariffs, according to an estimate from the Yale Budget Lab. Among all goods impacted, consumers are expected to face the steepest price hikes for clothing at 64%, the report showed.

The Yale Budget Lab projected that the tariffs would result in a loss of $4,700 a year on average for American households.

Accounting

At Schellman, AI reshapes a firm’s staffing needs

Published

15 hours ago

April 25, 2025

Business Finance News

Artificial intelligence is just getting started in the accounting world, but it is already helping firms like technology specialist Schellman do more things with fewer people, allowing the firm to scale back hiring and reduce headcount in certain areas through natural attrition.

Schellman CEO Avani Desai said there have definitely been some shifts in headcount at the Top 100 Firm, though she stressed it was nothing dramatic, as it mostly reflects natural attrition combined with being more selective with hiring. She said the firm has already made an internal decision to not reduce headcount in force, as that just indicates they didn’t hire properly the first time.

“It hasn’t been about reducing roles but evolving how we do work, so there wasn’t one specific date where we ‘started’ the reduction. It’s been more case by case. We’ve held back on refilling certain roles when we saw opportunities to streamline, especially with the use of new technologies like AI,” she said.

One area where the firm has found such opportunities has been in the testing of certain cybersecurity controls, particularly within the SOC framework. The firm examined all the controls it tests on the service side and asked which ones require human judgment or deep expertise. The answer was a lot of them. But for the ones that don’t, AI algorithms have been able to significantly lighten the load.

“[If] we don’t refill a role, it’s because the need actually has changed, or the process has improved so significantly [that] the workload is lighter or shared across the smarter system. So that’s what’s happening,” said Desai.

Outside of client services like SOC control testing and reporting, the firm has found efficiencies in administrative functions as well as certain internal operational processes. On the latter point, Desai noted that Schellman’s engineers, including the chief information officer, have been using AI to help develop code, which means they’re not relying as much on outside expertise on the internal service delivery side of things. There are still people in the development process, but their roles are changing: They’re writing less code, and doing more reviewing of code before it gets pushed into production, saving time and creating efficiencies.

“The best way for me to say this is, to us, this has been intentional. We paused hiring in a few areas where we saw overlaps, where technology was really working,” said Desai.

However, even in an age awash with AI, Schellman acknowledges there are certain jobs that need a human, at least for now. For example, the firm does assessments for the FedRAMP program, which is needed for cloud service providers to contract with certain government agencies. These assessments, even in the most stable of times, can be long and complex engagements, to say nothing of the less predictable nature of the current government. As such, it does not make as much sense to reduce human staff in this area.

“The way it is right now for us to do FedRAMP engagements, it’s a very manual process. There’s a lot of back and forth between us and a third party, the government, and we don’t see a lot of overall application or technology help… We’re in the federal space and you can imagine, [with] what’s going on right now, there’s a big changing market condition for clients and their pricing pressure,” said Desai.

As Schellman reduces staff levels in some places, it is increasing them in others. Desai said the firm is actively hiring in certain areas. In particular, it’s adding staff in technical cybersecurity (e.g., penetration testers), the aforementioned FedRAMP engagements, AI assessment (in line with recently becoming an ISO 42001 certification body) and in some client-facing roles like marketing and sales.

“So, to me, this isn’t about doing more with less … It’s about doing more of the right things with the right people,” said Desai.

While these moves have resulted in savings, she said that was never really the point, so whatever the firm has saved from staffing efficiencies it has reinvested in its tech stack to build its service line further. When asked for an example, she said the firm would like to focus more on penetration testing by building a SaaS tool for it. While Schellman has a proof of concept developed, she noted it would take a lot of money and time to deploy a full solution — both of which the firm now has more of because of its efficiency moves.

“What is the ‘why’ behind these decisions? The ‘why’ for us isn’t what I think you traditionally see, which is ‘We need to get profitability high. We need to have less people do more things.’ That’s not what it is like,” said Desai. “I want to be able to focus on quality. And the only way I think I can focus on quality is if my people are not focusing on things that don’t matter … I feel like I’m in a much better place because the smart people that I’ve hired are working on the riskiest and most complicated things.”