Making It Pay: A Conversation with ACLI's Andy Remo
ACLI's VP for Retirement Security on the annuity puzzle, four bold proposals, and the future he's building on Capitol Hill
Andrew Remo knows how things get done in Washington. As Vice President, Retirement Security at the American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI), he is one of the leading voices pushing for policies that help Americans turn their savings into income they cannot outlive. Before joining ACLI in 2023, he spent more than a decade at the American Retirement Association (ARA), where he helped shape landmark legislation—including SECURE 1.0 (2019) and SECURE 2.0 (2022). Earlier in his career, he served as a Legislative Aide to U.S. Senator Benjamin Cardin. He holds degrees in Political Science from American University and an MBA and M.A. in Government from Johns Hopkins University. We last talked with Andy when he was at ARA—and guess what—some of our shared interests came true! So at this key time, we had to sit down with Andy again to talk about the freshest thinking in paychecks-for-life. Join us as we chat, below.
Andy, we've got that fall feeling. What's happening in your neck of the woods this month?
We're just coming back from the August recess. It's been a slower time in the retirement space, although there was a lot of activity in the Senate right before they left. On the Hill, everybody is focused on the upcoming elections. The House has already voted on funding, and the Senate took care of its funding before they left for August. So we have funding through mid-December and no shutdown drama before the election. Everybody is bracing for what comes next.
I've been told—and we'll see what happens—that Rep. Richie Neal is going to introduce his blueprint for SECURE 3.0 as soon as perhaps this work period. He just made it through his primary, and if the election goes well for the Democrats and they flip the House, he could find himself back as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. He was the driving force when we got SECURE 1.0 done in 2019 and SECURE 2.0 done at the end of 2022. As Kendra Isaacson likes to say, SECURE 3.0 should be called the Charm Act—third time's the charm. Richie Neal is back for the second time as the ranking member, so I expect he will lay down that marker for the next round of retirement policy.
We all like retirement income—especially when it comes with some certainty. In-plan annuities are one way to get this, but only a few plans are offering them. Why is that?
The good news is we've seen a lot of developments this decade that I think are really propelling the availability of in-plan annuities. Big asset managers are teaming up with insurance providers to offer guaranteed lifetime income solutions inside target-date funds.
BlackRock, Equitable, and Brighthouse Financial were the first to announce something like this—their LifePath Paycheck solution—back in May 2020. But as you know if you've worked on retirement policy, this is complicated stuff. There are a lot of rules and regulations, and there's a long runway to actually plug it in and play it. It took about four years from that announcement to the actual launch, which happened in April 2024.
Then in December 2025, Vanguard teamed up with TIAA on a similar target-date fund product that's rolling out in the second half of 2026. And the big announcement this year was Fidelity teaming up with New York Life and Nationwide on their Freedom Lifetime suite of funds, which will roll out in early 2027.
It's always the toughest to be the first mover. But once one entity puts something in place, everybody follows. And I think it's exciting because, demographically, we're at what's being called 'Peak 65.' More than 11,400 Americans are turning 65 every single day, and that wave will continue through 2027. Couple that with the pressure on Social Security, and you have a real opening for guaranteed lifetime income products.
Social Security is everybody's bedrock floor of guaranteed lifetime income—that's where we start. But for most people outside the lowest two income groups, it's just not enough to replace adequate income. That's where our members come in with their guaranteed lifetime income products to fill the gap.
And here's something underappreciated: research shows that people who annuitize their savings actually spend more in retirement—about 22% more—because they know what their budget is and they know that check is going to arrive each month. They're not paralyzed by fear of running out of money. Super savers especially—people who've worked hard and accumulated real wealth—often end up living way below their means in retirement because they're terrified of outliving their savings. Once you annuitize at least a portion, you can relax a little. The research shows that a mix of liquid savings and guaranteed annuity income leads to the optimal retirement outcome.
“Once you annuitize at least a portion of your savings, studies show you spend about 25% more in retirement. You know what your budget is. You know that check is going to hit each month.”
We have a need, we have growing product, and demographics are pushing us in this direction. Is there more we can do? Tell us about the work ACLI is doing.
There's definitely more to be done. A 2024 paper from the Boston College Center for Retirement Research found that among people with over $100,000 in retirement savings, about 50% say they want annuitized income—but only 12% actually have it. That's the annuity puzzle: everybody says they want it, but not enough people follow through. The mismatch is real.
ACLI has four legislative proposals aimed at embedding lifetime income tools into the defined contribution plan system. Let me walk through them.
One - Require DC Plans to Offer an Annuity Distribution Option
This is my north star. It's simple: require large defined contribution plans to offer participants the option to take a portion of their account balance as a guaranteed lifetime income distribution. You'd be surprised how far that alone could move the needle.
A version of this is actually in Rep. Neal's Automatic IRA Act (reintroduced in December 2025 as H.R. 6722). Under that bill, plans with more than 100 participants would be required to offer a guaranteed lifetime income distribution option for participants with over $200,000 in account balance—for at least half of that balance. As a practical matter, if you're required to have it for some participants, I think most plan sponsors would just make it available to everyone. That's administrative simplification.
If you combine that requirement with the new target-date default investment solutions rolling out right now—from BlackRock, Vanguard, and Fidelity—I think you'd see a real uptick in people annuitizing. Right now, too many people aren't even given the option. You can't choose something that isn't on the menu.
Two - Update QDIA Liquidity Rules
Right now, there are liquidity rules that apply to default investments in 401(k) plans—so-called Qualified Default Investment Alternatives (QDIAs)—that create a barrier to using annuities as defaults. Annuities can be offered under current law, but our proposal would make the rules more flexible and widen the range of annuity options available.
Between you and me, this one is probably the most controversial on the Hill. It's less controversial to require plan sponsors to offer a distribution option than to change what can be used as a default investment. But I think progress on this is more likely to come through regulation—the Department of Labor has already taken steps through its alternative assets rule.
Three - In-Service Rollovers for Age 50+ (the RSCA)
This is my pet project. It's called the Retirement Simplification and Clarity Act, or RSCA. In the House, it's H.R. 6324, sponsored by Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) and Rep. Darin LaHood (R-IL). The Senate companion is S.5156, introduced by Senators Roger Marshall and Kirsten Gillibrand.
The idea is simple: if you're 50 or older and your plan sponsor opts in, you can roll some or all of your accrued 401(k) savings directly into an individual retirement annuity—while you're still working and still contributing to the plan. You lock in guaranteed lifetime income now, and keep building your liquid savings for the rest of your career.
Why 50? It's when catch-up contribution rules kick in, and it's around the age when people really start thinking about how to manage retirement income. It also means more time to purchase annuities in tranches. And that matters—the earlier you purchase an annuity, the better deal it is. Annuity pricing gets worse as you age, and a longer time horizon gives you more flexibility to take advantage of better interest rate environments.
“The earlier you purchase an annuity, the better deal it is. We’re giving people a wider latitude to make that choice.”
Four - Update the 402(f) Rollover Notice
This one is a good-government proposal. When you leave an employer, you're required to receive a notice called a 402(f) notice, which explains your options for your retirement savings—whether to keep it in the plan, roll it to another plan, move it to an IRA, and so on. The IRS just updated this notice this year. It's now 22 pages long—11 pages for traditional savings, 11 for Roth.
Our proposal is to simplify it. Put your core options on one page. If you want more detail, offer a link. Right now, a lot of people get overwhelmed by these notices and don't read them. The intent is just to highlight the key choices clearly: keep it in the plan, roll to another plan, roll to an IRA—including a rollover to an individual retirement annuity. The RSCA includes a provision to update this notice as part of the same bill.
There's some tension here, because the agency understandably wants to make sure people understand all the tax consequences involved. And there are a lot of rules. So it's a balance. But the 'smoking kills' standard applies here—sometimes a clear, short message is more powerful than pages of fine print.
So how do you prioritize these four proposals? What's easy, and what's more ambitious?
I'd put proposals three and four—the RSCA provisions on in-service rollovers and the 402(f) notice update—at the top of the achievability list. The RSCA is a bipartisan, modest bill that makes two targeted tweaks to the tax law: a new rollover option for those 50+, and a simplified rollover notice. It's a natural fit for SECURE 3.0.
Requiring DC plans to offer an annuity distribution option is my north star—that's the bold, big-picture play. It requires plan sponsors to have that option on the menu, which is critical. If the option isn't there, people can't choose it. Combine that requirement with the new default investment solutions from BlackRock, Vanguard, and Fidelity, and you'd see real movement. That's achievable too, but it's a bigger ask and a bolder policy step.
The QDIA liquidity rule change is probably the most controversial, and I think progress there is more likely to come through DOL regulation than legislation. The DOL's alternative assets rule has already taken some steps in the right direction.
Dream big. What does your ideal retirement savings and retirement security world look like?
I think we're heading toward a system where everybody is covered—either through work or through an account created at birth. Both the current administration's focus on universal coverage and the interest in creating savings accounts for every child are steps in that direction. If you don't use a Trump Account for other purposes, you can roll it into an IRA after 18 years, and that becomes your personal retirement savings vehicle that compounds over a long horizon.
What's encouraging is that both parties are genuinely intrigued by universal savings. I thought it was remarkable to hear Governor Newsom describe Trump Accounts as among the most significant things the current administration has done on financial security. They don't agree on much. But they agreed on that. For me, that's a signal.
So my big picture: give everybody an account, match lower-income savings so they have a meaningful savings opportunity, and then help them manage those savings in retirement through guaranteed lifetime income. That's the full arc—accumulation through decumulation. The guaranteed lifetime income piece is where our industry comes in, and it's where we can make the biggest difference.
What haven't we talked about?
I'd be remiss not to mention 403(b) investment parity. Because of quirks in tax law, 403(b) plans—which cover teachers, hospital workers, and nonprofit employees—don't have access to the same investment options as 401(k) plans, including collective investment trusts (CITs). This means those workers don't have access to the same lower-cost investment tools that 401(k) participants enjoy.
This has been a priority since 2019 and we're still working on it. ACLI and ICI don't always see eye to eye, but on this issue, we're completely aligned. It's a persistent, unresolved item—but hope springs eternal.
On that note – thank you Andy Remo, for sharing the view from your seat! We appreciate your perspective and insights. Like to connect with Andy and talk further? You can reach him by email here. You can follow Andy’s work here.
