Back to Research Library and Insights

Communicating the Saver’s Match: Findings and implications for outreach and policy design

  • SaverLife

Supporting the financial progress of LMI households

With budgets strained by the high cost of basic necessities like housing, energy, healthcare, and food, SaverLife members – and low- to moderate-income (LMI) households like them – often find themselves in the challenging position of  balancing their longer-term dreams of retirement against day-to-day financial realities. A tool that could make it both more motivating and easier for families to make progress towards their long-term savings goals could be a difference maker.

One of these tools is the Saver’s Match, which has the potential to boost retirement wealth by 12% through a “match” offered to LMI savers who contribute to certain types of retirement savings accounts.1 Yet, there are some design flaws in the Saver’s Match that could stymie its effectiveness at bolstering LMI households’ retirement savings.  Requiring that savers hold specific types of retirement accounts, making eligibility and match size contingent on annual contributions to retirement accounts, and utilizing a claiming process that follows an opt-in model are all policy choices that require savers to take action to receive the Match, ultimately making it harder than necessary for LMI households to benefit.2 

  • What is it? A 50% federal matching contribution of up to $1,000 (or up to $2,000 for married couples who file their taxes jointly) for low- to moderate-income workers contributing to a designated retirement savings account.
  • Who qualifies? Low- and moderate-income U.S. residents who are not claimed as a dependent in tax returns and are not enrolled as a full-time student. They must have made a contribution to a designated retirement account in 2027 and must have a qualified retirement account – a traditional IRA; a 401(k), 403(b), or a government 457(b) plan; or a SIMPLE IRA.
  • How to get the Match? In 2028, when filing a 2027 tax return, savers must claim the Match.

In an ideal world, the Saver’s Match would be revised to address these limitations, but there is also a time crunch to get LMI households bought into the value of the Match and prepped to take action so they can benefit in the 2027 tax season. With this in mind, policymakers, retirement researchers, and nonprofits, including SaverLife, are hard at work refining outreach and communicating the value of the Match, with the goal of motivating LMI savers to take action in time to receive the Match as soon as it is available.

We tested two different ways of communicating the value of the Match. For SaverLife members, the value of the Match was clear; its design was not. Fundamentally, neither message provided enough information about eligibility, the claiming process, and withdrawal rules to increase Members’ intentions around the Match, even though they described it as being unusually beneficial in its potential to help build long-term savings. 

Based on their concerns, we offer a set of recommendations for how trusted messengers can help bring clarity to the intended beneficiaries of a complex policy, recognizing that this work should be a complement to the larger project of advocating for a better-designed Saver’s Match. 

Translating the value of (up to) $1000

One potential barrier to take up is that the cash value of the Saver’s Match might seem abstract and distant and therefore less motivating for our members who are juggling cash shortages today. Messaging that demonstrates the value of saving for retirement can help build savings intentions and, ultimately, encourage savings behavior.3 In experiments conducted to increase interest in public benefits, one way to demonstrate value is through expenditure reframing – an approach that translates dollars into concrete expenses to show how receipt of a benefit might improve an individual’s financial life.4

At SaverLife, we applied this expenditure reframe approach to messages about the Saver’s Match. We tested whether reframing the potential $1,000 match from the Saver’s Match into monthly grocery expenses could increase intention to save for retirement among members living on incomes less than $75,000,5 ultimately better positioning them to receive the Saver’s Match during the 2027 tax season.

Members see the value of the Saver’s Match, regardless of wording

We launched a message test as part of a larger annual survey we shared with SaverLife members in April 2026. Members randomly received one of two messages (see below for exact wording) about the Saver’s Match to see if contextualizing the Saver’s Match in terms of concrete lived experiences would increase savings intentions among SaverLife members.

Two different messages about Saver’s Match

The Saver’s Match is a program designed to help taxpayers build their retirement savings. Depending on your household’s income and how much you saved for retirement that year, the federal government will give a match up to $1,000 in your retirement account.6

The Saver’s Match is a program designed to help taxpayers build their retirement savings. Depending on your household’s income and how much you saved for retirement that year, the federal government will give a match up to $1,000 in your retirement account. For the average SaverLife member, that could grow to cover almost 2 months of groceries in retirement.6

Ultimately, which message members received about the Saver’s Match mattered very little. Members already saw the value of the Saver’s Match. Among those who reported they were interested in the Saver’s Match, 62% reported that they would start contributing to a retirement plan and 74% said they would increase the amount they would save for retirement based on the information provided, regardless of wording.7

Members intend to save, often more, to take advantage of the Match

62%

Reported they were interested in the Saver’s Match said they’d start contributing to a retirement.

74%

Would increase their retirement savings based on the information provided, regardless of wording.

Those numbers deviate slightly depending on which message was shared,8 but not to a degree that is statistically significant. In other words, the slight variation in savings intentions may be due to random chance rather than meaningful differences in how the messages landed with members.9

In follow-up conversations with nine SaverLife members, the translation of $1,000 into months of groceries covered was not particularly salient for them, mirroring the results from the message test. Instead, SaverLife members were eager for more detail about eligibility requirements, how the Match worked, withdrawal rules associated with the Match, and implications for their receipt of other benefits. They were particularly interested to have more information about the size of the Match they could expect to receive, given their income, tax filing status, and potential retirement contributions. They also wanted to understand whether and how different types of savings programs and accounts – 530A accounts, Saver’s Match, ABLE accounts – can be combined. 

Members’ hunger for more information points to the value of the Saver’s Match. Despite not having all of the details about the Saver’s Match, members spoke of potential changes they could make to their retirement savings, but wanted to know more before they felt ready to commit to a plan. 

Trusted messengers can support uptake and provide clarity, even in a flawed design

Though it currently suffers from design flaws, the Saver’s Match has the potential to make a real difference in the long-term savings trajectories of LMI households. Many SaverLife members who are likely income-eligible for the Saver’s Match want to take advantage of it, but they first want greater clarity about how the Match works and its implications for other aspects of their financial lives. A more straightforward design of the Saver’s Match could mitigate these issues. In the meantime, there are ways that trusted messengers could help manage these challenges, including:

Treat Saver’s Match messages as the opening invitation for a longer conversation. SaverLife members wanted to get into the details to understand if the Saver’s Match was right for their personal circumstances. These details – whether and how to combine Saver’s Match with ABLE accounts, what size Match they could expect at their specific income level and tax filing status, what types of accounts qualify, and what the withdrawal rules are – don’t fit neatly into a brief message so it is critical that messages direct interested savers to additional information that clearly answers questions about eligibility specifics, how to get the full Match, withdrawal rules, and implications for any other benefits they currently receive. 

When possible, pair messages with personalized action items from trusted sources. Eligibility for the Saver’s Match and the possibility of maximizing the Match depend on a number of factors. Providing clear action steps would help reduce the cognitive load and bridge the intention-to-action gap. Different organizations can take a variety of approaches, such as:

  • Nonprofit organizations engaged directly with LMI households can help eligible savers prepare for the Saver’s Match through the creation of a personalized calculator or direct them to an IRS-created calculator to understand what Match they would receive at different levels of monthly retirement contributions, taking into account their income and filing status.
  • Organizations with insight into households’ retirement savings – such as employers, brokerage firms, or retirement and pension providers – can help by clearly identifying the steps an individual still needs to take to maximize their Match. An interactive planning tool that dynamically checked off steps as they were completed – such as having a retirement account that is eligible to receive the Match or making contributions to a designated retirement account – could denote progress and help savers see what actions they still need to take.

Work towards structural changes to the Match while also filling the gaps. The Saver’s Match has the potential to be an important tool for LMI households looking to boost their retirement savings. Organizations should continue to push for revisions to the Saver’s Match that simplify the process, including shifting from an opt-in model to automatic claiming, streamlining the eligibility process, and making contributions to ABLE accounts eligible for the Match. 

Absent these types of changes, organizations engaged directly with LMI households can help by ensuring those households are prepared to take advantage of the Saver’s Match in its current form. Messages that provide greater clarity on topics raised by members – whether they are eligible, how to claim, and withdrawal implications – have the potential to be particularly helpful. SaverLife is already sharing resources with our members, helping to explain the Saver’s Match and its eligibility requirements, but getting the word out will take all hands on deck to ensure that LMI households are able to take advantage of the free money being offered in the Saver’s Match and unlock its wealth-building potential.

Data comes from a SaverLife survey fielded to its members in April of 2026 to share their tax time experiences, including their use of different tax-advantaged savings accounts. Analysis on members’ interest in Saver’s Match was conducted on the responses of 269 members who were interested in the Saver’s Match, responded to a question of whether or not they filed their 2026 taxes, were aged 18 or older, and self-identified as financial decision-makers in their household. We also focused the sample on members with household incomes of $75,000 or less, making them likely to be eligible for the Saver’s Match. Follow-up conversations to dig deeper on survey findings were held with a group of 10 members in July of 2026. 

Endnotes

  1.  https://www.morningstar.com/content/cs-assets/v3/assets/blt9415ea4cc4157833/blt8e3e963c64eaeb6d/67979fc5284b0afcd79094d1/Impact_of_the_Savers_Match_on_Retirement_Wealth_Final.pdf
  2. https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2025/09/federal-savers-match-coming-in-2027-could-boost-automated-retirement-savings-programs
  3. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Josh-Wiener/publication/229708019_A_Framework_for_Promoting_Retirement_Savings/links/66f6dc86f599e0392fa8fb1d/A-Framework-for-Promoting-Retirement-Savings.pdf
  4.  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00222429251356992  
  5.  We restricted the sample to SaverLife members whose incomes would likely qualify them for the Saver’s Match, which is expected to completely phase out at $71,000 for married couples filing jointly.
  6. We calculated the expenditure reframe based on analysis from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Expenditure Survey estimating that American households spent $6,244 per year on groceries in 2024. From this, we calculated that receiving the full match of $1000 would be equivalent to roughly two months of groceries since $6,244 roughly translates to $520 a month in grocery spending. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm
  7.  Reporting on a 2024 survey of income-eligible households across the United States reported slightly higher numbers from ours. Their analysis showed that 89.9% of eligible savers would be very or somewhat likely to contribute more to their retirement savings and 73.5% of income-eligible non-savers would be very or somewhat likely to start saving for retirement. A number of factors may be leading to our different numbers, including variability in question wording, our inability to differentiate between those currently saving for retirement and those who are not, and the different economic circumstances households face in the spring of 2026 compared to February of 2024 with households simply not having the flex in their budgets that they once did.
  8. Among those who received the message without the expenditure reframe, 77% said they would increase their retirement contributions, and 59% said they would start contributing to retirement. Similarly, among those who received the expenditure reframe message, 72% said they would increase their retirement contributions, and 65% said they would start contributing to retirement.
  9.  Randomization was confirmed through balance checks across demographics. 

More SaverLife insights

Read more