Suze Orman: Couples Miss $14,000 in Free Retirement Money by Not Saving as a Team

Why Two 401(k) Matches Create a $14,000 Blind Spot

Many couples assume they are handling retirement well because both spouses are saving. But if both workplace plans have different match formulas, simply saving as individuals is not enough. During open enrollment season, the most useful move can be simple: compare the two match formulas and direct the first retirement dollars to the spouse with the better deal. The reason is straightforward. matching contribution formulas differ from one employer to the next, and 24 percent of couples do not coordinate in a way that captures the most employer money. The result is not an exotic mistake; it is a household allocation mistake.

Prioritize the more generous match first

The core idea is simple: secure the bigger employer match before spreading savings more evenly. When one plan offers a more generous match, that account should be filled first. Couples that skip this step are leaving $757 a year on the table on average, which adds up to more than $14,000 by age 65. That is an immediate return you do not have to chase in volatile markets.

The key point is not that couples must suddenly save much more. In many cases, the same total contribution could be reshuffled to capture more employer money. Once the best match is secured, you can build around cash flow, budget limits, and tax needs.

Why the Math Gets Tricky When Two Plans Meet

The difficulty is not moral; it is mechanical. Once two workplace plans enter the picture, retirement saving stops being a personal-habit test and becomes a household allocation problem. The right question is not, "Are we saving?" but "Which plan gives our next dollar the best guaranteed payout?" If both spouses contribute but the couple does not follow the better formula, free money can still slip through the cracks different match formulascoordinating your contributions.

It is a household allocation problem, not a character flaw

Think of the two plans as one shared scoreboard. One employer may give a dollar-for-dollar match on the first 3% - that is 100 cents on the dollar up to the cap. The other may give a 50-cent match for every dollar contributed up to the first 6% - still valuable, but only 50 cents on the dollar. If the household splits contributions evenly instead of funding the better payout first, the result is inefficiency, not bad character.

The cost is not theoretical. About 1 in 5 couples fail to coordinate around the better match, and those households miss about $760 per year on average. Another estimate puts the miss at roughly $700 a year. The long-term drag is bigger still because missed match dollars never get time to stay invested; one estimate suggests that a $700 annual shortfall could amount to more than $30,000 over 20 years at 6%.

Why smart couples still get it wrong

If cash flow allows, the ideal is for both spouses to get the full match. But the practical rule of thumb is clearer: when you cannot do both at once, get the highest guaranteed return first.

The same research finds that half of forgone matches appear accidental, while the other half reflect deliberate choices tied to weaker marital coordination or fears about how assets would be treated if the marriage ends. That tension is human, not unusual. The legal baseline is also reassuring: money contributed during marriage is generally marital property, and in many cases each spouse can expect a 50% share.

A simple household rule can help cut through that friction:

• Write down both match formulas in plain language.
• Agree that the first priority is the highest guaranteed return.
• If cash flow improves, aim for both full matches later, not first.
• Keep the plan visible so both spouses can follow it.

A Simple Team Playbook for Couples

Once the better match is identified, the next question is not "How do we save more?" but "What is the household order of operations?" During open enrollment, couples have a clear chance to fix that sequence before year-end autopilots lock in.

Set a household savings target

Start with a combined goal of about 15% of your salary, counting both your paycheck contributions and employer matches. That is the baseline that gives most households a real shot at retirement comfort. If 15% feels too large to do all at once, raise the rate by one percentage point each year and earmark at least half of any raise for retirement. The point is progress, not perfection.

List both match formulas, then decide who goes first

Grab the plan documents and write down the two rules side by side. One spouse may have a dollar-for-dollar match on the first 3%, while the other has a 50-cent match for every dollar contributed up to the first 6%. When the formulas differ, the spouse with the more generous match should contribute enough to get the full match first. If that is not enough to maximize both plans, that is okay. Secure the better deal before chasing the second one.

If the match is weak, keep saving - but change the bucket

If one or both plans have a shallow match, do not treat that as a reason to stop saving. Use the better match first, then direct additional dollars to the next most useful account. That may mean an IRA, while still keeping a Roth 401(k) option or other tax consequences in view. The key is to avoid letting savings sit idle while you wait for the "right" plan design.

Open-enrollment checklist for couples

• Write down both matching contribution formulas in plain language.
• Mark who should contribute enough to earn the full match first.
• Set or confirm automatic contributions so the household does not drift.
• Check whether the total is near 15% of salary.
• If the match is not enough, note the IRA fallback and whether a Roth 401(k) option fits your tax picture.
• Write the plan down and put it somewhere both spouses can find it.

This is the practical payoff of saving as a team: not a heroic effort, but a better sequence while the enrollment window is open.