Jackson: Gen X feels squeezed as advisors offer mixed responses on policy risk

A new study from Jackson and the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College finds a widening gap between investors’ fears about policy changes and the extent to which those fears are translated into planning conversations – a split that leaves many Gen X households particularly exposed as they near retirement.

The research, released March 11, 2026, surveyed 1,443 investors ages 45 to 79 with at least $100,000 in financial assets and 400 financial professionals.

It shows broad expectations that government programs and taxes will shift: 65% of investors expect cuts to Medicaid benefits, 46% anticipate reductions in Social Security benefits and 68% foresee rising Medicare premiums and copays. Thirty-three percent of respondents said they shifted to more conservative investments since early 2025, and one in five pre-retiree respondents said they postponed retirement.

Read more: Social Security trust fund to run dry by 2032, CBO says in new projections

“Our research reveals a surprising disconnect between the broad awareness of a changing policy landscape and understanding of how those expected changes can impact personal retirement planning,” said Glen Franklin, assistant vice president of research, RIA and lead generation strategy for Jackson National Life Distributors. “Financial professionals and investors alike can benefit by treating policy implications as a core element of retirement readiness.”

Although baby boomers report greater current or expected reliance on Social Security and Medicare, Gen X respondents expressed more concern: 76% of Gen Xers said a 5% federal tax-rate increase would require spending changes, compared with 65% of baby boomers. Only 36% of Gen X investors reported feeling very or extremely secure about their finances, versus 46% of baby boomers. Along those same lines, 46% percent of Gen X investors said concern about their financial future rose since early 2025, compared with 37% of baby boomers.

While many professionals report a rosier macro outlook than their clients – 47% of advisors saw economic improvement between 2024 and early 2025 – they also are recommending precautionary moves. Nearly half of advisors suggested investment changes and 43% recommended products that protect against investment losses.

Another 42% encouraged reallocations such as Roth conversions in anticipation of higher taxes, the risks of which are growing along with the ballooning US debt and a groundswell of state-level proposals to tax the very rich. Only about one-third of investors working with financial professionals discuss Medicaid and long-term care funding, the study found.

“Policy uncertainty hurts both investors and the economy,” said Andrew Eschtruth, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. “A meaningful share has taken steps to try to protect themselves, including delaying their retirement and shifting to more conservative investments.”

Despite the recommendations by some advisors, the researchers found little statistical evidence that having an advisor changed investors’ levels of concern about their investments or financial future. The report suggests that advisors often address policy topics only when prompted: 53% said they discuss policy issues when they deem them important, and another 28% said they neither avoid nor proactively seek them out. Client sensitivity and worries about appearing political were cited as common reasons to steer clear of these conversations.

The report also notes an uptick in advisor interest in hedging and emergency savings: 22% recommended clients increase emergency funds – which might make sense given last year's uptick in some 401(k) savers taking hardship withdrawals – and 25% recommended taking less investment risk.

Read more: Political worries hang over client conversations as advisors eye 2026

For advisors, the findings point to a practical briefing agenda: explicitly map potential Social Security and Medicare scenarios to client cash-flow plans, evaluate tax-sensitive moves such as Roth conversions, and weigh downside-protection solutions where appropriate.