Decumulate & Downsize

Most of your investing life you and your adviser (if you have one) are focused on wealth accumulation. But, we tend to forget, eventually the whole idea of this long process of delayed gratification is to actually spend this money! That’s decumulation as opposed to wealth accumulation. This stage may also involve downsizing from larger homes to smaller ones or condos, moving to the country or otherwise simplifying your life and jettisoning possessions that may tie you down.

The (Renewed) Case for GICs

Posted By |

**This is a sponsored post written by me [Robb Engen] on behalf of EQ Bank. However, as always, all opinions are my own.

A guaranteed investment certificate (GIC) is unlikely to spark an exciting dinner party conversation but when stock markets are reeling, like they were earlier this year, investors often seek safe havens to wait out the storm. Cash is king for those who don’t have the stomach to watch their portfolio plunge in value, and GICs at least offer the promise of a modest return.

Back in February 2009, when the global financial crisis had just about reached rock-bottom, 30-year-old me was scrambling to meet the RRSP deadline and bought a five-year GIC. It was a costly mistake in hindsight. The Toronto Stock Exchange surged ahead for the next five years, earning annual returns of 9.52 per cent, while my five-year GIC earned an average annual return of 2.75 per cent.

Instead of turning my $7,000 contribution into nearly $10,000, I only had $7,800 to show for my decision. At the time, though, I thought the GIC was a smart move because I had to make a quick decision on what to do with my contribution, and the stock market still looked downright nasty.

Why invest in GICs?

The truth is there’s nothing wrong with stashing your savings inside the comfort of a GIC. Here are four times when it makes good sense to put your money in GICs:

1.) When your entire portfolio is sitting in cash, waiting for “the right time” to get into the market

If you’re the type of investor who can’t ignore the doom-and-gloom economic headlines, and who’s convinced that a market meltdown is always imminent, maybe the stock market isn’t right for you.

Having your retirement savings constantly sitting in cash and earning nothing is like sitting on the fence and being paralyzed to move for fear of making the wrong decision at the wrong time.

A GIC ladder, which might involve purchasing equal amounts of one, two, three, four, and five-year terms, will maximize your risk-free returns and still give you the option of dipping your toes in the market each year when one of the terms comes due.

2.) When your investing strategy boils down to chasing last year’s winning stocks or mutual funds

If you’re the type of investor who’s constantly looking for the latest fad, you might be falling victim to the behaviour gap – the difference between investment returns and investor returns.

Consider that, according to DALBAR, from 1986 to 2016 the S&P 500 Index averaged 10.16   a year, but the average equity fund investor earned just 3.98   a year.

When you think about our poor investor behaviour, coupled with sky-high mutual fund fees (at least, here in Canada), those investors who just can’t help themselves might be better off parking their savings in the best five-year GIC and earning a guaranteed return. Continue Reading…

Why we are taking Social Security at age 62

Posted By |

By Billy and Akaisha Kaderli

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

We decided to take Social Security at age 62. We know there are as many ways to consider this decision as there are days in a year. And many experts advise against taking social security “early” so that you get a bigger check at full retirement age.

It is hard to argue against that.

We have always lived an unconventional lifestyle and the fact that so many experts agree on waiting for payment gives us pause for thought. Here is our logic.

First, the S&P 500 index has averaged over 8% per year, plus dividends, since we retired in 1991. If we take social security early and invest it, we won’t be losing the 8% per year the experts claim is the annual increase of waiting – although one is guaranteed and the other is not. Maybe the markets will trend sideways or go down or even up, no one knows.

For the last 27 years we have lived off of our investments through up and down markets, so investing the monthly check is definitely an option. More likely, we will just not spend our stash and look for opportunities in the markets as our cash positions grow. Plus we have control of the money at this point, adding to our net worth.

Next let’s look at some numbers.

11 years to break even

For easy math, say at 62 you are going to receive $1000.00 per month in benefits, but if you wait until you are 66, your payment will be $1360 ($1000 x 8% for the four years you have waited). Sounds great, right?

However, you would have missed receiving $48,000 dollars in payments from the previous 48 months. How long is it before you make that money back? Using this example it would take 133 months or a little over 11 years ($48,000 divided by $360) and that would put us at 77 years of age, just to break even. In that time frame, the Social Security we are receiving plus our investments should grow far outpacing the extra money received by waiting.

For some people deferring until their full retirement age could make sense, especially if they do not have the assets to support themselves, are poor at handling money or if they are still working. However, this is not our situation and therefore we decided to take the money and run.

It’s really a question of who you think can handle your money better; You or Uncle Sam?

Update: The illustration above shows the return of the S&P 500 Index since we took Social Security at 62.

Billy and Akaisha Kaderli are recognized retirement experts and internationally published authors on topics of finance, medical tourism and world travel. With the wealth of information they share on their award winning website RetireEarlyLifestyle.com, they have been helping people achieve their own retirement dreams since 1991. They wrote the popular books, The Adventurer’s Guide to Early Retirement and Your Retirement Dream IS Possible available on their website bookstore or on Amazon.com.
.

Retired Money: Should you worry a large TFSA will trigger a CRA audit?

Posted By |
MoneySense/Shutterstock

Should you worry that a large TFSA will trigger a CRA audit? My latest MoneySense Retired Money column looks at a legal debate between the Canada Revenue Agency and taxpayers who have succeeded too well in growing their Tax-free Savings Accounts (TFSAs) with shrewd investing. You can access the full story by clicking on the highlighted headline: Why the CRA is targeting some TFSAs in court. 

If you’ve contributed regularly to the TFSA since it began in January 2009 you now have $57,500 of cumulative contribution room. With decent growth, it’s easily possible to have accumulated $100,000 in a TFSA by now: in fact, the CRA told me for the article that of the 13.5 million TFSA accounts that existed by 2016, 18,000 have balances of at least $100,000 (a number that includes myself and my own Millennial daughter, thanks to a few good FANG stock picks).

A Globe & Mail article last week profiled several ordinary Canadian investors and financial bloggers who have TFSAs of at least $100,000. See How to Grow your TFSA: Tips from Financial Bloggers to Fatten Your Account.

My MoneySense article quotes an unnamed investor who is being audited because his TFSA has grown to $500,000, owing to  timely growth of some private technology companies. He doesn’t think $100,000 is enough to trigger an audit but suggests $250,000 may be. In other words, the CRA may be fine with TFSA doubles but five-baggers will invite scrutiny and ten-baggers most certainly so.

But the real controversy involves TFSAs that are run as de facto securities trading businesses. The Globe highlighted this latest crackdown in an earlier article in July but was merely the latest of a series of TFSA audit scares that have been surfacing virtually since after the first year the program existed.

Shrewd stock-picking is not “aggressive tax planning” 

Some of those earlier audits involved TFSAs that soared because they held private companies but my guess is that, as in my own case or that of my daughter, the vast majority of TFSA holders are neither day traders nor experts in investing in private companies. We only buy exchange-traded funds or blue-chip North American stocks, including the FANG tech giants (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google). Continue Reading…

The two main types of Financial Independence

Posted By |

By Vicki Peuckert Cook

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

If you are financially savvy and on your way to a secure retirement, you may already know the steps you should take to work toward financial independence. Maybe you’re already there.

But if you are climbing out of debt and just taking control of your money, financial independence (aka “Findependence”) might seem entirely out of reach. If you have kids, focusing on solving your own money problems may be complicated by your concern about their financial future too.

Financial independence means two different things at two different points in life. And they are both significant milestones. You and your adult children may even be working toward them at the same time!

Here are explanations of both kinds of financial independence and actions to consider to make the path to “FI” attainable, no matter where you are starting from.

Becoming Financially Independent from your parents

Adult children who no longer require any monetary support from their parents are financially independent. This doesn’t mean that a parent can’t provide some kind of financial aid if they choose, it means a child can meet their financial obligations without parental help.

With money concerns including five-figure student loans, rising rents, and considerable consumer debt, many young adults face an uphill battle when trying to leave their parents ‘financial’ nest. And parents may also be “sandwiched in” – helping their kids and providing support for aging parents while trying to save for retirement.

For the benefit of everyone involved, parents and adult children have a responsibility to each other to focus on changes and develop a plan to make financial independence a priority.

What can young adults do?

They can learn how to track expenses and make (and stick to) a budget. Making choices like sharing housing with friends and buying used cars or taking public transportation can also help 20-somethings tackle debt.

Over time, increased income from second jobs paired with making frugal choices like cooking at home, can provide the money adult children need to minimize and finally eliminate the need for parents to provide financial support.

What should parents do?

Parents should start setting limits on the assistance they provide their children. And they should work closely with them to create a plan to end all financial support over a set period of time. Parents need to realize they may actually be harming their kids by enabling their kids to make decisions that aren’t always focused on them becoming financially secure.

If a parent always steps in with a solution, their kids may not learn the importance of meeting their needs while putting off wants for the future. And this will only lengthen the time needed to reach financial independence.

Providing advice, emotional support, and helping adult children problem solve money troubles shifts the financial relationship to adults talking, rather than a parent instructing their child on what to do.

Becoming Financially Independent from Work

The other definition of financial independence is one that’s sometimes debated. But there is little argument that it should be a future goal of everyone. In general, reaching financial independence means you have enough income to pay for your living expenses for the rest of your life without having to work. Continue Reading…

The 4 Percent Rule: Is there a new normal for Canadian retirees?

Posted By |

By Dale Roberts

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

How much do I need to retire? How much income can I create from my investment portfolio? These are two of the most common and important questions that retirees will often ask.

Those two questions are certainly related, or let’s say one can determine the other. If you can earn a 7 percent annual return from your investments that will generate much more income compared to investments that only earn a 1 percent return. A $500,000 portfolio generating that 7 percent return could pay out $35,000 per year and maintain the original portfolio balance. You get ‘paid’ that $35,000 and you still have your initial $500,000.

A 1 percent return on your portfolio will only deliver $5,000 per year. Of course you could simply take out the $35,000 per year from your lower yielding portfolio, but over time the money will disappear.

So how much can you ‘safely’ take out of your retirement investment portfolio?

The financial gurus would suggest that spending 7 percent of your portfolio is much too aggressive. The gold standard retirement studies suggest that you can take out 4 percent – 4.5 percent of your portfolio value, inflation adjusted (2-3 percent annual increase in spending) and you will have a high probability of success over a 30 year period. You are creating perpetual income, just as would a pension. In fact, if your investments are positioned sensibly you are mimicking a pension – you are creating your own pension.

It’s an industry standard so much so that they call it – The 4 Percent Rule. 

The 4 Percent Rule: A Safe Withdrawal Rate in Retirement

The 4 percent rule is based on the work of Bill Bengen. The rule has been challenged and studied perhaps more than any other research in the retirement landscape. Mr. Bengen also took another look and challenged his own 4 percent rule in this 2012 article for Financial Advisor Magazine, How Much is Enough? 

Here’s the final thought from Mr. Bengen in that article. While there are no guarantees in life, and in investing, the rule of thumb has held up.

In summary, the 4.5 percent rule (and its infinite variations for time horizon, tax bracket, current market valuations, etc.) may be challenged in coming years. However, it appears to be working now.

The sensible retirement portfolio (pension) will typically consist of two components, a growth component (stocks) and a risk reducing agent (bonds). Durable income is created from enough growth in the stocks in a lower risk or lower volatility arrangement. Investing can be quite simple, even in the more ‘complicated’ retirement funding stage. Once again, we’re back to that simple mix of stocks and bonds. As always, we want to keep our fees as low as possible. This is no time to be paying ‘others’.

But is that 4 percent rule dead? Many think so. The reason for that is that the bond component of the portfolio, well, it kinda stinks these days. Or at least the yield or income from the bonds is nothing to write home about.

Challenges with the 4 Per cent Rule

Go back a couple of decades and your basic lower risk investment grades bonds would pay retirees 6-7 percent. The bonds on their own were enough to create durable income in a lower risk environment. Retirees did not need to take on much or any stock market risk. These days it might be difficult to generate more than 3 percent from your bond component. The yield on Canadian Bond Universe Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) XBB from iShares is 3.18 percent.

Yields have started to creep up over the last year, but they are still historically low. And bond yields can stay low. They do not have to go up just because they are down. Bond yields can and have in the past stayed very low for decades. We should always keep in mind that we do not know where bonds will go over time, just as we do not know where stock markets will go over the near term. Continue Reading…