Victory Lap

Once you achieve Financial Independence, you may choose to leave salaried employment but with decades of vibrant life ahead, it’s too soon to do nothing. The new stage of life between traditional employment and Full Retirement we call Victory Lap, or Victory Lap Retirement (also the title of a new book to be published in August 2016. You can pre-order now at VictoryLapRetirement.com). You may choose to start a business, go back to school or launch an Encore Act or Legacy Career. Perhaps you become a free agent, consultant, freelance writer or to change careers and re-enter the corporate world or government.

Why Polymarket could become the World’s biggest Betting Exchange

Posted By |
By Alain Guillot
Special to Financial Independence Hub

Have you heard of Polymarket yet?

In short, Polymarket is a betting exchange, although they prefer to call it a prediction market. But let’s be honest … it’s gambling. The difference is in the structure.

In traditional sports betting, you gamble against the house. The sportsbook sets the odds, takes your bet, pays out winners:  and keeps a hefty share of the profits.

Polymarket flips that model. Instead of betting against the house, users bet against each other, while Polymarket simply takes a small 2% fee from the winner.

The platform launched in 2019 — just six years ago — founded by college dropout Shayne Coplan, who has already become one of the youngest self-made billionaires at just 27.

Only in America can someone go from bathroom coder to billionaire in under a decade. Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison, Michael Dell, Steve Jobs — and now Shayne Coplan — all proof that dropping out of college can pay off massively.

Polymarket first exploded during the 2020 and 2024 U.S. presidential elections, when users wagered millions on political outcomes. Originally focused on non-sports events, Polymarket eventually added sports betting, and that’s when things went vertical.

Now I believe Polymarket is on track to become the #1 sports betting platform in the world — potentially disrupting giants like FanDuel and DraftKings.

Here’s why:

Why Polymarket has an Unfair Advantage Continue Reading…

Is the “4%” Rule still relevant for Retirement Planning? What the experts say

Posted By |

Late in October, my monthly MoneySense Retired Money column reviewed three recently published financial books, starting with financial planner William Bengen’s new A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More.

Below we canvassed more than a dozen retirement experts and financial planners in both Canada and the United States about their experiences with the Rule, both the original book as well as the new one.

These experts were gathered by Featured.com, which has been supplying Findependence Hub with quality content for several years now. It has changed its procedure so that editors like myself can request input on particular topics we think will interest our readership. The sources are all on LinkedIn, as you can see by clicking on their profiles below.

Here’s what we asked, followed by their answers, which have been re-ordered by me.

“What do you think of the 4% Rule: CFP Bill Bengen’s guideline about a safe annual Retirement withdrawal amount that factors in inflation? Have you read or do you plan to read Bengen’s just-published followup book: A Richer Retirement : Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More? Do you agree or do you have your own tweaks to the 4% Rule? Looking for both Canadian and American input.”

Here is what these thought leaders had to say.

Adaptive Withdrawals protect Retirement through Market Cycles

The 4% Rule, created by CFP Bill Bengen in the 1990s, remains one of the most referenced retirement withdrawal guidelines. It suggests withdrawing 4% of your portfolio in the first year of retirement and adjusting that amount for inflation each year. The idea was to provide a sustainable income stream for at least 30 years without depleting your savings. Bengen’s newly published book, A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More, revisits this concept using updated data and broader asset allocations. He now argues the safe withdrawal rate could rise to around 4.7%, supported by stronger market performance and portfolio diversification beyond the original stock-bond mix. 

I see the 4% Rule as a reliable starting point, but not a fixed rule. It offers structure for retirees who need clarity on how much to withdraw each year, but real-world conditions require flexibility. For U.S. investors, I still begin with 4% as a baseline because it remains simple and conservative. Then I evaluate three major factors before adjusting: market volatility, portfolio performance, and expected longevity. For Canadian retirees, I tend to start lower, around 3.5%, due to differences in taxation, mandatory RRIF withdrawal rules, and the impact of currency and inflation differences compared to U.S. portfolios. 

My main adjustment to the rule is to make withdrawals adaptive rather than static. If the portfolio declines by more than 20% early in retirement, I recommend reducing withdrawals by 5% to protect capital. If inflation stays above 4% for more than two years while fixed income returns remain weak, I hold withdrawals steady instead of increasing them. Conversely, if long-term returns outperform expectations, withdrawals can rise modestly. These adjustments keep the retirement plan sustainable through changing market cycles. 

The lesson is to view the 4% Rule as a guideline, not a guarantee. Its true value lies in the discipline it introduces. A flexible version of the rule — tailored to taxes, inflation, and market behaviour — helps retirees spend with confidence while protecting their financial future. — Andrew Izrailo, Senior Corporate and Fiduciary Manager,  Astra Trust

Real Estate Investors Outperform Traditional 4% Rule

I’ve always thought the 4% rule is a decent starting point, but it’s really built around stocks and bonds. In my world of real estate, combining rental income with property value growth usually blows past that number. Instead of a fixed withdrawal, you can sell a property or pull out equity when the market’s high. That flexibility often makes your money last a lot longer in retirement. — Carl Fanaro, President,  NOLA Buys Houses 

Balance Freedom and Security in Retirement Journey

Retirement, much like embarking on a long and meaningful journey, is not just about reaching a destination but about learning how to move through each stage of life with purpose and enjoyment.

After reading Bill Bengen’s A Richer Retirement, I found his updated perspective on the 4% Rule both inspiring and practical. He transforms what was once seen as a strict withdrawal formula into a flexible approach that prioritizes experience, adaptability, and peace of mind.

Bengen’s message is that retirement should not revolve around fear or limitation. Instead, it should be about living fully within realistic financial boundaries. By adjusting withdrawals according to personal goals, market performance, and the natural flow of retirement years, retirees can enjoy their savings as a source of freedom rather than anxiety.

The concept feels much like travel: in some seasons, you venture farther, explore more, and spend a bit extra; in others, you slow down, rest, and savor simplicity. This approach is particularly meaningful for those who dream of traveling during retirement. The early, active years can be dedicated to exploring places like Morocco, when energy and curiosity are at their peak. Later on, spending can naturally shift toward quieter experiences closer to home.

Both Canadians and Americans can apply this mindset using tools such as TFSAs, RRSPs, Roth IRAs, or Social Security planning to balance flexibility and security.

In the end, Bengen’s vision reframes retirement as a phase of freedom, not restriction. It invites people to plan wisely but live fully, creating space for exploration, connection, and purpose much like a well-planned journey that leaves room for discovery along the way. — Nassira Sennoune, Marketing Coordinator, Sun trails

Tax-Efficient Withdrawals add 1-2% to Retirement

The 4% rule is a solid starting point, but after 20+ years advising clients, I can tell you it’s not one-size-fits-all. I’ve seen too many retirees lock themselves into unnecessary restrictions because they treat it like gospel rather than a guideline. 

Here’s what I actually do with clients: we start with 4% as the baseline, then adjust based on their actual spending patterns and market conditions. I had a couple last year who were terrified to spend more than their calculated 4%, even though their portfolio had grown 30% and they were skipping vacations they’d dreamed about for decades. We bumped them to 5.5% for two years because the math worked and life is short: they finally took that trip to Italy. 

The biggest mistake I see isn’t about the percentage itself: it’s that people forget about tax efficiency in withdrawal sequencing. I always look at which accounts to pull from first (taxable vs. tax-deferred vs. Roth) because that can add 1-2% to your effective withdrawal rate without touching principal. One client saved $47,000 over five years just by restructuring their withdrawal order. 

I haven’t read Bengen’s new book yet, but it’s on my list. My practical tweak: build a 2-3 year cash cushion in your portfolio so you’re never forced to sell stocks in a down market. That flexibility alone has kept my clients sleeping well through every correction since 2008. — Winnie Sun, Executive Producer,, ModernMom

Canadian Medical Costs require Flexible Withdrawal Rates

Look, the 4% rule is a decent guideline, but it’s not some magic number you can set and forget. I’ve watched people get into trouble because they didn’t account for medical bills, which are a real wild card here in Canada. I always tell people to build in a cash buffer and check in on that withdrawal rate every couple of years instead of just locking it in permanently. — James Inwood, Insurance Broker, James Inwood

Cash Reserves shield Retirees from Market Volatility

I assist clients with retirement and estate planning.  Bill Bengen’s original 4% rule was first published in 1994 and took into account a balanced investment portfolio modeled back to 1926.  At that time, he projected a 4% withdrawal rate, adjusted annually for inflation, would ensure the portfolio was sustainable for a 30-year retirement.  I recommend my retired clients review their portfolio allocation, investment returns, monitor for annual inflation and expenditures and then make adjustments for the next year’s withdrawals.  

 I plan to read Mr. Bengen’s new book published in August.  Mr. Bengen  is now recommending a broader asset diversification to add in small percentages of international equities and small-cap stocks in addition to his historic investment portfolio of 50% U.S. large-cap stocks and 50% intermediate bonds.  He claims with this broader diversification the safe withdrawal rate could now be up to 4.7% under best case scenario, 4.15% worst case.  I agree with Bengen that broader asset diversification can make sense for retirees who are investment knowledgeable and are monitoring annually the data I’ve noted above.

I recommend to my clients that any rule of thumb such as Bengen is simply a data point.  Retirees need to take into account their own risk profile as well as their investment understanding before making any significant adjustments to their rate of asset withdrawal.   Retirees now have longer life spans and are battling a heightened inflation rate.  I recommend my clients have a flexible withdrawal range of 3.5% to 4.5%, monitor assets annually, and continually adjust their annual withdrawal rate as necessary for volatile markets.   

I also recommend that my clients have a cash account established of at least two years’ withdrawals to avoid having to sell assets in a prolonged negative market environment. — Lisa Cummings, Attorney and Executive Vice President at Cummings & Cummings Law,  Cummings & Cummings

Tax Planning Matters more than Withdrawal Percentages

I’ve spent 40 years managing my own law firm and CPA practice, plus 20 years as a registered investment advisor, so I’ve seen hundreds of retirement plans play out in real life. The 4% rule is a decent starting point, but I stopped treating it as gospel about 15 years into my advisory career.

Here’s what I actually saw with my small business owner clients: their retirement income rarely came from just traditional portfolios. Most had business sale proceeds, real estate holdings, and irregular cash flows that made the 4% rule almost irrelevant. One client sold his manufacturing business at 62 for $2.3 million (US) but kept the building and leased it back: his retirement “withdrawal rate” was completely different because he had guaranteed rental income covering 60% of his expenses. 

The bigger issue I noticed was tax planning around withdrawals. I’d have clients rigidly following 4% from their IRAs while sitting on Roth conversions they should’ve done years earlier, or taking Social Security at the wrong time. The sequence of what you withdraw from matters more than the percentage: I’ve seen people save $50K+ in taxes over retirement just by pulling from taxable accounts first while doing strategic Roth conversions. 

My tweak: forget the percentage and work backward from your actual monthly expenses, then layer in guaranteed income sources (Social Security, pensions, annuities) before touching portfolio money. Most of my retired clients ended up withdrawing 2-3% because they structured things right on the front end. — David Fritch, Attorney,  Fritch Law Office Continue Reading…

CMHC: Why it’s Time to rip off the Bandaid

Posted By |
By Kevin Fettig
Special to Financial Independence Hub

 

CMHC [Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation] is unique among federal entities. As a Crown Corporation, it carries out securitization and insurance operations under a corporate mandate while also receiving public funding for federal policy initiatives. Once funding is allocated, CMHC reports to its board rather than the minister responsible on a day-to-day basis.

This differs from the typical departmental reporting model, which has created issues for the PMO, particularly as housing became such a hot-button political issue. Over time, the Department of Infrastructure and Communities evolved into Housing, Infrastructure and Communities, and CMHC’s reporting shifted to the department rather than directly to the minister.

As budgetary spending responsibilities have gradually been peeled away from CMHC, the structure has become more complex and confusing. Policy responsibilities now overlap between the department and CMHC, and some areas – such as addressing homelessness – are jointly managed.

Reducing Chronic Homelessness

A 2022 Auditor General of Canada report found federal efforts to reduce chronic homelessness have been ineffective because departments lack clear accountability for the National Housing Strategy’s target of reducing chronic homelessness by 50 per cent. The report also found that federal departments and CMHC did not know whether their initiatives were effectively improving housing outcomes. In addition, it highlighted a lack of coordination among various federal housing and homelessness programs.

The fragmentation of roles has worsened with the creation of Build Canada Homes, a $13 billion plan to build social housing, starting with development on public land. The initiative is designed to speed up delivery, strengthen Canadian supply chains, and ensure homes are affordable and sustainable over the long term. It focuses on a Canadian, factory-built, net-zero housing platform capable of delivering quickly in major cities, rural communities, and the North.

In the past, CMHC was responsible for social housing programs, typically under Section 95 of the National Housing Act, providing funding for non-profit and co-operative housing. More recently, new initiatives have included the Federal Community Housing Initiative, the Co-operative Housing Development Program, and preservation funding to support asset management planning.

Do 3 agencies make sense for social housing?

Does it make sense to have three agencies responsible for social housing? These agencies have demonstrated poor accountability when responsibilities overlap. Consolidating CMHC’s social housing activity under Housing, Infrastructure and Communities or under Build Canada Homes  could create a more streamlined and cost-effective framework for delivering on policy.

This would allow CMHC to focus on its two commercial mandates – securitization and insurance – while retaining some housing finance activities that require a commercial perspective for reviewing and underwriting loans. Continue Reading…

The simple strategies that set you up for Retirement Success

Posted By |

By Dale Roberts, CutTheCrap Investing, Retirement Club

Special to Financial Independence Hub

More Canadians feel nervous and unsure about retirement. About 60% of Canadians feel they will outlive their money. I’m here to bring good news. There are a few, simple strategies that will set you up for retirement success. If you read the retirement experts, if you watch all of the wonderful Canadian advice-only financial planners’ YouTube videos, you’ll notice they all repeat the same core strategies. It’s a version of going around the internet and back. Eventually you can stop and realize ‘wow, this is easier than I thought’. It is a good feeling when you discover that creating a successful retirement plan is not that difficult, at all.

Let’s assume that you’ve done most everything right. You’ve read The Wealthy Barber books. You need to pick up another one, and ask your kids, nieces and nephews to read it, as well.

 

I condensed my financial planning book down to 1200 words …

Oh look, I just found $888,000 in your coffee.

Dave needed 250 pages this time. 😉

You paid yourself first, you invested successfully, on a regular schedule, in a low-fee manner (stocks and ETFs).

How much do you need to invest to become a millionaire?

You cleared your debt, good debt and bad debt. You got the house purchases right, you got the car purchases right. Perhaps you’re entering retirement with no mortgage and no vehicle payments (not a bad idea). You have or had proper insurance, created a will, etcetera, etcetera. If need be, you took advantage of the Spousal RRSP account.

You’re in very good shape.

The retirement basics

Now on to the simple core strategies that will set you up for a successful retirement. You’ve been a very successful DIY investor in the accumulation stage. You might create your own retirement plan. With some research and the retirement tools available, it is certainly ‘doable’ for most Canadians.

And that’s why we started Retirement Club for Canadians.

If you want more help or a second opinion you can certainly contact an advice-only planner. Yup, those same folks who (many of them) offer the advice for free in blogs and via video channels. You can pay a one-time fee, there’s no need to have an advisor in your pocket every day. You’ll receive conflict-free advice, they are not attached to any poor performing Canadian mutual funds, ha. 😉

Retirement Cash Flow Plan

You’ll use a free-use or very affordable retirement cash flow calculator to discover an optimized, tax-efficient spending strategy. There’s comfort in seeing and knowing that your money is going to last.

Delay CPP and OAS for greater payments

Most Canadians (many planners suggest it’s almost all Canadians) will benefit if they delay The Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS) payments. From age 65 to age 70 you’ll receive a 42% boost to your CPP payments and a 36% boost to your OAS payments.

The retirement cash flow calculator will show you the way. It’s different for everyone, of course. To enable the delay of those government monies (let’s call those pensionable earnings), you’ll enact the RRSP meltdown strategy.

The RRSP / RRIF meltdown. A Canadian retiree’s greatest hack?

You’ll spend down your RRSP / RRIF in an accelerated fashion early in retirement to provide a bridge as you await those larger pension-like earnings from CPP and OAS.

The flexible cash flow plan

You’ll embrace a variable withdrawal strategy. The retirement cash flow calculator will show you that a flexible spending plan offers a much higher success rate compared to a static or rigid plan. For example, you might set a desired spending range of $90,000 – $100,000 annual after taxes, compared to a rigid $100,000. If we enter a severe recession and market correction you’re OK to spend a little less.

The investment returns and life events will shape your retirement plan over time. We will certainly evaluate the plan every few years.

The U or You-Shaped spending plan

Speaking of life events, out of the gate you might start with a U-shaped retirement spending plan.

Of course, we build the cash flow plan around your life plans, and the life you want to live in retirement. You might embrace and plan for a U-shaped retirement plan.

  • Spend more in the early go-go years
  • Spend less in the mid slow-go years
  • Boost spending in the no-go years

Spend more when you have your health and energy. Be prepared for surprisingly high healthcare and residence costs in the late-in-life stage.

Income splitting, sharing is caring

When you run a retirement calculator you might be shocked by the low-tax environment you are entering if you are ‘with spouse’.

To lower the tax burden you can split employer pensions, RRIF amounts and even CPP in some situations. Income splitting with strategic use of your RRIF, TFSA and Taxable accounts can enable a ridiculously low effective tax rate for many Canadian retirees. Continue Reading…

Mini, Semi, or Early Retirement: Which Path fits your Life (and Wallet)?

Posted By |

Key Takeaways

  • Mini-retirement requires dedicated savings to cover expenses and missed retirement contributions
  • Semi-retirement can dramatically reduce the total capital needed for full retirement
  • Early retirement requires significantly more savings than traditional retirement to fund decades without employment income
  • Government benefits like CPP have flexible timing options that substantially impact your retirement income, while OAS doesn’t begin until age 65
  • Sustainable withdrawal rates vary based on retirement length: longer retirements require more conservative spending approaches
Canva Custom Creation: Lowrie Financial

By Steve Lowrie, CFA

Special to Financial Independence Hub

After decades of working with clients, I’ve noticed something interesting: the concept of retirement at 65 has become almost quaint. The reality is that very few people follow that traditional path anymore, and frankly, they shouldn’t feel obligated to. Your retirement should reflect your life, not some arbitrary date on a calendar.

Let me share what I’ve seen work for real people, and more importantly, help you figure out which approach might be right for you.

The three Alternative Retirement Paths people actually Take

Retirement isn’t a one-size-fits-all event anymore. Instead of that dramatic “last day at the office” moment at 65, most of my clients take one of three very different approaches.

Mini-Retirement: The Career Intermission

Think of this as an adult gap year but done right. You’re taking several months or even a couple of years away from work during your career, not at the end of it. I’ve had clients do this in their 30s, 40s, and 50s to travel, for a career change, or simply to take a break to recharge.

The upside is compelling: you get to enjoy life while you still have the energy and health to really do it. You can reset your career trajectory or return with fresh perspective. The mental and physical health benefits are real and measurable.

But let’s be honest about the downsides. Every month you’re not working is a month you’re not saving. You’re losing CPP credits that you can’t get back. And there’s no guarantee you’ll return to the same salary or position.

Here’s my advice if you’re seriously considering this: run the numbers first. Look at what taking a year off now means for your planned retirement date. Sometimes the math works beautifully. Other times, you realize that mini-retirement might cost you three extra years of work later. Know what you’re trading before you trade it.

Semi-Retirement: The Gentle Glide Path

This is my personal favorite approach for most people because I’ve seen it work so consistently well. Semi-retirement means you’re scaling back, not stopping. Maybe you go from five days a week to three. Maybe you move to consulting on your own terms. Or maybe you keep ownership in your business and hire professional managers to run it.

The benefits go beyond just the financial. Yes, that part-time income takes enormous pressure off your retirement savings. But you also maintain your professional identity and network. You stay mentally sharp and socially connected. The psychological adjustment is gradual rather than jarring.

The challenges are real though. Your time is still partially committed. Some clients find they can’t fully relax because they’re always thinking about that next project. And here’s a trap I see people fall into: they become dependent on that part-time income and never fully retire, even when they should.

Here’s a practical example. If you can earn $40,000 per year from part-time work for five years in your 60s, you would need $200,000 less on day one of retirement (before tax). Because you are not drawing from your investments in those early years, your portfolio has more time to compound, which often makes the overall impact even larger. That kind of bridge income can be the difference between retiring a few years sooner versus waiting. So, working fifteen hours a week doing consulting work you enjoy could mean the difference between retiring comfortably at 62 versus working full-time until 67.

Early Retirement: The Big Leap Exit

Early retirement means fully stepping back from your career: not just scaling down or taking a break but choosing to stop working altogether and move into the next phase of life with intention. Whatever age that might be, it’s ultimately a lifestyle choice about how you want to spend your time.

The appeal is obvious: no alarm clocks, no boss, no commute, complete control over every single day. If you retire at 55 instead of 65, that’s a decade of freedom while you’re still healthy and energetic enough to really use it.

But early retirement is not for everyone. You need significantly more savings because you’re funding potentially 40 or more years without employment income. The risk of outliving your money is real. You will receive smaller CPP payments if you start them before 65, and OAS doesn’t even begin until 65. While healthcare is covered in Canada, prescriptions, dental work, and long-term care come out of your pocket.

The truth is that early retirement requires substantial financial resources and a realistic understanding of what it costs to maintain your lifestyle. For many people, that can mean needing millions more invested to comfortably support several decades without employment income. Funding that many years of spending is no small task, and the risk of outliving your money is real. What matters most isn’t the retirement age or the size of your portfolio. It’s whether your resources can sustain the life you actually want, without unnecessary stress or sacrifice.

Understanding Financial Independence

Before we go further, we need to talk about what Financial Independence actually means in the context of these three paths.

Financial independence doesn’t necessarily mean you never work again. It means you have enough assets that you could live without employment income if you chose to. It’s about having options, not about making a specific choice.

For a mini-retirement, you’re not financially independent in the traditional sense. You’re taking a break, but you’re planning to return to work. Your financial goal is simpler: having enough savings to cover your expenses during the break without derailing your long-term retirement plans.

Semi-retirement sits in an interesting middle ground. You might be financially independent but are choosing to continue earning some income. Or you might not be fully independent yet, but close enough that part-time income bridges the gap. This flexibility is one of semi-retirement’s greatest strengths.

Early retirement requires full financial independence. Your investment portfolio needs to generate enough income and/or withstand enough withdrawals, to cover your living expenses for potentially 40+ years. This is a high bar, and it should be. The consequences of getting it wrong are serious.

Key Considerations before you Choose your Preferred Retirement Path

Every retirement decision has financial implications that ripple forward for decades. Let me walk you through what you need to think about.

CPP and OAS

Your Canada Pension Plan (CPP) benefit is directly tied to how much you’ve contributed and for how many years. Take a mini-retirement or retire early, and you’re leaving CPP contribution years on the table. You can defer taking CPP until age 70, increasing your monthly payment by 42% compared to taking it at 65. But if you’ve retired early and need the income, you might start at 60, accepting a 36% reduction.

Old Age Security (OAS) is simpler but has its own timing considerations. OAS doesn’t start until age 65, period. You can’t take it early like CPP, but you can defer it up to age 70 for a 36% increase. If you retire early at 55, you’re funding 10 years of life before OAS even begins. This is why early retirees need substantially more savings: you’re bridging a longer gap before government benefits kick in.

RRSPs and TFSAs

Every year you’re not working is a year you’re not maximizing these accounts. Miss a year of RRSP contributions in your 40s, and you’re losing not just that contribution but 20+ years of tax-deferred growth. If you retire early, you might need to start drawing from your RRSP before 71, and every dollar you withdraw is fully taxable as income.

Workplace Pensions

If you have a workplace pension plan, the rules around early retirement or phased retirement matter enormously. Some plans let you work part-time while starting to collect a partial pension. Others are all-or-nothing. You need to know your specific plan’s rules before making any retirement decisions.

Healthcare

Canada’s universal healthcare covers a lot, but prescription drugs, dental work, vision care, and eventually long-term care all come out of your pocket unless you have supplementary insurance. For a couple in their 60s, comprehensive health insurance can easily run $3,000 to $5,000 per year, and that’s before you actually use any services.

How your Retirement Path Choice shapes your Financial Strategy

Each retirement path requires a fundamentally different approach to saving, investing, and spending. Here’s what you need to know.

Mini-Retirement: Building the Bridge Fund

If you’re planning a mini-retirement, you’re essentially building a separate fund for that specific purpose. If you need $100,000 per year to maintain your lifestyle and want two years off, that’s $200,000. But if your original plan was to maintain $30,000 to $40,000 per year in savings, you will need to add another $60,000 to $80,000 to your savings/investments. So really, you’re looking at saving $260,000 to $280,000 for this mini-retirement.

Early Retirement: Maximizing Everything Now

Early retirement requires the most aggressive savings strategy. If you want to retire at 55 instead of 65, you need to save as if you’re retiring at 55 but living until 95. That’s funding 40 years of retirement instead of 30. It’s a double whammy:  you have fewer years to save and benefit from investment growth, and you start withdrawing earlier, which means your portfolio must last longer to sustain your lifestyle. On top of that, retiring early also means smaller CPP benefits, since you’re giving up contribution years and potentially starting the benefits earlier.  The result is that you may need 40–50% more capital than a traditional retirement would require. Continue Reading…