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.

Is everyone thinking of Retiring?

Posted By |

 

By Dale Roberts, Cutthecrap investing

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

It’s just a coincidence perhaps. But much of my blog and reads for the week research landed on that retirement theme. Everyone’s thinking of retiring or writing about retirement. And why not? That is a big end goal for most of us; some form of financial freedom. This Sunday Reads post offers a nice slice of retirement thinking, from the emotional to the money side of things. And of course, there’s some non-retirement ‘stuff’ in here as well.

This is a very good topic and post on My Own Advisor – the emotional side of retirement. In fact on this site I wrote an article that offered that waiting for your spouse was the hardest part of retirement.

Mark offers up on that period after the retirement honeymoon stage (after year one) …

At this point in retirement, the honeymoon is over and potentially it isn’t as enjoyable for some as they may thought.

Maybe some folks go back to work – as part of FIWOOT [Financial Independence: Work on own Terms]. There are only so many rounds of golf you can play …

I’ve read feelings of disenchantment can set in for some. Even depression. That’s certainly something I wish to avoid. By maintaining some form of work into my routine (may or may not be daily), it is my hope that I can stay active (socially, physically, cognitively) to support my health in early retirement and far beyond.

We certainly have to take greater care when we design our life in retirement. We need to be busy and we have to have purpose – from my life experience and from many studies. Having the money to retire in some form is just the half of it, or less.

The waiting is the hardest part

In my post link above, I touched on my first taste of semi-retirement experienced alone. My wife still works and will likely work for a a few more years. I also took off down east to be with my daughter as I launched this blog …

That said, I got a good taste of that ‘waiting’. And as Tom Petty (RIP) sang ‘The Waiting Is The Hardest Part’. While I have a very generous amount of loner in me I was surprised at how uncomfortable a feeling that was – that working alone and being alone for many hours on end. I couldn’t wait for my daughter to finish work and head up to the cottage for dinner and a walk along the beach.

I may have got a taste of what if feels like to make that transition.

The Boomers Retire

On the retirement front Jonathan Chevreau takes a look at a new edition of The Boomers Retire. The book is co-authored by Alexandra Macqueen, a Certified Financial Planner who co-authored Pensionize Your Nest Egg with famed finance professor Moshe Milvesky. David Field is an investment advisor and financial planner and co-creator of the CPP Calculator.

From Jonathan’s post on MoneySense …

“That’s just responding to the reality of retirement income planning for the growing numbers of the ‘pensionless’,” Macqueen says. “If you don’t have lifetime income, you’ll need to create it or take your chances. Whatever you decide, here’s a collection of the relevant facts, principles and issues you’ll need to take into consideration when you’re making your plan.”

While the book is written for advisors and planners, it is also a good read for the rest of us offers Jon.

Of course Alexandra is no stranger to this site. A retirement and pension expert Alexandra penned one of the most read (and most important) posts on this site.

Must read: Defined benefit pension planning. Bad advice could cost you your retirement.

And the Maple Money Podcast is on point this week as well with how to design your retirement lifestyle, with Mike Drak. Mr. Drak is a co-author of retirement heaven or hell, which will you choose? Continue Reading…

Lack a DB pension? Pros and Cons of the Purpose Longevity Fund

Posted By |

By Mark and Joe

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Hello readers of the Financial Independence Hub! We are the founders of CashflowsandPortfolios.com,  a free resource dedicated to helping DIY investors in getting started with their portfolio right up to planning efficient withdrawal strategies during retirement.

We are honoured to have been invited by Jon Chevreau to contribute a piece on a new income product for retirees: the Purpose Investments Longevity Fund.

If you are close to retiring or already a retiree, you’ve likely thought a lot about the following questions:

  1. Did I save enough for retirement?
  2. How will I generate sufficient income for my retirement?
  3. How long will my money last?

If you are lucky enough to have worked for a Government entity for 25-30 years, then you are probably not too worried about funding your retirement.  However, for the rest (most) of us, we need to save and invest on our own over the long-term. If that’s not enough, we then need to figure out ways to decumulate our savings as efficiently as possible.

For DIY investors, there is not much in the form of “forever” payments until death, except of course Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS). We consider these as one of the three pillars of retirement income for Canadians.

Another common source of “forever” income that acts like a government defined benefit (DB) pension are annuities: which are guaranteed by insurance companies. With annuities, investors are trading their capital for a steady income stream, which is essentially a DB pension.

Why aren’t annuities more popular? For DIY investors, it’s likely because of the fact that you are giving up your capital for a yield (currently around 4-5%) that can be obtained by your own DIY portfolio (see below for an example).

So what if there was a product out there that would provide:

  1. Income for life
  2. A yield higher than annuities
  3. An option to “sell” the product to regain some of your invested capital if needed?

That’s the opportunity and challenge that Purpose Investments has taken on with the creation of their latest mutual fund: The Longevity Pension Fund.

There has been a lot of buzz about the Purpose Investments Longevity Pension Fund and for good reason:  it solves a number of big problems that retirees face.

What is the Longevity Pension Fund and what are the pros and cons of owning such a fund?

Pros and Cons of the Longevity Pension Fund

At a high level, the Longevity Pension Fund is a cross between a balanced index mutual fund (47% equities/38% fixed income/15% alternatives), an annuity, and a defined benefit pension. While the fund does offer income for investors, a solid yield, and an option to “sell” the product if needed, these potential benefits must be considered with some drawbacks. As always with financial products, the devil is in the details.

With the basics out of the way, what are the PROS and CONS of the fund?

PRO – Reduces longevity risk (i.e., outliving your money) by offering income for life, but without the guarantees

As mentioned, the Longevity Purpose Fund is a mutual fund that any investor will be able to buy. Once purchased, and the investor is 65 or older, the fund will pay a distribution for life (at least that is the plan). Purpose Investments has stated that the 6.15% yield may sound high, but to maintain that yield they would only need to achieve an annual return of 3.5% net, which is well below historical returns for a common 60/40 stock/bond balanced portfolio.

Combined with mortality credits (investors who die sooner than expected, leaving their money invested in the fund for other investors), Purpose Investments has stated that 6.15% is conservative and can possibly go higher in the future.

PRO – You can get some of your investment back

With annuities and defined benefit pensions, you don’t typically get your contributions back. With this Longevity Fund, if you sell the fund you will get your initial investment minus any income payments. For example, if you have invested $100k into the fund, and have been paid out $10k, then you get back $90k if you sell. At a yield of 6.15%, essentially you can get some capital back up to 16 years of being invested in the fund. After that point, co

nsider yourself invested for life.

PRO – The taxation of the distributions will be tax efficient

While the fund is available for all kinds of accounts — including tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) and registered retirement income funds (RRIFs) — potentially the best home for this fund could be in a taxable account. That is because monthly income distributions in the first year are expected to be roughly half a return of capital (RoC) with the remainder from capital gains, dividends and interest. This means that in a taxable investment account, the distributions will be tax-efficient (much more so than a defined benefit pension payment).

PRO – No Binding Contract

A key feature of this Longevity Pension Fund is a script from the annuity playbook: mortality credits. Similar to an annuity, you are participating in a pool of credits: those that die. When you die, your estate gets your initial contribution minus the total amount of income payments. The investment gains generated by your investments over the years stay in the fund and are used to top up monthly payments for everyone else.

Unlike an annuity though, you can get out of the fund: it’s not a one-way binding contract.

From Purpose:

“Unlike many traditional annuities or other lifetime income products, the Longevity Pension Fund is not meant to feel like a binding contract. You can change your mind and access the lesser of your unpaid capital** (i.e., your invested capital less the distributions you’ve received) or current NAV. Your beneficiaries are entitled to the same amount if you pass away. Once your cumulative distributions surpass your invested capital, there will no longer be any redeemable value left. Please speak to your advisor or see the prospectus for further details.”

The fund is also designed similar to many pension plan funds or funds of funds:  a balanced mix of stocks, bonds and other investments that should* meet their income obligations to unitholders.

*Target income is just that. This fund does not offer an income guarantee.

CONS – The fund does not pass onto heirs

As mentioned above, the mortality credits are how this fund will sustain its yield into the future, which also means that the fund and its payout do not pass onto your spouse/heirs. For investors with a spouse/heirs, this is one of the largest drawbacks of the Longevity Pension Fund.

CONS – The distributions are not guaranteed

The monthly payments seem juicy right now but the Longevity Pension Fund is not like an annuity whereby income is guaranteed for life; the 6% or more income target is just that: a target. Continue Reading…

Misguided thinking about Dividend Investing

Posted By |

I’ve received an uptick in emails and comments from investors about dividends and so I thought I’d address some common misconceptions around dividend investing.

One reader in particular wanted to know if he should take the commuted value of his pension ($750,000) and put it all in Enbridge stock because it was yielding around 6.5%. That reminds me of the reader who, several years ago, asked if he should borrow money at 4% to buy Canadian Oil Sands stock that was paying an 8% dividend yield.

Related: How did that leveraged investment work out?

I shouldn’t have to tell you why it’s not sensible to put your entire retirement savings into one stock – dividend payer or not.

Most comments were much more sensible and reflected what I perceive to be some misguided thinking about dividend investing.

Dividends + Price Growth = Magic?

Some companies pay a dividend to shareholders. Some do not. Investors shouldn’t have a preference either way.

Amazon doesn’t pay a dividend, focusing instead on reinvesting their profits back into their business for more growth opportunities.

Apple, on the other hand, is awash in cash thanks to the tremendous success of the iPhone and decided to start paying a dividend in 2012. It likely cannot reinvest or grow fast enough to keep up with its cash flow and so it returns some of that cash to shareholders.

Investors shouldn’t prefer Apple to Amazon just because of Apple’s dividend policy.

But what happens when a dividend is paid? The value of the company decreases by the amount of the dividend. That must be true, since the dividend didn’t just appear out of thin air – it came from the company’s earnings.

Company A and Company B are worth $10 each. Company A pays out a $1 dividend, while Company B does not.

Company A is now worth $9, and its shareholders received $1. Company B is still worth $10 and its shareholders received $0.

But some investors do seem to think the dividend comes from thin air and that it does not reduce the value of the dividend paying company.

Consider this example: Let’s say expected stock returns are 8% per year. The average dividend yield from all stocks (both non-dividend payers and dividend payers) is around 2%. That leaves 6% to come from the increase in share prices or capital gains.

Shopify doesn’t pay a dividend. You could consider its expected annual return to be 8% (ignoring the extreme dispersion of possible outcomes for a single stock), but all 8% would come from increases to its share price.

Enbridge has a dividend yield of 6.5%. Should we expect its price to also increase by 8%? Of course not. It would be more reasonable to expect price growth of 1.5% (again, ignoring the extreme dispersion of possible outcomes).

Here’s a more diversified example featuring Vanguard’s VCN (Canadian equities, represented by the yellow line) versus iShares’ CDZ (Canadian dividend aristocrats, in blue):

VCN vs CDZ

My review of The Boomers Retire

Posted By |

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column reviews the new fifth edition of The Boomers Retire by certified financial planners Alexandra Macqueen and David Field. Click on the highlighted headline here to retrieve full article: Fresh takes on the challenges facing baby boomers as they approach retirement.

As I note in the column, the original edition of The Boomers Retire (which I read at the time) was by Lynn Biscott and was published back in 2008.

Macqueen and Field are both CFPs and the book is aimed at both financial advisors as well as their clients, as indicated in the book’s subtitle.

Clearly, retiring boomers constitute a massive potential readership. I myself co-authored The Wealthy Boomer, way back in 1998. At that time, baby boomers may have started to worry about Retirement but most, including myself, would have been squarely in the Wealth accumulation camp.

Wealthy Boomers now well on way to transition to Decumulation

Here in 2021, Decumulation is the emerging financial focus of Baby Boomers, many of whom will already be retired or semi-retired, and considering new decumulation solutions like the Purpose Longevity Fund, which this site has looked at more than once. (here via Dale Roberts and here via another MoneySense Retired Money column.) Continue Reading…

How one Tawcan reader lives on $360,000 a year of dividends almost tax-free

Posted By |

 

By Bob Lai, Tawcan

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Long time readers will know that my wife and I are deploying a hybrid investing strategy – we invest in both dividend paying stocks and index ETFs. It is our goal to have our portfolio generating enough dividend income to cover our expenses. When this happens, we can call ourselves financially independent and live off dividends. By constructing our portfolio and selecting stocks that grow dividends each year organically, we believe our dividend income will continue to grow organically and keep up with inflation so we don’t have to ever touch our principal.

In the past, I have done a few simulations showing that living of dividends is possible and that dividend income is very tax-efficient in Canada. But simulations are full of assumptions and the numbers can change. Wouldn’t it be nice to showcase someone that is living off dividends already?

As luck would have it, Reader B, a fellow Canadian, recently mentioned that he retired in 2004 at age 55 and has been living off dividends since. I was very intrigued by B’s story when he told me that he worked as a civil engineer and his wife worked as an administrator.

I fell off the chair when he told me that he and his wife started investing with $10,000 and have amassed a dividend portfolio that generates over $360,000 in dividends each year! 

That’s $30,000 a month! Holy cow! 

While working, they had above average salary (B made ~$110k and B’s wife made ~$90k in today’s money). The high household income has certainly helped them build the dividend portfolio. But I believe a lot of it is due to B and his wife’s living modestly – not a lavish lifestyle but not penny pinching either.

After a bit of emailing exchanges, he agreed to answer my questions about his experience with living off dividends (it took a bit of convincing haha!). I truly believe B’s knowledge will help a lot of dividend growth investors.

Note: B’s original reply was over 11,000 words not including my comments (our email exchanges were very long too). I went through his answers and edited some parts out. For ease of reading, I have decided to split the post into two posts.

I hope you’ll enjoy this Q&A as much as I did.

Living off dividends – How I’m receiving $360k dividends a year and paying almost no taxes

Q1:  First of all, B, thank you for participating. It’s wonderful to learn that you and your wife have been retired since 2004 and have been dividend investors for over 36 years.

A: Thank you, Bob, for giving me the opportunity to share my 36 plus years of dividend investing experience and results with you and your readers. After following your blog, I realized that we and many others were on the same dividend investing path. The only difference being that I was a few more years along in the investing journey. I felt others might benefit from my experience with dividend investing.

You’re on the right path, Bob, and given your rate of progress to date by the time you reach my age (72) you will certainly attain your dividend income goals and likely well beyond. So I wanted to encourage you to continue along the dividend investing path. It’s a very sound and profitable strategy.

I’m more than happy to share with others a few of my ideas on dividend investing and how it can be done in a tax-effective manner.

Q2:  How long have you been investing in dividend paying stocks?

A: I started investing in stocks in 1985. After the initial period of learning the ropes and finding my way in the investing and stock market world, it was only in 1990 after subscribing to a weekly investing newsletter that I finally saw the investing light and found that dividend investing was right for us.

So I guess you could say I’ve been traveling along the dividend paying stock road for some 31 years now. And we’ve been comfortably supplementing our lifestyle with an ever increasing stream of dividends since we retired in 2004 to the present day.

Diving into the dividend portfolio

Q3:  How much dividend income are you getting each year? Can you provide a detailed breakdown across non-registered and registered accounts? 

A: As of April 30, 2021, my wife and I are receiving $360,000 in combined pre-tax dividend income annually – that’s $30,000 per month – and still growing.

Our combined assets are distributed as follows:

  • RRIFs: 8.2%
  • TFSAs: 1.9%
  • Non-Reg Dividend Income Accounts: 85.5%
  • Other Short-Term Liquid Assets: 4.4%

So the amount we have in registered tax-sheltered plans totals 10.1% and is decreasing annually in compliance with RRIF mandatory withdrawal requirements.

These figures illustrate a problem that can develop gradually over time – a severe imbalance between registered and non-registered  accounts caused by the low contribution limits governing registered savings plans. Allowable contributions to registered plans are capped.

If one’s savings levels exceed the cap limits by a significant amount, then the balance between registered and non-registered accounts can tilt heavily towards the latter. The effect is that registered plans then become less and less significant in the overall account mix. This unbalanced effect means that we now have only 10.1% of our assets in tax sheltered accounts while 85.5% is held in “unsheltered” non-registered accounts.

So that makes it critical to find ways to ensure that holdings in non-registered accounts are as tax efficient as possible. The most optimum way to achieve tax-efficiency under such conditions is to focus on buying and holding Canadian dividend paying stocks in non-registered accounts.

We will continue to shift portions of our “other” assets toward Canadian dividend income as we go forward.

Our non-registered accounts are producing the entire $360K dividend income stream referenced above. The annual yield on market value is 4.2%. The actual yield on cost is much higher than the market yield. Our portfolio has returned nicely over the years.

Our annual mandatory RRIF withdrawals are the minimum required by age and proceeds are immediately re-invested in more dividend stocks and held in our non-registered accounts. We do not touch our TFSAs and contribute the maximum allowable amount each year.

Tawcan: My jaw dropped when you told me about your $360k a year dividend income. That is absolutely amazing! 

At 4.2% yield that means the market value of your portfolio is over $8.5M! Obviously your yield on cost would be much higher than that given you have invested over 30 years. Regardless, I’m betting that the cost basis of your non-registered portfolio is in the multi-million dollars range. It is very impressive considering you and your wife only made around $200k a year in today’s money.  

The Dividend Investing Philosophy

Q4:  Can you give us an idea of your general approach to dividend investing?

A: My dividend investment philosophy can be summed up as: “To buy gradually over time, high-quality Canadian tax-efficient dividend paying stocks and hold them indefinitely.”

I buy stocks gradually in roughly equal amounts and spread the purchases over time. I never invest large lump sums all at once. I’ll take an initial position in a stock, usually in the $10K value range, and then return again at an opportune price point and buy some more (i.e. dollar cost-averaging).

High quality stocks are selected – conservative large cap stocks – most often dividend aristocrats – minimum 2% yield with the odd exception for superior growth stocks or those with growth potential. Great focus is placed on buying dividend aristocrats and stocks in the TSX Composite 60 Index with a nod toward following the Beat the TSX strategy.

Tawcan: Funny B mentioned the BTSX strategy. Check out Matt, the brain behind Beating the TSX strategy, and his family’s amazing story about traveling the world with 4 kids. 

I exclusively buy only Canadian stocks – no USA stocks – none – no exceptions. The only US stocks I would consider are those that have a TSX listing and can be purchased in Canadian dollars for tax efficiency reasons.

Tawcan: It’s interesting that you only hold top Canadian dividend stocks and no US or international dividend paying stocks or ETFs. 

All our stock buys must be held in non-registered accounts – contributions can not be made to RRIFs and our TFSA contribution room is maxed out. My wife and I also invest in REITs and they require special attention (more on that later).

All stocks we buy must pay a dividend. As mentioned, I usually insist on a 2% yield or higher – but not too high. One never wants to over-reach for yield, which is often the warning sign for an impending dividend cut. If a stock does eliminate its dividend, then it’s automatically gone from our portfolios and we move on to another stock that does pay a reliable dividend.

On very rare occasions, it may be advisable/necessary to sell a stock for the following reasons:

  1. When a stock’s prospects have taken a downward turn.
  2. In the event of a takeover bid – friendly or otherwise – one often has little choice but to sell.
  3. For tax-loss selling purposes. We seldom pay any capital gains income tax at all. When we do realize a capital gain from a stock sale, then we’ll sell another stock (or partially sell) to realize an offsetting capital loss. But tax-loss selling is not usually done at year-end along with “the herd.” After waiting the mandatory 30 days and if the stock remains a solid investment, then we will often buy the stock back – hopefully at a lower price.

Under a buy and hold strategy, there is not a lot of opportunity for capital gains. By not selling, no capital gain is realized and so capital gains tax can be deferred indefinitely.

On the other hand, dividend income can be extremely tax efficient when you are income splitting between two people. We’ll get into the specifics a bit later.

Q5:  You mentioned that REITs require special attention. What did you mean by that?

A: Not all REITs are equal in terms of tax efficiency when held in a non-registered account where taxes on REIT distributions can vary from 0% to 53.53% (in Ontario). Therefore, the most tax-efficient place to hold a REIT is in a registered account. Continue Reading…