Longevity & Aging

No doubt about it: at some point we’re neither semi-retired, findependent or fully retired. We’re out there in a retirement community or retirement home, and maybe for a few years near the end of this incarnation, some time to reflect on it all in a nursing home. Our Longevity & Aging category features our own unique blog posts, as well as blog feeds from Mark Venning’s ChangeRangers.com and other experts.

Retirement Case Study: Marcus and Lee

Photo by SHVETS production

by Patricia Campbell, Cascades Financial Solutions

(Sponsor Content)

Ages: 60 & 55

Province: Ontario
Professions: Capital and Facilities Planning Director & Senior Data Analysist

Primary Goal: Determine annual retirement income, save taxes, and plan for travel.

Marcus and Lee were on track for retirement in 5 years, but an early retirement offer from Marcus’ company prompted them to consider retirement earlier than originally planned. We investigate their concerns in this retirement planning case study using Cascades Financial Solutions.

The Issues

Unexpectedly, Marcus was forced into retirement by his company due to a severe downturn in business. The couple thought they had at least five more years before they would need to make a decision regarding retirement.

Over their careers, Marcus and Lee prioritized saving money each year in their Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) and Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA). In addition, they both had a joint savings account, and Marcus had a defined benefit pan but, was it enough?

Their Concerns

How much retirement income will they have? Did they have enough money for Marcus to retire early? Lee will continue working until she is 60 but was depending on Marcus to have 5 more years of income and savings. 

How could they minimize the taxes on their retirement? The couple would like to explore tax efficient strategies and are unsure how to approach this.

Will they be able to travel? By retiring early Marcus is concerned about their future travel plans.

The Plan

Marcus and Lee realized that this was a critical time and needed help from someone with extensive experience in retirement income planning.

Marcus and Nicole decided to seek financial planning advice. The financial planner they found uses Cascades Financial Solutions.

The Cascades financial planning process included the below steps:

Gather fact find data. This included the details of each RRSP, TFSAs, defined benefit plan and any joint savings, their investments large purchases they plan on making in the future.

Consider ages for CPP and OAS options. The next step was to run a few retirement income scenarios which included adjusting the start age to receive CPP and OAS.

Choose a winning strategy. After running a few scenarios which included receiving CPP at 60 vs. receiving at 70 they were able to determine a sustainable withdrawal plan and maximize taxes savings over the course of their retirement.

Execute the plan. Finally, it was time to start putting the new retirement income strategy in place. Seeing the plan on paper, gave the couple the confidence and financial security they needed to be at ease.

The Results

Marcus was delighted retiring early knowing their hard work and saving for a rainy day paid off. While Lee wasn’t quite ready to retire, she was happy Marcus can enjoy a few years of retirement before she did. When they are both retired, they plan to take two international trips each year and spend plenty of time with family.

The financial planning process helped Marcus and Lee in several ways: Continue Reading…

Planning for Longevity: How to avoid Retirement Hell

I never thought that I would fail at retirement and end up in Retirement Hell. But I did.

You see, I spent my entire career – almost forty years- in the banking industry. While there, I learned a lot about money and investing and, over the years, I helped thousands of clients save for their own retirement. Furthermore, my wife is a financial advisor. And yet despite all that knowledge and expertise, I still managed to fail miserably at retirement.

Looking back, I now realize that many of my beliefs about retirement were wrong because they were all linked to the financial aspects of retirement. What I know for sure now is you just don’t fall into a happy retirement because you have a lot of money. You need financial security, of course. But designing a satisfying life takes thought, time and planning on many more levels. You need to know your needs and values, and what makes you happy, and then you have to find ways to satisfy these aspirations on a regular basis. Thinking that you will figure things out when you get there doesn’t work.

Traditional retirement planning has programmed us to think it’s all about the money, but it’s not. In conventional planning, the focus is always on the number: how much money you are going to need to retire. Few financial advisors/planners talk about the other important stuff: how you are going to replace your work identity, how you are going to stay relevant and connected, and how you are going to keep mentally sharp and physically fit, among other things.

Believe it or not most retirements fail for non-financial reasons rather than financial ones. I don’t want that to happen to you so for the past year and a half I along with five of my friends have been working on a new book — Longevity Lifestyle By Design — to help people design a life they would be happy to wake up too.

Retiring from work is simple. Figuring out what you are going to do with the rest of your life is the hard part.

Our mission is to help improve the transition to retirement and help retirees to design a life that they look forward to living everyday.

We know that many people are going to struggle with the non financial challenges that can often accompany retirement. It happened to me, my colleagues and through my discussions with other retirees discovered that it also happened to many of them as well. Continue Reading…

High inflation in 2022 changes calculus on delaying CPP till 70

Actuary Fred Vettese had a couple of interesting (and controversial!) articles in the Globe & Mail recently that may give some near-retirees  who were planning to defer CPP benefits until age 70 some pause.

The gist of them is that because of inflation, those nearing age 70 in 2022 might want to take benefits sooner than later: despite the almost-universal recommendation of financial pundits that the optimum time to start receiving CPP (or even OAS) benefits is at age 70. From what I glean from Vettese’s analysis, those who are 69 this year should give this serious consideration, and possibly those who are currently 68 (or even 67!)  might also think about it.

You can find the first piece (under paywall, Sept 27) by clicking the highlighted headline:  Thanks to a Rare Event, Deferring CPP until age 70 may no longer always be the best option.

The second, quite similar, article ran October 6th:  Deferring CPP till 70 is still best for most people. But here’s another quirk for 2022, when inflation is higher than wage growth.

Certainly, Vettese’s opinion carries weight. He is former chief actuary of Morneau Shepell (LifeWorks) and author of several regarded books on retirement, including Retirement Income for Life.

My own financial advisor [who doesn’t wish to be publicized] commented to his clients about these articles,  noting that they:

“aroused interest among some of you on when to begin receiving the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) given an unusual wrinkle that has occurred over the past couple of years where it may be more beneficial  to not defer it to 70 in order to maximize the dollar benefit.  It is particularly relevant for those who are within a year or two of approaching  70 years old and have so far postponed receiving CPP … My take on the piece is that if you are not receiving CPP and you are closer to 70 years old than 65, then the odds move more favourable to taking it before reaching 70. That is particularly true if there are health concerns that affect longevity.”

I must confess that I found Vettese’s thought process hard to follow all the way, but I respect his opinion and that of my advisor enough that it altered our own CPP strategy.  People who had originally planned to take CPP  at age 70 early in 2023 may be better off jumping the gun by a few months, opting to commence CPP benefits late in 2022. This is because of a unique “quirk” in the Canada Pension Plan that is occurring in 2022, whereby “price inflation is higher than wage inflation.”

Personally, I took it at age 66 (3 years ago) but we had planned to defer my wife Ruth’s CPP commencement till 70, still about 18 months away. Vettese himself turns 70 in late April [as do I] and in an email he clarified that because of the inflation quirk, he’s taking his own CPP in December: 5 months early.  But as his example of Janice below demonstrates, even those a year or two younger may benefit by doing the same.

A lot is at stake with such a decision, however, so I would check with your financial advisor and Service Canada first, or engage a consultant like Doug Runchie of DR Pensions Consulting, to make sure your personal situation lines up with the examples described in the article.

2022 is the exception that proves the rule

Actuary and author Fred Vettese

Vettese starts the first article by recapping that CPP benefits are normally 42% higher if you postpone receipt from age 65 to age 70. However, he adds:

“Almost no one knows – and this includes many actuaries and financial planners – that the actual adjustment is not really 42 per cent; it will be more or less, depending on how wage inflation compares with price inflation in the five years leading up to age 70. It turns out this arcane fact is crucial. The usual reward for waiting until 70 to collect CPP is that the pension amount ultimately payable is typically much greater than if you had started your pension sooner, such as at age 65. In 2022, that won’t be the case. As we will see later on, someone who is age 69 in 2022 and who was waiting until 70 to start his CPP, is much better off starting it this year instead.”

Those most directly affected are people over 65 who have not yet started to collect their CPP pension. Here’s how he concludes the first article:

“In a way, 2022 is the exception that proves the rule. It is the result of COVID, a once-a-century event, creating a one-year spike in price inflation without a corresponding one-year spike in wage inflation. This analysis, by the way, has no bearing on when to start collecting the OAS pension.

This should send an SOS to financial planners and accountants, as well as retirees who take a DIY approach. Deferring CPP will usually continue to make sense but not necessarily in times of economic upheaval.”

In an email to Fred, he sent me this: “I wouldn’t spend too much time on the Wade example (first article). Situation is rare. More common is the Janice example (second article). It applies just as I state in the article.”

Example of those turning 68 early in 2023

For the Janice scenario, Vettese describes someone currently age 67 who had planned to start taking CPP benefits in April 2023, a month after she turns 68: Continue Reading…

MoneySense Retired Money feature on Canada’s new “Tontine” Retirement solutions

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column looks at the revolutionary “Tontine” type Retire Solution announced by Guardian Capital and finance professor Moshe Milevsky earlier this month. My initial take was here on the Hub and the more in-depth MoneySense feature story can be viewed by clicking on this highlighted headline: Tontines in Canada — Moving from Theory to Practice as a solution to our Retirement Crisis.

We’ve illustrated this blog with financial projections of one of the three new Guardian Capital Retirement solutions developed in partnership with Milevsky. Some of the ideas were adapted from Milevsky’s latest book: How to Build a Modern Tontine. The theory behind this book is a driving force for Guardian Capital’s efforts to commercize these concepts and put them in the hands of retirees and would-be retirees worried about outliving their money. Nobel Laureate Economist William Sharpe has described this as “the nastiest, hardest problem in finance.”

Milvesky’s book is certainly aimed at industry practitioners and sophisticated financial advisors and investors, and contains a lot of mathematics that may beyond the reach of average investors or retirees. So rather than attempt to review it, we’ll move on to the efforts to bring these ideas to the market. What Milevsky calls “tontine thinking” is belatedly showing up in the marketplace in Canada, starting last year with Purpose Investments’ and now with three different solutions from Guardian Capital. Hub readers also can read an excerpt of the book which ran earlier Wednesday: Longevity Insurance vs Credits — a Primer.

All this has been a long time coming. MoneySense readers may recall two of my Retired Money columns about Milevsky and the future of tontines published in 2015: Part one is here and part two here. Also see my 2018 column that explains tontines in detail: Why Ottawa needs to push for tontine-like annuities.

Last June (2021), Purpose got the tontine ball rolling in Canada with its Purpose Longevity Fund. Here’s my MoneySense take on that one: Is the Longevity Pension Fund a cure for Retirement Income Worries? 

As the MoneySense feature explains, Milevsky is Guardian Capital’s Chief Retirement Architect. It sums up the original 2021 launch of Purpose Longevity Fund, and how it compares to Guardian’s three solutions.

Think of Purpose’s product as a lower-case tontine, and Guardian Capital’s as a Tontine with a capital T.

Guardian Capital’s Modern Tontine  

Guardian Capital’s September 7th press release uses the term “Modern Tontine.” There, Guardian Capital Managing Director and Head of Canadian Retail Asset Management Barry Gordon said “With our modern tontine, investors concerned about outliving their nest egg pool their assets and are entitled to their share of the pool as it winds up 20 years from now … Over that 20-year period, we seek to grow the invested capital as much as possible to maximize the longevity payout.”

 Along the way, investors who redeem early or pass away leave a portion of their assets in the pool to the benefit of surviving unitholders, boosting the rate of return. “All surviving unitholders in 20 years will participate in any growth in the tontine’s assets, generated from compound growth and the pooling of survivorship credits. This payout can be used to fund their later years of life as they see fit, and aims to ensure that investors don’t outlive their investment portfolio.” Continue Reading…

Longevity Insurance vs. Credits: A Primer

This guest blog is excerpted from Moshe Milevsky’s recently published book, How to Build a Modern Tontine

By Prof. Moshe A. Milevsky, Ph.D.

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

I have been asked about the difference between a tontine – be it modern or medieval – and a conventional life annuity, purchased from a regulated life insurance company. Both might appear to perform similar tasks at first glance, but the differences are subtle and important and get to the essence of the distinction between longevity insurance versus longevity (or survivorship) credits.

One aspect of the life annuity story is the financial benefit of risk pooling, and the other is the insurance benefit and comfort from having a guaranteed income that you can’t outlive. Allow me to elaborate with a statement that some readers might find shocking. If you are 75 years old with $100,000 in your RRIF and would like to guarantee a fixed annual income for the rest of your life, there is absolutely no need to purchase a life annuity from an insurance company to achieve that goal. There are other options.

This might sound like something odd for a long-term annuity advocate to say. But the fact is that a non-insurance financial advisor can design a lovely portfolio of zero-coupon strip bonds that will do the job. That collection of bonds will generate $4,000 per year for the rest of your life, even if you reach the grand old age of 115. Ok, financial advisors need to eat too, so they may not do it for $100,000, but I’m sure that a lump sum of $1,000,000 will pique their interest and in exchange you will get $40,000 per year.

Moreover, with these strips, if you don’t make it all the way to the astonishing age of 115, they will continue to send those $4,000 (or $40K) to your spouse, children or favourite charity until the date you would have reached 115, if you had been alive. This collection of strips would be completely liquid, tradeable and fully reversable, although subject to the vagaries of bond market rates. For this I have assumed a conservative, safe and constant 2.5% discount rate across the entire yield curve, which isn’t entirely unreasonable in today’s increasing environment.

Stated technically, the present value of the $4,000 annual payments, for the 40 years between your current age 75 and your maximum age 115, is exactly equal to $100,000 when discounted at 2.5%. Yes, those numbers and ages were deliberately selected so my numerical example rhymes with the infamous 4% rule of retirement planning but has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Now, I’m sure you must now be thinking (or even yelling) “Moshe, but what if you live beyond age 115, eh? You will run out of money!”

Touché. Let’s unpack that common knee-jerk reaction to non-insurance solutions for a moment. To start with, the probability of reaching age 115 is ridiculously and unquantifiably low. If you do happen to be the one in a 100 million (or perhaps billion) that reaches age 115, I suspect you will have other things on your murky mind. Personally and post-covid, there is a very long list of hazards that worries me more than hitting 115.

Nobody really “runs out of money” in this century

Second and more importantly, nobody really “runs out of money” in retirement in the 21st century. That is plain utter fear-mongering nonsense. With CPP, OAS/GIS, the elderly will continue to receive some income for as long as they live even if they have completely emptied every piggy bank on their personal balance sheet. In fact, with tax-based means-testing you might get more benefits if you actually do empty your bank accounts.

Ok, so back to my prior claim and the supporting numbers, if you want a guaranteed (liquid, reversable, bequeathable) income for the rest of your life, you can exchange your $100,000 for a bunch of strip bonds and voila, you have created a sort of pension plan. My point here is that the primary objective isn’t a guaranteed lifetime of income: which anyone can create with a simple discount brokerage account and a DIY instruction manual. Continue Reading…