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.

High inflation in 2022 changes calculus on delaying CPP till 70

Posted By |

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

Posted By |

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

Posted By |
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…

New retirement: Case study with Cascades Financial Solutions

Posted By |
Photo by Gustavo Fring

By Ian Moyer

(Sponsor Content)

A Canadian couple living in Nova Scotia are approaching retirement. Carlos is 64 and his wife Arlene is 61. They have one adult adopted child who lives on their own with the couple’s three grandchildren. Carlos and Arlene live close to their daughter and help with the grandchildren often, so being able to stay in their home is important.

After two extended careers in the public sector with a combined annual income of $180,000, Carlos and his wife Arlene decided it was time to retire beginning March of the following year.

Managing the family finances Carlos and Arlene were able to save the following for retirement:

Carlos

  • $250,000 Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), contributing $5500 annually until retirement
  • $31,500 annually from a Defined benefit pension
  • $ 21,000 in A Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA), contributing $1500 annually

Arlene

  • $290,000 Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), contributing $5500 annually until retirement
  • $33,600 annually from a Defined benefit pension
  • $ 30,000 in A Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA), contributing $1500 annually

Carlos and Arlene dream of traveling to various countries and plan to take 3 trips a year and assume they would need a total of $15,000 annually to do so for 8 years. After traveling they would like to contribute to Registered Education Savings Plans (RESP) for each of their grandchildren totalling $3000 a year.

More recently, when the market experienced volatility, Carlos’ portfolio took a big hit. Making adjustments to spending, Carlos was able to recuperate most of his losses and is now back on track with his goals.

“The more you learn, the more you earn.”
— Warren Buffett

A key consideration in Cascades is to take a look at the retirement budget: using their employment income as a starting point to determine how much retirement income they require. It is well known and generally accepted that you will require less income in your retirement years, but how much less? In making this determination the couple can consider they no longer have employment income deductions like CPP and employment insurance, retirement savings, costs related to traveling to work, retirement income tax credits, etc. Carlos used their employment income after these deductions, taxes, and employment expenses and compare that with the projected retirement income. Carlos assumes he would need approximately $120,000 annually.

Carlos believes he has a good understanding of financial planning strategies, but he finds decumulation a bit overwhelming and wanted to learn more to personalize his retirement income based on their needs: using Cascades Financial Solutions retirement Income planning software and to plan for his retirement.

After entering his data into Cascades Financial Solutions Carlos’ report determined the best retirement decumulation strategy would only allow him to receive an after-tax amount of $116,945 per year.

The couple has a few options to offset the$3,055 retirement income shortage.

Life Annuity option: The couple can consider allocating some of their savings to a life annuity that could help achieve a higher sustainable retirement income. These vehicles are a great way the shift the burden of making their money last forever and can often have attractive capital payout ratios throughout the retirement years due to their “mortality credits.” Continue Reading…

Beware the Retirement Risk Zone

Posted By |

I often recommend deferring CPP until age 70 to secure more lifetime income in retirement. It’s also possible to defer OAS to age 70 for a smaller, but still meaningful, increase in guaranteed income.

While the goal is to design a more secure retirement, there can be a psychological hurdle for retirees to overcome. That hurdle has to do with withdrawing (often significant) dollars from existing savings to fill the income gap while you wait for your government benefits to kick in.

Indeed, the idea is still to meet your desired spending needs in retirement – a key objective, especially to new retirees.

This leads to what I call the retirement risk zone: The period of time between retirement and the uptake of delayed government benefits. Sometimes there’s even a delay between retirement and the uptake of a defined benefit pension.

Retirement Risk Zone

The challenge for retirees is that even though a retirement plan that has them drawing heavily from existing RRSPs, non-registered savings, and potentially even their TFSAs, works out nicely on paper, it can be extremely difficult to start spending down their assets.

That makes sense, because one of the biggest fears that retirees face is the prospect of outliving their savings. And, even though delaying CPP and OAS helps mitigate that concern, spending down actual dollars in the bank still seems counterintuitive.

Consider an example of a recently divorced woman I’ll call Leslie, who earns a good salary of $120,000 per year and spends modestly at about $62,000 per year after taxes (including her mortgage payments). She wants to retire in nine years, at age 55.

Leslie left a 20-year career in the public sector to work for a financial services company. She chose to stay in her defined benefit pension plan, which will pay her $24,000 per year starting at age 65. The new job has a defined contribution plan to which she contributes 2.5% of her salary and her employer matches that amount.

Leslie then maxes out her personal RRSP and her TFSA. She owns her home and pays an extra $5,000 per month towards her mortgage with the goal of paying it off three years after she retires.

Because of her impressive ability to save, Leslie will be able to reach her goal of retiring at 55. But she’ll then enter the “retirement risk zone” from age 55 to 65, while she waits for her defined benefit pension to kick in, and still be in that zone from 65 to 70 while she waits to apply for her CPP and OAS benefits.

The result is a rapid reduction in her assets and net worth from age 55 to 70:

Retirement risk zone example 55-70

Leslie starts drawing immediately from her RRSP at age 56, at a rate of about 7.5% of the balance. She turns the defined contribution plan into a LIRA and then a LIF, and starts drawing the required minimum amount. Finally, she tops up her spending from the non-registered savings that she built up in her final working years.

When the non-registered savings have been exhausted at age 60, Leslie turns to her TFSA to replace that income. She’ll take that balance down from $216,000 to about $70,000 by age 70. Continue Reading…