Posted By 
My latest MoneySense Retired Money column is the second part of a series on CPP and survivorship issues. You can find part 2 by clicking on the highlighted headline here: Reconsidering when to take CPP benefits amid Covid-19 risk. You can find the first part here and yesterday’s Hub summary here.
What’s all that about Covid-19 risk? It’s admittedly a bit morbid but after all, retirement survivor benefits are all about expected longevity and mortality. To the extent Covid-19 provides a slightly higher probability of a spouse passing away before expected, it underlines the fact senior couples need to think about survivor benefits. They should have all along, of course, but this crisis just makes the issue that much more tangible.
The main sources in the column are again retired advisor Warren Baldwin, who personally took his own CPP at 66 in part because of survivorship issues, and TriDelta Financial president Ted Rechtshaffen, who tackled the topic in this recent column in the Financial Post. There he described the unfairness of CPP and how it may have “effectively” no survivor benefits. He observed that if a couple both collect full CPP and one dies, the other receives a one-time $2,500 death benefit, but loses the entire ongoing CPP benefits of the deceased.
But if the same couple has one person collecting a full CPP benefit and their partner never paid into the plan and collects $0 CPP, if either dies the net result is they will continue to collect one full CPP benefit. The maximum survivor benefit is 60% of the maximum pension, since no individual can collect more than 100% of a CPP benefit. However, if one person currently receives less than 100%, if the partner dies, that person can top up the CPP payment up to 100% out of the amount being collected by the partner.
For most seniors, dropping combined maximum CPP income (at age 65, in 2019) from $27,600 a year to just $13,800 constitutes a huge hit if both partners contributed a lot to CPP over the years. Rechtshaffen suggested these rules “almost provide an incentive to only have one working partner over the years. It hurts couples in which both partners worked full time.” He also made some suggestions on how Ottawa could redress this unfair situation.
Asher Tward, Tridelta’s VP estate planning, generated quotes on a life-only, $14,110 per annum, single-person annuity, no survivorship, with the payment 2% indexed. He found a typical quote for a 65-year old male with 2% indexation was worth $316,000, while a typical quote for a 65-year old female with 2% indexation was worth $355,000. We also asked what it would cost to buy the same annuity with a 60% survivorship payout to the surviving spouse. The relevant comparison is someone with no spouse or who has a spouse with maximum CPP against a person who has a spouse who has no CPP. For a registered annuity for couples like my wife and I, Tward found a joint annuity with 2% indexation and a 60% survivor benefit was worth $358,000, with either partner being the survivor.
So for a couple with maximum CPP, the total “value” is around $700,000. If they can afford it, they could defer collecting benefits by living off RRSPs and other savings; however those assets are fully estate-protected for either survivors or beneficiaries.
“There is a degree of use-it-or-lose-it in the CPP,” Baldwin concludes, adding it behaves somewhat like a tontine, except with no lump sum at the end.
Similar issues with OAS
OAS presents a similar issue: at just over $7,000 a year, it would have a value around 50% of CPP: about $150,000, so why not collect as soon as possible?
A qualifying couple could have $42,000 a year of pension just from double CPP and double OAS, and assuming both CPPs are at the max, the income could drop by 50% on the death of the first spouse. If your philosophy is to “get your money” back (all those premiums over the years), Baldwin says it takes 22 years of $14,000 p/a CPP to receive $316,000, which he views as more reason to discourage deferring CPP.
