Tag: inflation

Categories
Retirement Income Planning

It’s All About Timing

No matter how many times we see magic shows, inevitably, in response to a professionally-performed magic trick, we blurt out, “How did he do that?” Even though we know that the magician’s goal is to elicit this reaction, we’re nonetheless amazed by it.

What’s more astounding is that we’re amazed despite the fact that we all know the secret to each and every trick – timing. The use of precise timing in the performance of a planned sequence of events is responsible for creating the illusion that’s played out before our eyes time and time again by a professional magician.

It’s no different when it comes to successful retirement income planning. It’s all about timing. Anyone can stop working permanently and say they’re retired. Successful financial retirement, however, requires the performance of a planned sequence of events before and throughout retirement.

As you may have noticed, unlike my description of the magic process, I omitted the word “precise” before “planned sequence of events.” This was intentional since, unlike magic where the magician has control over the outcome of his tricks provided his timing is precise, this is irrelevant when it comes to retirement income planning. There are too many variables beyond our control, e.g., longevity, inflation, etc., that affect the outcome of a retirement income plan, making the use of precise timing meaningless.

Nonetheless, the performance of a planned sequence of events in a timely manner is essential to increasing the likelihood of a successful financial retirement. It’s a complicated ongoing process that requires planning, managing, and protecting retirement income. Given the potential duration of retirement of up to 25+ years, the sooner the process is begun, the more likelihood of a successful result.

As a retirement income planner, my ability to perform “magic” for a client is dependent upon my ability to understand my client’s financial needs and my client’s willingness to allow me to implement and maintain a plan that includes the performance of a planned sequence of events that will increase the likeliness of my client meeting his/her financial needs throughout retirement. Timing is everything.

Categories
Retirement Asset Planning Retirement Income Planning

Don’t Plan to Squeak By Into Retirement

Let’s face it. We’re a “just in time” society. With our busy lives, we do a lot of things at the last minute. Many people thrive on the adrenaline rush that often accompanies completion of a project right before its deadline.

Retirement income planning lesson #1: Don’t plan to squeak by into retirement. We simply cannot apply our “just in time” thinking to retirement. Retirement income planning is complicated, with too many things that can go wrong, many of them beyond our control. It requires a totally different mindset that runs contrary to the way most of us are use to thinking.

While there are no guarantees, a retirement income plan that’s begun and frequently revisited well before and throughout retirement provides the best opportunity for success. The basic goal of any retirement income plan is for your money to outlive you. When you see headlines like “Boomers’ Retirement Confidence Sinks,” you know this isn’t an easy goal to achieve.

Retirement income planning is especially tricky. It is quite different from retirement planning where the primary objective is accumulation of assets to obtain financial security throughout one’s retirement years. Traditional retirement planning isn’t enough to get you to the finish line in most cases today.

It’s too easy to have a false sense of comfort that one’s accumulated assets are sufficient to last for the duration of retirement only to be unpleasantly blindsided by the “sequence of returns” in the first several years of retirement. For those of you who aren’t familiar with this term, it is a series of investment portfolio returns, usually expressed annually, that has a direct impact on the longevity of an investment portfolio during the withdrawal stage. See The Sequence of Returns – The Roulette Wheel of Retirement that includes a comparison of three scenarios to help you better understand the importance of this risk to a retirement asset plan.

Retirement income planning takes retirement planning a step further. It requires planning for a predictable income stream from one’s assets, that when combined with other sources of income, is designed to meet an individual’s or family’s financial needs for the duration of retirement. This is a very important distinction. Locking in a predictable income stream in advance of one’s retirement reduces the impact of a down market in the early years of retirement.

A retirement income plan needs to have a secure floor of retirement income that will last for your, and, if applicable, your spouse’s lifetime. The timing and after-tax amount of the floor needs to correspond to ongoing and one-time predictable and unpredictable expenses that will fluctuate during different periods of retirement adjusted for inflation. To the extent that known income streams, e.g., Social Security, aren’t projected to be sufficient to cover expense needs, other sources of sustainable income need to be developed well in advance of retirement.

Don’t plan to squeak by into retirement. Trust me – there won’t be any adrenaline rush.

Categories
Social Security

Approaching 62? – Stop Before You Leap – Part 1 of 2

As I’ve dealt with clients and nonclients alike over the last three decades, one of my ongoing observations is the lack of formal and informal financial education we receive as a society when it comes to how to recognize and plan for critical life-changing financial events in our lives. This is especially true as it pertains to one of the most, if not the most, important financial decisions most of us will make during our lifetime, i.e., when to begin receiving Social Security retirement benefits.

By way of background, although you may apply to begin receiving Social Security retirement benefits at age 62, your benefit will increase each month that you defer your start date until age 70. While it’s tempting to turn on the faucet at age 62, this may not be the best age to begin receiving benefits if you’re concerned about maximizing and prolonging your retirement income stream and that of your spouse if you’re married.

The timing of the Social Security claiming age decision occurs at the crossroads of most peoples lives when many decisions need to be made that will affect the financial and emotional success of one’re retirement years. It comes at a time when:

  • The financial and psychological security of full-time employment will be ending in the near future for most people.
  • The sequence of investment returns can make or break one’s retirement if not properly planned for.
  • There will be a prolonged period of financial uncertainty without the associated safety of a paycheck, including unknown investment performance, inflation, and income tax rates.
  • Health begins to decline for many people with escalating health insurance premiums, potential higher out-of-pocket medical costs, and potential uncovered long-term care expense.

Given the far-reaching and long-term consequences of the Social Security claiming decision, it should be a high priority for anyone approaching age 62 to have a professional retirement income planner prepare an analysis as part of a retirement income plan to determine the optimal age to begin receiving Social Security retirement benefits.

The choice of a Social Security starting age will differ depending upon each person’s unique circumstances. This will become more evident when you read the reasons why the choice of your Social Security claiming age is so important in Part 2 of this post next week.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Social Security

Social Security – A Lifetime Deferred Income Annuity

Do you have an investment that will pay you guaranteed lifetime income totaling $870,000 to $1.87 million? This is the projected range of income that my wife and I expect to receive from Social Security during our lifetime based solely on my earnings record depending upon when I choose to start my benefits and how long both of us live. Granted that my earnings have exceeded the taxable Social Security wage base for most of my working years, however, this isn’t unusual.

Our projected benefits assume that (a) my current earnings level continues until I begin receiving Social Security, (b) either my wife or I live until at least my age 90, (c) my wife potentially lives until age 95, and (d) Social Security cost-of-living adjustments (“COLA’s”) are 2% each year which is less than the average increase of 2.6% over the last ten years. If all of these assumptions are realized, our actual benefits will likely be greater than the projected amounts since the projections don’t include COLA’s between now and retirement.

In order to truly appreciate the value of Social Security retirement benefits, it’s important to understand that it isn’t simply an entitlement program. Social Security is instead an investment; in particular, it’s a deferred income annuity (“DIA”) payable for life.

Let’s review a couple of definitions in order to put things in perspective. Per Retirement Income Visions™
Glossary, a Deferred Income Annuity is an annuity for which annuitization begins at least 13 months after the date of purchase in exchange for a lump sum or series of periodic payments. Per the Glossary, Annuitization is the irrevocable structured payout of income with a specified payment beginning at a specified date, paid at specified intervals over a stated period of months or years or for the duration of the annuitant’s and potentially his/her spouse’s and/or other individuals’ lifetime(s) depending upon the payout option selected.

Relating these two definitions to Social Security, in exchange for a series of payments, i.e., Social Security taxes paid by you and your employer, over your working years, you will receive an irrevocable structured payout of income with a specified payment beginning at a specified date paid for the duration of your, and potentially your spouse’s, lifetime, depending upon the payout option selected.

The primary difference between Social Security and a commercial DIA is the organization from which the investment is purchased and payments are guaranteed. In the case of Social Security, it is the federal government while DIA’s are purchased from, and payments guaranteed by, individual life insurance companies.

A second difference is the methodology used to calculate one’s lifetime benefit. Simply stated, Social Security benefits are calculated using a series of formulas based on one’s historical earnings relative to the taxable Social Security wage base in effect during each year of employment. Lifetime DIA payouts, on the other hand, are actuarially calculated using the amount and timing of lump sum and/or series of periodic payments, life expectancy factors, as well as current and projected interest rates.

A third potential difference between Social Security and a commercial DIA is the calculation of the payment amount after the initial year. Although a specified payment beginning at a specified date is calculated by the Social Security Administration based on various assumptions, the payment is the amount payable during the first year of benefits. Subsequent years’ payments can increase depending upon annual COLA’s. DIA payouts can increase as well if contractually provided. In some cases it’s also based on COLA’s, however, most of the time it’s determined by a predefined inflation factor.

Approximately 96% of working-age Americans are covered by the Social Security system. Social Security provides 90% of retirement income for one in three retirees and more than 50% for two in three retirees. Given these facts, Social Security is the most prevalent type of investment in the United States. Furthermore, it is, by far, the most popular DIA available in the marketplace.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Fixed Index Annuities Longevity Insurance

Invest in DIA to Fund LTCI Premiums When Retired – Part 2 of 4

Last week’s post discussed the use of a deferred income annuity (“DIA”), commonly referred to as longevity insurance, to fund long-term care insurance (“LTCI”) premiums during retirement. Similar to a fixed index annuity (“FIA”) with an income rider, in exchange for an initial investment, or premium, you’re entitled to receive a lifetime income beginning at least a year from the date of purchase.

As noted in last week’s post, there are five important differences between FIA’s with income riders and DIA’s that will influence which retirement income planning strategy is preferable for funding LTCI premiums in a given situation. These differences are as follows:

  1. Income start date flexibility
  2. Income increase provision
  3. Income tax consequences
  4. Investment value
  5. Death benefit

The first three distinctions are explained below. Part three will discuss the fourth and fifth differences. Part four will present a sample case to illustrate the use of a DIA vs. a FIA with an income rider to fund LTCI premiums during retirement.

Income Start Date Flexibility

FIA’s with income riders are known for their flexibility when it comes to their income start date. Income can typically be withdrawn beginning one year from the initial issue date with no time limit after that. The lifetime income payout will generally increase the longer you wait to begin your withdrawals as a result of potential increases in the income base and withdrawal percentages.

Unlike FIA’s, DIA’s generally aren’t flexible when it comes to the income start date. With most DIA’s, you’re tied to a specified payout at a specified start date at the time of investment.

Income Increase Provision

Although DIA’s generally have a fixed income start date, an annual inflation factor can be applied to the income payout to result in increasing annual payments. A greater premium, or investment, is required for this feature.

While the annual lifetime income payout will generally increase the longer you wait to begin your withdrawals with a FIA, the income amount generally won’t change once you turn on your income. In other words, there’s inflation protection built into FIA income riders only up until the time that you begin taking income withdrawals.

Income Tax Consequences

If retirement plans such as 401(k)’s or traditional IRA’s are the source of premium payments, then 100% of withdrawals from DIA’s and FIA’s will generally be taxable as ordinary income. Consequently, it doesn’t matter if the source of funds for LTCI premium payments is a FIA with an income rider or a DIA since taxation will be identical.

Whenever possible, nonretirement funds should be used to pay LTCI premiums. Here’s where DIA’s have the edge, especially during the early years. DIA payouts are considered to be an annuitization of the investment. Part of each payment through one’s life expectancy is deemed to be principal and interest. Any payments received thereafter are fully taxable.

Since only the interest portion is taxable and a large part of each payment is often classified as principal over the course of one’s life expectancy, DIA distributions receive tax-favored treatment.

When you take income withdrawals from FIA’s, on the other hand, you aren’t annuitizing your investment. Instead, “last-in first-out,” or “LIFO,” taxation is applied to your withdrawals. This means that 100% of your initial withdrawals will be taxed until all interest is recovered with subsequent withdrawals received tax-free as a return of principal.

Categories
Annuities Celebration Fixed Index Annuities Retirement Income Planning

Retirement Income Visions Celebrates 3-Year Anniversary!

Thanks to my clients, subscribers, and other readers, Retirement Income Visions™ is celebrating its three-year anniversary. Retirement Income Visions™ has published a weekly post each Monday morning, the theme of which is Innovative Strategies for Creating and Optimizing Retirement Income™.

As stated in the initial post on August 16, 2009, Retirement Income Visions™ Makes Its Debut, the importance of retirement income planning as a separate and distinct discipline from traditional retirement planning was magnified during the October, 2007 – March, 2009 stock market decline. Just ask anyone who retired just prior to, or during, this period that didn’t have a retirement income plan in place when he/she retired.

With increasing life expectancies, record-low interest rates, traditional pension plans going by the wayside, soaring health and long-term care costs, and the potential for inflation, retirement income planning is no longer an option. It has become a necessity for anyone who wants to ensure that he/she will have sufficient income to meet his/her expenses for the duration of retirement. Recognizing this fact, The American College launched its Retirement Income Certified Professional™ (RICP™) program earlier this year in which I was one of the first enrollees.

Since its inception, Retirement Income Visions™ has used a themed approach, with several weeks of posts focusing on a relevant retirement income planning strategy. This year was no exception. The weekly posts, together with the customized Glossary of Terms, which currently includes definitions of 137 terms to assist in the understanding of technical subject matter, has contributed to a growing body of knowledge in the relatively new retirement income planning profession.

While the first two years of Retirement Income Visions™ presented a variety of retirement income planning strategies, fixed index annuities, or “FIA’s,” have been the sole focus of virtually every weekly post for the past 13 months. Continuing a theme that began on July 11, 2011 during the second year of publication with Shelter a Portion of Your Portfolio From the Next Stock Market Freefall, the inner workings of FIA’s, including their unique benefits as a retirement income planning solution, has been discussed in detail. As a result, Retirement Income Visions™ has become an authoritative source of information on this important and timely topic.

Although FIA’s has been the theme of almost every post for over a year, the posts have been organized by a number of sub-themes. Following the July 11, 2011 post, the introduction to the FIA strategy continued with the next five posts, Looking for Upside Potential With Downside Protection – Take a Look at Indexed Annuities (July 18, 2011), Limit Your Losses to Zero (July 25, 2011), Do You Want to Limit Your Potential Gains? (August 1, 2011), When is the Best Time to Invest in Indexed Annuities? (August 8, 2011), and How Does Your Fixed Index Annuity Grow? (August 22, 2011).

The next twelve posts, beginning with the August 29, 2011 post, Indexing Strategies – The Key to Fixed Index Annuity Growth, through the November 14, 2011 post, How to Get Interest Credited to Your Fixed Index Annuity When the Market Declines, presented a thorough discussion of the various traditional fixed index annuity indexing strategies. This included an introduction to, and comparison of, the following indexing methods: annual point-to-point, monthly point-to-point, monthly average, trigger indexing, inverse performance trigger indexing, as well as the fixed account that’s included as one of the strategy choices by virtually every FIA.

Moving beyond the base product, the subject of the next nine posts was an introduction to the income rider that’s offered by many FIA’s. The income, or guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit (“GMWB”), rider is the mechanism for providing guaranteed (subject to the claims-paying ability of individual life insurance companies) lifetime income with a flexible start date that is essential to so many retirement income plans. This kicked off with the enlightening December 5, 2011 and December 12, 2011 posts, No Pension? Create Your Own and Add an Income Rider to Your Fixed Index Annuity to Create a Retirement Paycheck. The introduction to income rider series also included two two-part series, Your Fixed Index Annuity Income Rider – What You Don’t Receive (December 19, 2011 and December 26, 2011) and 5 Things You Receive From a Fixed Index Annuity Income Rider (January 9, 2012 and January 16, 2012).

Following two posts introducing fixed index annuity income calculation variables on January 23, 2012 and January 30, 2012 (10 Fixed Index Annuity Income Calculation Variables and Contractual vs. Situation Fixed Index Annuity Income Calculation Variables), a five-part series ensued revolving around a topic often misunderstood by the general public — premium bonuses. The posts in this series included 8 Questions to Ask Yourself When Analyzing Premium Bonuses (February 6, 2012), What’s a Reasonable Premium Bonus Percentage? (February 13, 2012), How Will a Premium Bonus Affect a Fixed Index Annuity’s Value? (February 20, 2012), How Will Withdrawals Affect Your Premium Bonus? (February 27, 2012), and How Will a Premium Bonus Affect Your Fixed Index Annuity Income Distribution? (March 5, 2012).

The next five posts delved into the inner workings behind the variables and interaction of variables behind the calculation of income withdrawal amounts from FIA income riders. This included the following posts: Income Account Value vs. Accumulation Value – What’s the Difference? (March 19, 2012), How is Your Fixed Index Annuity’s Income Account Value Calculated? (April 2, 2012), How Much Income Will You Receive From Your Fixed Index Annuity? (April 9, 2012), and a two-part series, Don’t Be Fooled by Interest Rates – It’s a Package Deal (April 16, 2012 and April 23, 2012).

When Should You Begin Your Lifetime Retirement Payout? was the subject of a two-part series (May 7, 2012 and May 14, 2012) followed by another timing question, When Should You Begin Investing in Income Rider Fixed Index Annuities? (May 21, 2012).

The May 28, 2012 through June 18, 2012 four-part series, Fixed Index Annuity Income Rider Similarities to Social Security, was a well-received and timely topic. This was followed by a second five-part comparison series beginning on June 25, 2012 and continuing through July 23, 2012, FIA’s With Income Riders vs. DIA’s: Which is Right for You?

The last two weeks’ posts have addressed the topic of valuation of a FIA’s income rider stream. This included the July 30, 2012 post, What is the Real Value of Your Fixed Index Annuity, and the August 6, 2012 post, Why Isn’t the Value of Your Income Stream Shown on Your Fixed Index Annuity Statement?.

As I did in my August 9, 2010 and August 15, 2011 “anniversary” posts, I would like to conclude this post by thanking all of my readers for taking the time to read Retirement Income Visions™. Once again, a special thanks to my clients and non-clients, alike, who continue to give me tremendous and much-appreciated feedback and inspiration. Last, but not least, thank you to Nira, my incredible wife, for her enduring support of my blog writing and other professional activities.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Fixed Index Annuities

FIAs With Income Riders vs. DIAs: Which is Right for You? – Part 5 of 5

Retirement Income Center - Puzzle

The first four parts of this series compared and contrasted the features available in two major types of fixed income annuities that defer the payment of their income, i.e., fixed index annuities (“FIAs”) with income riders and deferred income annuities (“DIAs”). So now that we’ve thoroughly analyzed both of these excellent retirement income planning tools, which is right for you?

The answer to this question depends upon your retirement income planning needs. The ideal retirement income planning strategy is one that will generate one or more guaranteed streams of income that will close the gap between projected expenses and projected existing sources of income with the smallest investment. Whether FIA’s or DIA’s or a combination of both strategies, will achieve this goal, will be dictated by the unique facts in a given situation.

Whenever possible, multiple FIA and DIA illustrations should be prepared to determine which strategy or strategies makes the most sense for a particular case. As discussed in the first four parts of this series, while FIAs and DIAs have much in common, each has features not found in the other.

Assuming that a similar amount of income will be produced whether a FIA or a DIA is used, the meshing of the unique features associated with each of the two types of fixed income annuities with the requirements of a particular retirement income plan will dictate what’s best for the plan. As an example, if income start date flexibility is important, a FIA will generally fit the bill. If, on the other hand, inflation-adjusted income is required over a specified term, e.g., from age 65 – 75, a DIA may be the best solution.

The presence of an accumulation value and associated built-in death benefit with FIA’s that’s not available with DIA’s often tips the scale in favor of FIAs. This is further reinforced when lifetime, vs. a specified term, income is important.

Cost is another factor that needs to be considered when comparing FIAs with income riders to DIA’s. DIA’s, as a stand-alone income-producing product, have no upfront or ongoing cost associated with them. Since the benefits of guaranteed income associated with FIA’s can generally only be obtained by purchasing an optional income rider, there’s an annual charge that’s assessed and deducted from a FIA’s accumulation value for this rider.

There are two other things to keep in mind when comparing FIAs with DIAs. Unlike FIAs with income riders, which are currently offered by numerous life insurance carriers with 169 products currently on the market, there are only a handful of carriers that offer DIA’s. One of the leading carriers, Hartford Financial Services Group, recently agreed to sell its units that develop, market, and distribute new versions of retirement income products.

A second thing to keep in mind is the ongoing tweaking of existing products and development of new products in response to marketplace demands. Of note, one of the top-rated carriers with a longstanding history introduced an innovative DIA within the last year that allows for ongoing investments as well as a flexible income start date, both features of which weren’t previously available with traditional DIA’s.

As you can see, the decision between FIAs with income riders vs. DIAs is complicated, to say the least. Determining what makes sense for you requires the skills and knowledge of an experienced retirement income planner who routinely works with these and other retirement income planning strategies.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Fixed Index Annuities

FIAs With Income Riders vs. DIAs: Which is Right for You? – Part 4 of 5

Retirement Income Center - Puzzle

If you haven’t read the first three parts of this series yet, you may want to do so since it will provide you with the background for this post. The first three parts listed and compared 12 features offered by fixed index annuities (“FIAs”) with an income rider with deferred income annuities (“DIAs”). It organized the 12 features into three categories: (a) offered by DIAs, (b) applicable to DIAs, and (c) applicable to DIAs on a limited basis.

DIAs are a unique investment in and of themselves. As such, they offer features that are unavailable in other investments, including FIAs with income riders. This week’s post discusses the retirement income planning benefits that are applicable to DIAs that aren’t present in FIAs with income riders.

Simply stated, a DIA is (a) the income rider portion of a FIA, (b) minus the income start date flexibility, (c) plus potential annual income inflation adjustments, (d) plus potential term vs. lifetime income opportunity.

Income Rider Portion of a FIA

As discussed in Part 2, DIAs, unlike FIAs, don’t have a traditional investment value associated with them. As such, a DIA is a simpler investment to understand than a FIA since it’s all about a future income stream.

Unlike the payments from FIA income riders that represent income withdrawals, DIA payments are annuity payments. This is an important distinction when it comes to income taxation. When held in a qualified plan such as a traditional IRA, 100% of FIA income rider and DIA payments are taxable as ordinary income.

With nonqualified, or nonretirement plans, income withdrawals from nonretirement FIAs are subject to “last-in first-out,” or “LIFO,” taxation. 100% of all withdrawals up to your income amount are taxable as ordinary income with any subsequent withdrawals received tax-free. Since DIA payments are annuity payments, they benefit from more favorable taxation when held in nonqualified plans. Each payment is subject to an “exclusion ratio” that excludes from taxation the portion of the payment that’s deemed to be a return of principal.

Minus the Income Start Date Flexibility

One of the best features of a FIA with an income rider from a retirement income planner’s perspective is the ability to begin income withdrawals at virtually any future date so long as it’s generally at least one year from the date of purchase and you’ve reached a specified age, typically 50. Most DIAs have a specified income start date and, therefore, don’t offer this flexibility. This downside can be negated to a certain extent by purchasing multiple DIA’s with different start dates.

Plus Potential Annual Income Inflation Adjustments

While it may change in the future, FIA income withdrawals, once they begin, are generally fixed amounts that don’t adjust for inflation. Although it isn’t automatic, the income payout from a DIA, on the other hand, can be structured to increase by a specified annual inflation factor, generally ranging between 3% and 6%.

Plus Potential Term vs. Lifetime Income Opportunity

One of the benefits of income annuities in general, including FIAs with income riders, is lifetime income. This also applies to DIA’s, however, you can also structure a DIA for a specified term. The term can be a certain number of years, however, it can be fine-tuned to a specified number of months.

With a known payment beginning at a specified future date for a specified number of months, you know exactly the total amount of income that will be received over the term of the DIA at the time of purchase. This offers three distinct retirement income planning benefits:

  1. Ability to precisely calculate an internal rate of return
  2. Ability to structure income to dovetail with the amount, frequency, and duration of other projected income sources to meet projected expenses
  3. Ongoing income payment to beneficiaries in the event of death prior to the end of the term

So which is right for you – FIAs with income riders or DIAs? Mark your calendar to read next week’s post to find out.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Fixed Index Annuities

FIAs With Income Riders vs. DIAs: Which is Right for You? – Part 3 of 5

Retirement Income Center - Puzzle

I hope that you’re enjoying this series so far comparing two innovative retirement income planning tools – fixed index annuities (“FIAs”) with income riders and deferred income annuities (“DIAs”). Of the 12 features offered by FIAs with income riders that are listed in Part 1, we’ve looked at three features that are also offered by DIAs, and five that aren’t applicable to DIAs.

This post will discuss the remaining four features that are applicable to DIAs on a limited basis. They are as follows:

  1. Known future income amount at time of initial and ongoing investments
  2. Flexible income start date
  3. Greater income amount the longer you defer your income start date
  4. Death benefit

Known Future Income Amount at Time of Initial and Ongoing Investments

One of the really cool things about fixed income annuities from a retirement income planning perspective is the ability to structure a guaranteed (subject to the claims paying ability of individual life insurance companies) income stream to match one’s income needs. In the case of both FIA’s with income riders and DIA’s, the amount of the future income stream is known at the time of initial and ongoing investments.

When you purchase a DIA, a known amount of income, with or without an annual inflation factor, will be paid to you as an annuity beginning at a specified future date for either a specified number of months or for life, either single or joint as applicable. With traditional DIA’s, you make a one-time investment; however, there are a handful of products that offer you the ability to make ongoing investments.

Unlike traditional DIA’s where you generally make a single investment and you receive a specified amount of income beginning at a specified date, FIA’s with income riders have more variations. For one thing, assuming you’re working with a flexible– vs. a single-premium FIA, you have the ability to make ongoing investments in a single FIA. In addition, the income start date, which will be discussed in the next section, is flexible. While the future income amount is known at the time of initial and ongoing investments, both of these variables combine to offer a much broader range of possibilities than a traditional DIA when it comes to the income withdrawal amount.

Flexible Income Start Date

All FIAs with income riders have a flexible income start date with the ability to begin income withdrawals either in the year of purchase or one year from the date of purchase assuming you’ve reached a specified age, generally 50. There’s no requirement with FIA income riders to commit to the income start date at the time of purchase, and, furthermore, you don’t have to ever start taking income withdrawals if you choose not to do so.

Per the previous section, traditional DIAs begin their income payouts at a specified future date. There are some nontraditional DIAs that provide for a flexible income start date similar to FIAs with income riders.

Greater Income Amount the Longer You Defer Your Income Start Date

With all fixed income annuities where the income isn’t payable during the first year, i.e., single premium immediate annuities, or “SPIAs,” the longer you defer your income start date, the greater the amount of income you will receive. This is true whether the income payment is for a fixed term, as it is with some DIAs, or if it’s for life.

FIAs with income riders, with their built-in flexible income start date, include this feature. In order to obtain this benefit with a traditional DIA, you need to choose a later income start date at the time of purchase.

Death Benefit

Income withdrawal is an optional rider with FIAs. The base product has an accumulation value that’s increased by initial and ongoing investments, premium bonuses, and interest credits and is decreased by withdrawals and surrender and income rider charges. To the extent that there’s accumulation value remaining upon the death of the owner(s), it’s paid to the contract’s beneficiaries as a death benefit.

Traditional DIAs may or may not include a death benefit prior to annuitization. Once annuitization occurs, there’s generally no death benefit payable. If you opt for a traditional DIA that includes a death benefit before annuitization, the amount of the benefit will generally be equal to your investment amount; however, the tradeoff will be a reduced income amount than would otherwise be payable by a similar product that doesn’t include a death benefit.

Categories
Annuities Fixed Index Annuities

Fixed Index Annuity Income Rider Similarities to Social Security – Part 2 of 4

Retirement Income Center - Currency

Part 1 of this post began a discussion of eight characteristics shared by fixed index annuity (“FIA”) income riders and Social Security. It discussed the first two characteristics, lifetime income and entry fee. This post continues the series, addressing characteristics three through five as follows:

  1. Flexible income start date
  2. Increased annual lifetime income
  3. Inflation and longevity risk protection

Flexible Income Start Date

Unlike some fixed income annuity investments that have a specified income start date, there’s no such requirement for either Social Security retirement benefits or fixed index annuity income rider withdrawals. In the case of Social Security, recipients may begin taking reduced benefits at age 62, with a full benefit available between age 65 and 67, depending upon when you were born, and a maximum benefit for those deferring their start date to age 70.

With a FIA income rider, there’s even greater flexibility regarding commencement of income withdrawals. As discussed in the May 7, 2012 post, When Should You Begin Your Lifetime Retirement Payout? Part 1 of 2, the earliest start date, which is defined in the income rider section of every FIA contract, is either during the initial contract year or after the first contract year once you’ve attained a specified age, typically 50.

Increased Annual Lifetime Income

As a general rule, it behooves Social Security recipients and FIA income rider holders to defer their income start date. By doing so, they will receive larger annual lifetime income amounts than if they elect to receive income sooner. If married, this benefit extends to the individual’s spouse in the case of Social Security in the event of death if the surviving spouse’s benefit is less than that of the deceased. Increased lifetime income will also be available for both spouses of FIA contracts with income riders assuming a joint lifetime payout is offered and is elected at the time of application.

With Social Security, the increased benefit for each year of deferral is significant. As an example, someone who is eligible to receive a monthly benefit of $1,000 at full retirement age of 66, would receive 25% less, or $750 at age 62. Likewise, if the individual waited until age 70 to begin receiving benefits, the amount would be $1,320, or 32% greater than at age 66, or 76% greater than at age 62.

For FIA income riders, the lifetime retirement payment (“LRP”) amount will increase during each year of the income rider accumulation phase. This period varies by product from a specified number of years, e.g., 10, until income is taken, or until a specified age, e.g., 85 or 90. In addition, once you complete the accumulation phase, your LRP will increase as a result of the application of increased withdrawal percentages associated with older ages, however, the frequency of increases is generally limited to five-year intervals with most FIA contracts.

Inflation and Longevity Risk Protection

To the extent that Social Security recipients and FIA income rider holders defer their income start date and receive a larger annual lifetime income payment, this will provide them with increased protection from two major retirement income planning risks: inflation and longevity. The value of this protection shouldn’t be underestimated when choosing a start date for Social Security benefits or FIA income rider payments.

Categories
Annuities Celebration Income Tax Planning IRA Retirement Income Planning Roth IRA Social Security

Retirement Income Visions™ Celebrates 2-Year Anniversary!

Retirement Income Center

Thanks to all of my subscribers and other readers, Retirement Income Visions™ is celebrating its two-year anniversary. Since its debut on August 16, 2009, Retirement Income Visions™ has published a weekly post each Monday morning, the theme of which is Innovative Strategies for Creating and Optimizing Retirement Income™.

As stated in the initial post two years ago, Retirement Income Visions™ Makes Its Debut, the importance of retirement income planning as a separate and distinct discipline from traditional retirement planning was magnified during the October, 2007 – March, 2009 stock market decline. Although the stock market experienced three positive and encouraging days this past week, the market volatility the last three weeks has only served to emphasize the need for a comprehensive retirement income plan.

Add to the mix the increasing instability of the Social Security and Medicare programs and the rapid decline of traditional pensions as a source of retirement income. Not to mention increasing life expectancies, soaring health care costs, and an economic situation ripe for inflation. Retirement income planning is no longer an option – it has quickly become a downright necessity.

Since inception, Retirement Income Visions™ has used a themed approach, with several weeks of posts focusing on a relevant retirement income planning strategy. This past year was no exception. The weekly posts, together with the customized Glossary of Terms, which currently includes definitions of 99 terms to assist in the understanding of technical subject matter, has contributed to a growing body of knowledge in the relatively new retirement income planning profession.

Going back a year, the six August 16 through September 20, 2010 posts completed a 36-part series on Roth IRA conversions. This was a very timely topic with the January 1, 2010 availability of this strategy to all taxpayers regardless of income level, combined with the ability to defer 50% of the reporting of income from a 2010 Roth IRA conversion to 2011 and the other 50% to 2012.

The September 27, 2010 post, Plan for the Frays in Your Social Security Blanket, began a 25-part educational series about Social Security. The first two parts discussed some of the historical events in connection with changes to the Social Security system affecting benefit amounts and delay in the commencement of receipt of benefits. The October 11, 2010 post, Do Your Homework Before Flipping the Social Security Switch, began a five-part series regarding various considerations in connection with electing to begin receiving Social Security benefits before full retirement age (“FRA”).

The November 15, 2010 post, Wait Until 70 to Collect Social Security? examined the opposite end of the spectrum, i.e., delaying the start date of receipt of Social Security benefits. The follow-up three-part series, Pay-to-Play Social Security, presented the “do-over” strategy, a little-publicized strategy for increasing monthly benefits in exchange for repayment of cumulative retirement benefits received.

The “file and suspend” and “double dipping” strategies for potential maximization of Social Security benefits were addressed in the next two two-part posts from December 13, 2010 through January 3, 2011, Breadwinner Approaching Social Security Retirement Age? – File and Suspend and Working? Remember Your Social Security Spousal Benefit When Your Spouse Retires.

Income taxation and associated planning strategies was the subject of the subsequent respective two- and four-part January 10 through February 14, 2011 series, Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits and Increase Your After-Tax Social Security Benefits. The February 21, 2011 post, Remember Your Future Widow(er) in Your Social Security Plan made the point that the decision regarding the start date of Social Security Benefits, in addition to fixing the amount of your retirement benefit, may also establish the amount of your spouse’s monthly benefit.

Retirement Income Visions™ Social Security series culminated with the three-part February 28 through March 24, 2011 series, Your Social Security Retirement Asset. These three posts discussed the importance of Social Security as an asset, perhaps one’s most important asset, in addition to its inherent role as a monthly retirement income stream.

With the media’s emphasis in 2010 on the two-year deferral of inclusion of income from a 2010 Roth IRA conversion as the motivating factor for pursuing this planning technique, I felt that there wasn’t enough attention given to the potential long-term economic benefits available through use of this investment strategy. Roth IRA Conversions – Don’t Let the Tax Tail Wag the Dog began a six-part series on this important topic on March 21, 2011 that ran through April 25, 2011. The May 2 and May 9, 2011 Roth IRA Conversion Insights two-part series followed up the Roth IRA conversion economic benefit discussion.

The importance of nonretirement assets in connection with retirement income planning was discussed in the May 9, 2011 Roth IRA Conversions Insights post as well as the May 23 and May 30, 2011 respective posts, Nonretirement Investments – The Key to a Successful Retirement Income Plan and Nonretirement vs. Retirement Plan Investments – What is the Right Mix? This was followed up with two posts on June 6 and 13, 2011 regarding traditional retirement funding strategies, Sizeable Capital Loss Carryover? Rethink Your Retirement Plan Contributions and To IRA or Not to IRA?

The June 20 and June 27, 2011 posts, Do You Have a Retirement Income Portfolio? and Is Your Retirement Income Portfolio Tax-Efficient? addressed the need for every retirement income plan to include a plan for transitioning a portion, or in some cases, all, of one’s traditional investment portfolio into a tax-efficient retirement income portfolio. This was followed by the July 5, 2011 timely Yet Another “Don’t Try to Time the Market” Lesson post.

The July 11, 2011 Shelter a Portion of Your Portfolio From the Next Stock Market Freefall began a new timely and relevant ongoing series about indexed annuities. This post was published just ten days before the July 21st Dow Jones Industrial Average peak of 12,724.41 that was followed by the beginning of a steady stock market decline coinciding with the final days of U.S. debt limit negotiations and Standard & Poor’s unprecedented U.S. credit rating downgrade, culminating with a closing low of 10,719.94 this past Wednesday. As implied in the titles of the July 18 and July 25, 2011 posts, Looking for Upside Potential With Downside Protection – Take a Look at Indexed Annuities and Limit Your Losses to Zero, this relatively new investment strategy has the potential to be a key defensive component of a successful retirement income plan.

As I did a year ago, I would like to conclude this post by thanking all of my readers for taking the time to read Retirement Income Visions™. Once again, a special thanks to my clients and non-clients, alike, who continue to give me tremendous and much-appreciated feedback regarding various blog posts. Last, but not least, thank you to my incredible wife, Nira. In addition to continuing to support my weekly blog-writing activities, she also endured my year-long family tree project that I recently completed. Well, sort of. Is a family tree ever completed?

Categories
Retirement Income Planning

Do You Have a Retirement Income Portfolio?

Retirement Income Center

Investopedia® defines a portfolio as “a grouping of financial assets such as stocks, bonds and cash equivalents, as well as their mutual, exchange-traded and closed-fund counterparts.” It completes the definition by saying that “portfolios are held directly by investors and/or managed by financial professionals.”

In other words, an investment portfolio consists of a mixture, or collection, of financial assets. During our working years, we typically finance our fixed and discretionary expenses from current sources of employment income, including salary, if we’re employed, and from draws, if we’re self-employed or a partner. Employment income is also used to fund an investment portfolio, including retirement and nonretirement investment plans through, and independent of, employers.

Following the concept that income is required to pay for expenses, when we retire, we need retirement income to pay for our fixed and discretionary retirement expenses. Given the fact that traditional pension opportunities are dwindling, combined with the uncertainty of Social Security in its present form, it’s incumbent on us to have a retirement income plan in place several years before we retire.

Every retirement income plan should include a plan for transitioning a portion, or in some cases, all, of one’s traditional investment portfolio into a retirement income portfolio. The amount and timing of the transition is dependent upon projected non-asset sources of retirement income compared to projected retirement expenses. Projected non-asset sources of retirement income consists of income that you will receive that is independent of assets that you own and are projected to own. This includes Social Security and private and government pensions.

Projected retirement expenses should be the focus of every retirement income plan. While current expenses can be used as a starting point, it’s important to remember that the expenses that we incur today are most likely quite a bit different than those we incurred ten or twenty years ago. Similarly, it’s critical that we visualize our retirement lifestyle since the type and amount of expenses that we incur during our retirement years are likely to be different than what we’re experiencing today. In addition, retirement should be broken down into different stages to take into consideration potential decreased levels of physical activity and different types of expenses associated with each stage.

Care must be taken to include potential extraordinary expenses in one’s list of projected retirement expenses, especially those related to health and long-term care needs. In addition, an appropriate inflation factor needs to be applied to all non-fixed expenses. Furthermore, different inflation factors should be applied to different expenses to reflect the projected reality of the marketplace.

Once we have a handle on our projected annual retirement expenses and subtract projected non-asset sources of retirement income, the difference will be the annual projected after-tax income that is required to be generated from our retirement income portfolio. It is then, and only then, that the individual components that will comprise the retirement income portfolio can be determined. As with traditional investment portfolios, it often makes sense to turn to a professional, in this case a retirement income planner, for guidance.

Categories
Retirement Asset Planning Retirement Income Planning

Retirement Income Planning – The End Game

Retirement Income Center

If you’re a subscriber to Retirement Income Visions™, you may have noticed that, although there have been nine posts prior to this one, none of them has stayed true to the theme of this blog, i.e., Innovative strategies for creating and optimizing retirement income. This post will be no exception. As the saying goes, there’s a method to my madness. In order to understand and appreciate the strategies and apply them to your situation, it’s important to understand the origin of retirement income planning, including the limitations of the retirement asset planning approach.

As explained in The Retirement Planning Paradigm Shift – Part 2, retirement planning is undergoing a paradigm shift. Instead of relying on retirement asset planning as a solution for both the accumulation and withdrawal phases of retirement, people are beginning to recognize, understand, and appreciate the need for, and value of, employing retirement income planning strategies during the withdrawal phase. No doubt about it, per Retirement Asset Planning – The Foundation, retirement asset planning is the way to go in the accumulation stage to build a solid foundation for a successful retirement plan. However, as discussed in The Retirement Planning Shift – Part 2, as a result of the uncertainty of traditional retirement asset planning as a solution for providing a predictable income stream to match one’s financial needs in retirement, retirement income planning was born.

Is Your Retirement Plan At Risk? introduced six risks common to all retirement plans: inflation, investment, income tax, longevity, health, and Social Security benefits reduction.

Beginning with Retirement Asset Planning – The Foundation, the inadequacy of retirement asset planning during the “spend-down” phase was discussed. This begins with the process itself. Unlike most types of financial planning where you get to see the results of your plan after reaching a specified target date, this is not the case with retirement asset planning since the timeframe is undefined.

Withdrawal Drag – The Silent Killer contrasted the beauty of compound rates of return during the accumulation stage with the erosion of portfolio income and the associated benefit of compounding, otherwise known as “withdrawal drag,” in the withdrawal stage of retirement. There is yet another phenomenon that can wreak havoc on your portfolio if you only rely on a retirement asset planning strategy during your retirement years. The Sequence of Returns – The Roulette Wheel of Retirement exposed this investment phenomenon and provided an example of how “luck of the rate-of-return draw” can prematurely devastate a conservative, well-diversified portfolio.

As if all of these variables and financial phenomenon were not a wake-up call to your planning, we mustn’t forget about the “safe withdrawal rate.” Safe Withdrawal Rate – A Nice Rule of Thumb demonstrated how the widely-accepted 4% “safe” withdrawal rate doesn’t necessarily guarantee that you won’t outlive your investment portfolio. Furthermore, the withdrawal amount that is calculated using this methodology typically won’t match your retirement needs.

All of the foregoing financial risks and phenomenon contribute to the inherent uncertainty associated with the retirement asset planning process during the withdrawal phase of retirement. As pointed out in Retirement Asset Planning – The Foundation, even if you’ve done an excellent job of accumulating what appear to be sufficient assets for retirement, you generally won’t know if this is true for many years

Retirement income planning is truly the end game in financial planning. Assuming that your goal is to generate a predictable income stream to match your financial needs in retirement while minimizing your exposure to withdrawal drag, the sequence of returns, and the various risks common to all retirement plans, it generally makes sense for you to begin employing retirement income planning strategies for a portion of your assets ten years before you plan to retire. The amount of assets and the exact timing of implementation are dependent upon your particular retirement and other financial goals as well as your current and projected financial situation.

Categories
Retirement Asset Planning

Safe Withdrawal Rate – A Nice Rule of Thumb

Retirement Income Center

Last week’s post, The Sequence of Returns – The Roulette Wheel of Retirement, showed how “luck of the rate-of-return draw” can have a dramatic affect on a retirement asset plan in determining whether you will outlive your investment portfolio. In two scenarios where the retirement age (65), portfolio beginning value ($500,000), average rate of return (7%), withdrawal rate (5%), and inflation factor applied to the withdrawal rate (3%) were identical, and the only variable was good vs. bad early years, there were quite different results. With the “Good Early Years” scenario, after 25 years, at age 90, distributions totaled $964,000, the portfolio earned $1.385 million, and the portfolio value was $921,000. Under the “Bad Early Years” scenario, the portfolio was depleted after 16 years at age 81 after taking distributions totaling $541,000 and the portfolio earning $41,000.

Many people would argue that 5% seems like a reasonable withdrawal rate, however, as we saw, under the “Bad Early Years” scenario, this proved to be too aggressive. The financial planning industry, after many years of debate, has settled on a rule of thumb of 4% as a “safe withdrawal rate.” That is to say, you can withdraw 4% of the value of your portfolio in your first year of retirement and then increase your withdrawal amount by an inflation factor in subsequent years without depleting your portfolio during your lifetime. As an example, assuming a portfolio value of $500,000 at retirement and a 3% inflation factor, you could withdraw $20,000 ($500,000 x 4%) in Year 1, $20,600 ($20,000 x 1.03) in Year 2, $21,218 ($20,600 x 1.03) in Year 3, etc.

Is a “safe withdrawal rate” something we should live by or is it simply a rule of thumb? While a 4% withdrawal rate during retirement can potentially enable you to sustain your retirement capital for the duration of your retirement, this is not always the case, particularly in “Bad Early Years” scenarios. In addition to the withdrawal rate, the interplay of the following ten variables will determine whether or not you will outlive your portfolio:

  1. Type of portfolio, i.e., nonretirement vs. retirement
  2. Income tax rates
  3. Source of income tax payments, e.g., checking account, nonretirement sales proceeds, IRA withdrawal, etc.
  4. Retirement duration
  5. Average rate of return
  6. Sequence of returns
  7. Timing of earning of income
  8. Inflation rate
  9. Frequency of withdrawals
  10. Timing of withdrawals

As an example of the interplay of several of these variables, let’s make the following assumptions:

  1. Retirement age: 65
  2. Beginning portfolio value: $500,000
  3. Average rate of return: 6%
  4. Sequence of returns: Bad early years
  5. Withdrawal rate: 4%
  6. Inflation rate: 3%
  7. Frequency of withdrawals: Annual
  8. Timing of withdrawals: Beginning of year

In this scenario, despite the fact that the withdrawal rate has been reduced from 5% per the “Bad Early Years” scenario in the last post to 4%, which is generally considered to be a “safe” withdrawal rate, by simply changing one other variable, i.e., reducing the average rate of return from 7% to 6%, per Bad Early Years Assuming 6% Average Rate of Return, the portfolio is depleted at age 85. While the frequency and timing of withdrawals in this example may not be typical, the “safe withdrawal rate” of 4% isn’t conservative enough.

There are other scenarios where the interplay of the various variables is such that a withdrawal rate of 4% can prove to be problematic. As is typically illustrated, the previous example assumed an inflation rate of 3% each and every year. What happens if inflation averages 3%, however, the sequence of inflation rates is such that it is much higher in the first five years, say 7%. This would result in larger withdrawals in years 2 through 6, and, depending upon the rate of return, sequence of returns, and duration of retirement, this could result in premature depletion of the portfolio.

Mathematics aside, there are several other issues to consider when planning to use a safe withdrawal rate. For starters, why should you base your withdrawals for the duration of your retirement on the value of your retirement portfolio on a single day, i.e., the day before you retire? Also, it does not consider the fact that a sizeable portion of your expenses may be for mortgage and/or other fixed payments that don’t increase each year, and, as such, don’t require an inflation factor to be applied to them. In addition, the safe withdrawal rate methodology doesn’t take into consideration the fact that we typically incur nonrecurring expenses, planned and unplanned, e.g., new car, home improvements, wedding, etc., in addition to our ongoing expenses.

Another factor not incorporated in safe rate withdrawal calculations is the affect of differences in sources and amounts of non-portfolio income, e.g., Social Security, pensions, part-time income, etc. on portfolio values. What about the impact of inheritances on the amount of subsequent withdrawals? Finally, who is going to be responsible for doing the accounting to ensure that the amount of withdrawals doesn’t exceed the targeted amount in a particular year?

While the amount of withdrawals calculated using safe withdrawal rate methodology may match your income needs in some years, this probably won’t be the case in most years. This is arguably its single biggest weakness. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to live my life based on a simple calculation that doesn’t consider my changing financial needs. While a safe withdrawal rate is a nice starting point, or rule of thumb, for calculating retirement withdrawal amounts, its limitations need to be considered when applying it to one’s retirement plan.

Categories
Retirement Asset Planning Retirement Income Planning

Retirement Asset Planning – The Foundation

Retirement Income Center

Last week, in Retirement Planning Risks, I discussed six risks associated with retirement planning in general. In order to understand and appreciate the value and importance of retirement income planning and its associated strategies, let’s take a closer look at retirement asset planning.

As was presented in The Retirement Planning Paradigm Shift – Part 2, the focus of retirement asset planning is on the accumulation and “spending down” of one’s assets. The accumulation phase is common to various financial planning areas, not just retirement, including house purchase planning and education planning, to name a couple. With most types of planning, you’re typically designing a plan for the purpose of accumulating funds for either (1) a single expenditure at some specified, or target, date, in the future, e.g., a down payment on a house, or (2) a series of expenditures for a limited and specified series of target dates, e.g., a four-year college education.

With all types of financial planning, there are two major stages:  (1) design, and (2) funding, or plan implementation. Similar to an architect, a financial planner, after consultation with his/her client(s), designs a financial blueprint, or plan, for achieving a particular goal, or series of goals. Assuming that the client approves the recommendations, the plan is generally funded with a single lump sum or a series of payments over a specified period of time, depending on the plan’s goals, the client’s current and projected resources, and various other factors.

With most types of financial planning, when you reach the plan’s target date, you immediately, or over a limited number of years, e.g., four in the case of college education, see the results of your plan. What distinguishes retirement asset planning from other types of planning and adds to the complexity of the plan design and funding strategy is the “spend-down” phase.

Unique to retirement asset planning, the timeframe of the “spend-down” phase is undefined. It can last for less than a year and, although it is unlikely, it can go on for as many as 60 years, depending upon when it starts and a host of many variables.

Unlike most types of financial planning where you get to see the results of your plan after reaching a specified target date, this is not the case with retirement asset planning. As a result of all of the risks discussed in last week’s post, there’s an inherent uncertainty associated with retirement asset planning. Even if you’ve done an excellent job of accumulating what appear to be sufficient assets for retirement, you generally won’t know if this is true for many years.

While retirement asset planning can provide a solid foundation for a successful retirement plan, unless it is accompanied by a customized retirement income plan at the appropriate stage in your life, there is a higher likelihood that your retirement income will fall short of your needs and that the plan, itself, may not succeed.