Skip to main content

Sound Advice: August 4, 2021

Three Questions

When can I retire?  This is by far the most common question and it’s typically asked by folks in their late 50s or early 60s.  The real question is whether the person has sufficient net assets (after outstanding debts are repaid) and an adequate balance between income and expenses to continue enjoying his or her preferred lifestyle.

The answer is straightforward, but requires a fair amount of effort to reach.  The task is that of assembling four groups of information.  These include assets, liabilities, earnings, and expenses.  In other words: what you own, what you owe, what you earn, and what you spend.  The first three are usually simple to identify.  Spending, however, can be a challenge.  Invariably, there are at least two dozen or more categories of regular expenses.  Added to that are unpredictables such as health care, inheritances, relocation, etc.

The upshot of this gathering and evaluation of information will be a result that indicates the likelihood that there will be sufficient resources for future funding.  In the event that there is a substantial possibility of a shortfall, the needed adjustments include options such as delaying retirement, reducing expenses, and increasing returns on investments.

Question Two comes in several forms.  The first is whether to keep the current residence or sell it and rent.  The second is whether to keep the current residence and move elsewhere, perhaps to an area with a lower cost of living.  The third is whether to sell and downsize. 

The answer requires the same approach as that for Question Number One.  Each case requires a comparison of outcomes between the possibilities. That’s especially so in view of the usually disproportionate importance of residence values for most families.  All of the information needed to answer Question One is needed to answer Question Two. 

Question Three: When should I start taking Social Security?  The answer is equally complex.  Assuming the potential recipient has made a sufficient number of contributions to qualify (usually 40 calendar quarters), there are three main choices.  The first is “taking early” at 62 years of age.  The next is at full retirement age, which varies by date of birth, but tends to be about 67 years of age.  The third is at 70 years of age.  In all cases, it’s not cut and dried.

Taking early at 62, for example, comes with several caveats. One is that benefits are reduced by 30% from those that would be received at full retirement age.  Another is that benefits may be reduced if the recipient continues to work.  Plus, when the recipient stops working, the benefits stay the same.  From a long-term standpoint, this is rarely a good choice.

Taking at full retirement age is a better choice.  There is no reduction of benefits and there is no penalty for continuing to earn income. 

An even better choice for those with good life expectancy is waiting for benefits to start after full retirement age, perhaps as late as 70.  For each year of postponement, benefits will increase by 8%, but the delay can be as little as one month or as long as three years.  The increase is always proportionate.

There are other variations as well, such as spousal benefits, which may involve a comparison of what the spouse would have received based on his or her own contributions with what would be received based on a percentage of the other spouse’s benefits.  Even if the spouses are no longer married, spousal benefits may still be available.

In all cases, the answers to all of these kinds of questions involve an evaluation of relevant information.         

N. Russell Wayne, CFP®

Any questions? Please contact me at nrwayne@soundasset.com

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sound Advice: January 3, 2025

2025 Market Forecasts: Stupidity Taken To An Extreme   If you know anything about stock market performance, you can only gag at the nonsense “esteemed forecasters” are now putting forth about the prospective path of stocks in the year ahead.   Our cousins in the UK would call this rubbish.   I would not be as kind. Leading the Ship of Fools is the forecast from the Chief Investment Strategist at Oppenheimer who is looking for a year-end 2025 level for the Standard & Poor’s Index of 7,100, a whopping 21% increase from the most recent standing.   Indeed, most of these folks are looking for double-digit gains.   Only two expect stocks to weaken. In the last 30 years, the market has risen by more than 20% only 15 times.   The exceptional span during that time was 1996-1999, which accounted for four of those jumps.   What followed in 2000 through 2002 was the polar opposite: 2000:      -9.1% 2001:     -11.9% ...

Sound Advice: January 15, 2025

Why investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts   Investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts for several compelling reasons: Poor accuracy Wall Street forecasts have a terrible track record of accuracy. Studies show that their predictions are often no better than random chance, with accuracy rates as low as 47%   Some prominent analysts even perform worse, with accuracy ratings as low as 35% Consistent overestimation Analysts consistently overestimate earnings growth, predicting 10-12%                 annual growth when the reality is closer to 6%.   This overoptimism can                 lead investors to make overly aggressive bets in the market. Inability to predict unpredictable events The stock market is influenced by numerous unpredictable factors, including geopolitical events, technological changes, and company-specific news.   Anal...

Sound Advice: October 12, 2022

More Pain Ahead? It’s been a difficult year for the investment markets, but tough times have happened before and they will certainly happen again.   Sometimes recoveries are relatively quick and sometimes a hefty dose of patience is required.   No two downdrafts are alike, but the net result is always a rebound to even higher levels than seen before. One of the most uncomfortable stretches over the last half century took place during the oil embargo days of the early and mid-1970s.   Market valuations fell to the high single digits, a level that was about half the historic average.   For investors, this was one of the great sales of all time.   Those who had the courage to get aboard reaped huge rewards. More recent pullbacks of note took place during the dot.com days of the turn of the millennium and the banking crisis of 2008-9.   The former period was marked by what appeared to be investors’ absolute indifference to longstanding measures of reasona...