Registered Retirement Income Funds

Looking back on what the experts say – Save with SPP

July 21, 2022

Summertime, and while the living is easy, it’s not always easy to get people on the phone for an interview. We get it – there’s only a few short months of great weather in this country, after all.

So, Save with SPP had a look back on what we’ve learned about retirement and saving over the past while through past interviews, and via book reviews, from industry experts and leaders.

Derek Dobson, CEO and Plan Manager of the Colleges of Applied Arts & Technology Pension Plan, pointed to new research from the Canadian Public Pension Leadership Council that showed the economic value of pension dollars.  The study found that $16.72 of economic activity arises from every $10 paid out from a pension plan, notes Dobson. And that type of benefit comes from efficient plans, he explains. “Any plan that uses experienced investment professionals, and pooling – I include the Saskatchewan Pension Plan as an example of that – is delivering pensions efficiently,” he tells Save with SPP.

In an interview about the ins and outs of registered retirement income funds (RRIFs), BMO’s James McCreath noted that converting some or all of your registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) to an annuity instead of moving it to a RRIF is also an option.

“As interest rates rise, the functionality and usefulness of annuities go up,” he told Save with SPP. You can read the full interview here.

Prof. Luc Godbout, remarking on the trend of people working longer, had an idea on how to tweak the retirement system to accommodate the needs of older workers.  Allowing Canadians to postpone Old Age Security until age 75, and moving the conversion dates for RRSPs/RRIFs to 75, would “optimize the mechanics of pension plans, and also encourage Canadians to remain in the workforce, which improves health and also helps with Canada’s looming labour shortage.” Here’s where you can find the full article.

The author of Getting Out of Debt, Michael Steven, had some interesting thoughts on the importance of saving (once debt is under control).

“Saving requires discipline, a habit you build over time. It can be hard to save instead of spend, but if you have to attain financial freedom, then saving is one of those things you will have to embrace.” You can read the rest of our book review here.

There’s a lot to the broad topic of retirement and saving. For sure, belonging to a workplace pension plan is a key step towards retirement security. If you are saving on your own, you do need to understand the “decumulation stage” when savings are converted to income, either via an annuity or through drawing down a RRIF or similar vehicle. If you don’t have a lot of savings and have boomed your way into your 60s, then the proposed federal changes to benefits discussed by Prof. Godbout may make sense for you. But at the end of the day, as the old saying goes, it’s not what you make, but what you save, that helps your future self paddle through the waters of retirement.

If you don’t have a pension plan at work, and/or haven’t started saving for retirement yet, help is at hand. The Saskatchewan Pension Plan is open to any Canadian with RRSP room, and offers pooled investing, low-fee investment management, and many retirement income options including annuities. Check out SPP today!

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


Quebec academic calls for changes to RRSP and RRIF age limits

April 14, 2022

A university professor from Sherbrooke, Quebec is calling for a couple of changes to Canada’s system of registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) and registered retirement income funds (RRIFs), in light of the fact that people are living longer.

Professor Luc Godbout, Professor, School of Administration at the Université de Sherbrooke, is also Chair in Taxation and Public Finance. He kindly agreed to answer some questions Save with SPP had about his ideas, which were published by the C.D. Howe Institute as an open letter to federal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland.

His open letter was originally published in French.

The professor’s open letter calls for “simple changes” to the existing rules.

“The first would be adjusting the threshold age at which registered capital accumulation plans – such as the RRSP – must be terminated. The rule now is age 71,” he notes in the letter.

Under the current rules, his letter explains, RRSP holders must “transfer their RRSP or defined-contribution pension plan balances into a RRIF or a life annuity” before the end of the year in which they reach age 71. If they don’t, he explains, “the entire value is added to their taxable income in that year.”

The age limit of 71 was established in 1957, his open letter notes.   “This means that since the creation of the RRSP in 1957, the age limit of 71 has never been raised,” the open letter explains. “Yet, since 1957, the life expectancy of seniors in Canada has improved significantly. 

“Life expectancy at age 65 was 14.5 years during the period 1955-1957. It improved to 20.9 years in 2018-2020. But the RRIF rules have not moved,” he writes.

He remarks that recent changes to Old Age Security (OAS) benefits for those aged 75 and older “provides an opportunity to harmonize other elements around our living 75-year-olds.”

Why not, he asks, consider allowing Canadians to postpone their OAS payments to age 75, rather than the current age 70? And, he asks, why not move the limit for converting an RRSP to a RRIF to 75?

“This type of change would optimize the mechanics of pension plans, and also encourage Canadians to remain in the workforce, which improves health and also helps with Canada’s looming labour shortage,” his open letter concludes.

Save with SPP asked the professor a couple of questions about his open letter.

Q. You mention that moving the “end date” for RRSP contributions (and for DC plans) and RRIF conversion to 75 from the current 71 would encourage more people to stay in the workforce. Do you see the current age 71 rule as something that encourages the opposite – a deadline that encourages retirement?

A. It may not be an important factor, but it cannot play favorably in the heads of those who want to continue in the labour market, for example, a liberal profession.

Q. If your idea on changing the date is adopted, do you think government retirement benefits like the Canada Pension Plan/Quebec Pension Plan and Old Age Security should also be changed?

A. Yes, but it is not an obligation to retire later, only to offer a possibility to delay the time when the pension begins, currently CPP between 60 and 70 years and OAS between 65 and 70 years.

Q. You note that while the RRIF age of 71 has been lowered (to 69) in the past, it has never been raised. Why do you think 71 is still the age, especially considering how things have changed since the rules came in in 1957, and retirement was mandatory at 65!

A. Because the scheme does not provide for the adjustment of this threshold to take account of the increase in life expectancy.

We thank Prof. Godbout for taking the time to answer our questions.

One way that a pension plan can deal with longer life expectancies of its membership is by providing the option of an annuity. The Saskatchewan Pension Plan provides a number of different annuity options for its retiring members – but all of them provide a lifetime monthly pension. Check out SPP today.

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


Apr 11: BEST FROM THE BLOGOSPHERE

April 11, 2022

Having a withdrawal strategy should help your savings withstand inflation: McGugan

Reporting for the Globe and Mail, columnist Ian McGugan says retirees living off a nest egg of money need a strategy to cope with inflation.

“Unlike a truly rare disaster such as a global pandemic, the current inflationary outburst resembles a muted replay of the 1970s – and retirement planners have long used strategies designed to soldier through such episodes,” he writes.

He notes that a key tactic is the “four per cent rule,” developed by financial adviser William Bengen in 1994.

The rule, McGugan explains, “holds that a retiree planning for a 30-year retirement can safely withdraw an inflation-adjusted four per cent of their starting portfolio each year without fear of running out of money.”

Bengen, the article continues, based his formula on a “U.S. retiree with a portfolio split evenly between bonds and stocks,” and his research showed that even during the Great Depression, the Second World War or the “stagflation” period of the 1970s (a long period of very high, stubborn inflation), the four per cent rule would have worked.

Some industry observers, notably Morningstar, advise a lower withdrawal rate of 3.3 per cent, in light of “how bond yields have fallen,” he reports. Others say you could go up to 4.5 per cent.

McGugan notes that economist Karsten Jeske found “no strong relationship between prevailing levels of inflation and future safe withdrawal rates.”

He is more concerned, McGugan reports, about stock valuations as a problem for retirees.

“When stocks are expensive compared with their long-run earnings – as they are now – retirees should be cautious about how much they withdraw from their portfolio because high valuations are usually a sign of lower stock-market returns to come,” the article notes.

When talking about withdrawal rates, we should qualify the discussion by saying that certain retirement savings vehicles, such as registered retirement income funds (RRIFs), set out a minimum amount you must withdraw each year. When you look at the rates, you’ll notice they start out at four per cent when you’re 65, but gradually increase over time. If you make it to 95, the minimum withdrawal rate jumps to 20 per cent.

But if your savings are in a Tax Free Savings Account or any non-registered vehicle, the four per cent is worth consideration. We are all used to getting a steady paycheque, usually every two weeks or twice a month. If you got all your pay in January, you’d have to figure out a way to make it last so you don’t run out with a month or two left in the year. The four per cent rule is a way to make a lump sum of retirement savings last for the long haul.

The way that people used to deal with volatility in stock prices was to invest in bonds and stocks equally, as the article describes. Because interest rates have been low for decades, and bond yields have declined in recent years, modern “balanced” funds tend to add in some bond alternatives that deliver steady, bond-like income, like real estate, infrastructure and mortgages. If stocks pull back, these sources still generate reliable regular income.

A good example is the Saskatchewan Pension Plan’s Balanced Fund. The asset mix of the fund includes not only bonds, but real estate, mortgages, infrastructure and money market exposure, as well as Canadian, U.S. and international equities. This multi-category investment vehicle is a fine place to store your retirement nest egg. Check out SPP today.

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


May 10: BEST FROM THE BLOGOSPHERE

May 10, 2021

“Mind shift” on taxation needed when you enter retirement

Writing in the Sarnia Observer, financial writer Christine Ibbotson notes that taxation – fairly straightforward before you retire – gets a lot more complicated after you retire.

“Managing your taxes during your working years is relatively generic,” she writes. “You maximize your registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) contributions, purchase investments that attract the least tax possible on investment income or buy real estate to increase your net worth.”  The goal with taxes is get them as low as possible, she explains.

It’s a different ball game in retirement, Ibbotson notes.

“As you transition into retirement, the tax planning process shifts onto withdrawing assets, and doing so in the most tax-efficient manner,” she explains. This requires what she calls a minor “mind shift” for most people, the article notes.

“Most are preoccupied with minimizing current taxes each year. But this cannot be at the expense of your long-term objective for maximizing after tax income for your entire retirement (often estimated at 25 to 40 years),” she notes.

For that reason, Ibbotson says retirees need to get a handle on how the various types of income they may receive are taxed.

“There are three main types of taxation to consider: interest income, dividend income, and capital gains. All are taxed differently, so this makes it easier to structure your portfolio more efficiently when you are creating your plan with your advisor,” Ibbotson writes.

“As a general rule you want to place income that is going to be unfavourably taxed, (interest income) into tax-sheltered products such as tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) or RRSPs. Investment income that generates returns that receive more favourable tax treatments (dividends or capital gains) should be placed in non-registered accounts.”

If you are retiring, it’s critical that you know what your income is from all sources – government retirement benefits, a workplace pension, and “anticipated income” from your own savings. This knowledge can help you to “avoid clawbacks as much as possible,” she explains.

Other tax-saving suggestions from Ibbotson include the ideas of Canada Pension Plan/Quebec Pension Plan “sharing,” splitting employer pension plans for tax purposes with your spouse, and holding on to RRSPs, registered retirement income funds (RRIFs) or locked-in retirement accounts (LIRAs) to maturity. Those age 65 and older in receipt of a pension (including an SPP annuity) will qualify for the federal Pension Income Tax Credit, another little way to save a bit on the tax bill.

“Simply put, paying less tax translates into keeping more money in your pocket, allowing you to enjoy a better quality of life,” she concludes.

This is great advice. Save with SPP can attest to the unexpected complexity of having multiple sources of income in retirement after many years of having only one paycheque. You also have fewer levers to address taxes – while you might be able to contribute to an RRSP or your SPP account, it’s probably only on your earnings from part-time work or consulting. You can ask your pension plan to deduct additional taxes from your monthly cheque if you find you are paying the Canada Revenue Agency every year.

The older you get, the more you talk about taxes with friends and neighbours, and many a decumulation strategy has been mapped out on the back of a golf scorecard after input from the other players!

Wondering how much your Saskatchewan Pension Plan account will total when it’s time to retire? Have a look at SPP’s Wealth Calculator. Plug in your current account balance, your expected annual contributions, years to retirement and the interest rate you expect, and voila – there’s an estimate for you. It’s just another feature for members developed by SPP, who have been building retirement security for 35 years.

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


Guide aims at folks planning on retiring in 10 years or less

April 22, 2021

If you are one of the many Canadians who is a decade (or less) away from retirement, and haven’t had time to really think about it, there’s an ideal book out there for you.  The Procrastinator’s Guide to Retirement by David Trahair walks you through all the decisions you’ll need to make, and the strategies you may want to employ, to have a solid retirement – soon.

Trahair makes the point early that you need to track your current spending to have an accurate sense of how much you need to save to fund your retirement.  He says the old 70 per cent rule – that you will be comfortable if you can save up enough to live on 70 per cent of your pre-retirement income – is “problematic… it may be the right answer for one person, but totally wrong for you because your financial situation is as individual as your fingerprints.” Knowing what you spend now, and will spend when retired, is a key piece of knowledge when setting savings targets, he explains.

Through the deft use of charts, examples and worksheets, Trahair explains that most of us have “golden opportunity” years for retirement savings when we have surplus funds, thanks to paying off a car loan, or having a child graduate from university. What you do during these periods of excess money “can make or break” your retirement plans, he advises, noting that an obvious destination for some of this cash is retirement savings.

He looks in detail at whether it’s a good idea to save for retirement in a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) or pay off debt, like credit cards or mortgages, first. Trahair says anyone with high-interest credit card debt should pay that off first before saving for retirement, because of the “rate of return” you get by eliminating the debt.

“A lack of cash outflow is as good as a cash inflow, and better if that inflow is taxed,” he explains. In other words, all the money once spent on paying down the credit card is now in your pocket instead.

Whether to pay down the mortgage versus saving for retirement is a trickier calculation (Trahair has a spreadsheet for you to make your own choice). He says the “commonsensical” approach is to make an RRSP payment and then put the refund on the mortgage. However, later in the book he warns of the dangers of not paying off the mortgage until after retirement.

“If you went into retirement with a $200,000 mortgage, you’d need $293,254.75 extra in your RRSP just to break even,” he writes. “Put another way, you’d be just as well off as someone who had a zero-mortgage balance and $293,254.74 less in their RRSP.”

There’s a lot of good stuff here. There’s a chapter on selecting an investment advisor, and good advice for those investing on their own. He warns that those saving later in life often look for higher returns, which can be risky. “Hoping for a 10 per cent rate of return to solve your problems will mean you’ll have to take extreme risk… chances are good this strategy will result in dismal failure. So, he advises, have a disciplined investment approach, and manage risks. A rule of thumb he likes is the one that suggests 100 minus your age should be the percentage of your portfolio that is in fixed income. The rest should be in the stock market.

Later, he explains how GICs are his favourite investment, especially when held in RRSPs, Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs) and Tax Free Savings Accounts (TFSAs).

He examines the concept of how much you’ll spend in retirement, noting that some costs, like Canada Pension Plan (CPP) contributions, car operating costs, dining out and dry cleaning will drop once you’re no longer going to work, well-dressed.

He talks about how you can maximize both CPP and Old Age Security benefits by deferring them until later – and covers the pros and cons of doing so.

Later chapters cover the “risk” of living a long life, the “snowball” versus “avalanche” methods of debt reducing, and estate planning.

This is an excellent resource for all aspects of retirement planning, and – even better – it is written for a Canadian audience.

If your retirement plan includes the Saskatchewan Pension Plan, you’re already getting professional investing help at a low fee of just 0.83 per cent in 2020. SPP manages investment risks for you – and has chalked up an impressive rate of return of 8 per cent since its inception 35 years ago. Why not to check out SPP today!

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


Now is the time to act on boosting retirement security: C.A.R.P.’s VanGorder

January 14, 2021

For those of us who aren’t yet retired, it’s difficult to put ourselves in the shoes of a retiree and imagine what issues they may be facing.

Save with SPP reached out recently to Bill VanGorder, Chief Policy Officer for C.A.R.P., a group that advocates for older adults, to find out what it’s like once you’re no longer working.

For a start, says VanGorder, all older people aren’t set for life with a good pension from their place of work. In fact, he says, “65 to 70 per cent of those reaching retirement age don’t have a (workplace) pension.”

As a result of that, most people are getting by on income from their own retirement savings, along with government benefits like the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), Old Age Security (OAS), and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS).

“Politicians don’t understand what it’s like to live on a fixed income,” VanGorder explains, adding that any unexpected expenses hit those on a fixed income really hard. Right now in Nova Scotia C.A.R.P. is trying to stop plans to end a longstanding cap on property taxes – a move that would hit fixed-income folks the hardest.

In removing the cap, the province has suggested it would “look after” low-income seniors, but VanGorder points out that retirees at all levels of income are on fixed income. “It’s not just low-income earners… everyone would be hit by this,” he says.

It’s an example of how older Canadians seem to be overlooked when the government is writing up new public policies, VanGorder says. When the pandemic struck, all that older Canadians were offered was a one-time $300 payment, plus an extra $200 for the lower income group, he notes. Meanwhile younger Canadians were eligible for Canada Emergency Response Benefit payments of $2,000 per month, there were wage subsidies and rent subsidies for business, and more.

Older Canadians “feel they’ve seen every other part of the country get more economic assistance,” he explains. That’s because there’s a misconception that older Canadians “are already getting stuff… and are being looked after.”

“Their cost of living has gone up exponentially,” VanGorder says, noting that many services for seniors – getting volunteer drivers, or home support visits – have been curtailed for health reasons. These changes lead to increased costs for older Canadians, he explains.

C.A.R.P. is looking for ways to keep more money in the pockets of older people. For example, he notes, C.A.R.P. feels that there should be no minimum withdrawal rule for Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs). “It’s unfair to force people to take their money out once they reach a certain age,” he explains. “A lot of people are retiring later (than age 71).” He notes that since taxes are paid on any amount withdrawn anyway, the government would always get its share eventually if there was no minimum withdrawal rule.

Another argument against the minimum withdrawal rule is the increase in longevity, VanGorder says. Ten per cent of kids born today will live to be over 100, he points out. “We’re adding a year more longevity for every decade,” he says.

C.A.R.P. is also pushing the federal government to move forward with election promises on increasing OAS payments for those over age 75, and to increase survivor benefits. While the feds did improve the CPP, the improvements will not impact today’s retirees; instead they’ll help millennials and younger generations following them.

Another area of concern to C.A.R.P. on the pension front is the rights of plan members when the company offering the pension goes under. “C.A.R.P. would like to see the plan members get super-priority creditor status,” he explains. That way, they’d be first in line to get money moved into their pensions when a Nortel or Sears-type situation occurs.

He notes that Canada is the only country with government-run healthcare that doesn’t also offer government-run pharmacare.

VanGorder agrees that there aren’t enough workplace pensions anymore. “Canada doesn’t mandate employers to offer pensions, making (reliance) on CPP and OAS more critical than it is in other countries,” he explains. The solutions would be forcing companies to offer a pension plan, or greatly increasing the benefits offered by OAS and CPP, he says.

“If we don’t start fixing it now, we are going to end up with a horrible problem when the millennials start to retire,” VanGorder predicts. Now is the time to act on expanding retirement security, he says. “They always say the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago,” he says. “But the second-best time is today.”

We thank Bill VanGorder for taking the time to speak to Save with SPP.

Don’t have a pension plan at work? Not sure how to save on your own? The experts at the Saskatchewan Pension Plan can help you get your savings on track. SPP offers a well-run, low-cost defined contribution plan that invests the money you contribute, and provides you with the option of a lifetime pension when work’s in the rear-view mirror. An employer pension plan option is also available. See if they’re right for you!

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


Dec 14: BEST FROM THE BLOGOSPHERE

December 14, 2020

Could we see a change in RRIF withdrawal rules?

An interesting idea that’s apparently being discussed in political circles is one of high interest to retirees – it’s the thought of doing away with minimum withdrawal rules from Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs).

According to an article on the Sudbury.com site, this idea seems to be focusing on the fact that retirees may not want to withdraw funds – or at least, less funds than the usual minimum – from their RRIFs during a time when the markets have been volatile due to the worldwide pandemic.

“Each year, seniors with registered retirement income funds have to withdraw a minimum amount from their savings, which is considered taxable income,” the article explains.

“The Liberals shifted the marker this year, dropping the minimum for each senior by 25 per cent to ease concerns raised by the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. That let those who could afford it leave more money in their tax-sheltered investments, hoping to recoup losses from the pounding the pandemic delivered to the markets,” the article continues.

The article notes that 2.1 million Canadians had RRIFs in 2018, with an average balance of $114,019. That average withdrawal, again according to the article, was $10,645 in 2018, with 41 per cent of RRIF owners withdrawing more than that.

When you’re too old to put money into a Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), one of your options is to transfer the funds into a RRIF. There, your funds continue to grow tax-free, but you are taxed on a minimum amount you have to take out each year – at least under the present rules.

Your other options for the RRSP, when it ends, are to buy a life annuity (more on that later) or to withdraw it all in cash and pay taxes on the entire amount.

So what’s the deal with this new RRIF idea?

It could be a good option for those of us with RRIF savings who don’t want to “sell low,” and take money out when markets aren’t strong. But, as the Sudbury.com article tells us, if this option ever comes to pass, it carries a price tag – for Ottawa.

The Parliamentary Budget Office, the article notes, says “cutting the minimum withdrawal all the way to zero would end up costing the federal treasury $940 million next year, rising each year until hitting just over $1 billion in 2025.”  That said, presumably – even if there is no minimum withdrawal amount – some seniors will still need to withdraw money from their RRIFs and would pay some of those “waived” taxes.

RRIFs aren’t perfect. As mentioned, you (currently) have to take money out even if markets tank, a set amount each year. As well, your income from a RRIF tends to fluctuate; you generally don’t get the same amount each year because you are withdrawing funds from a declining account balance. And, you could run out of RRIF money before you run out of life.

If you’re a Saskatchewan Pension Plan member, you have an additional option when you retire. You can convert your SPP savings to a life annuity. You’ll get the same income every month – for life – regardless of whether the markets go up or down, and the longer you live the more payments you get. SPP also has options for your spouse and beneficiary to receive income upon your death. Check this important SPP benefit out today!

Join the Wealthcare Revolution – follow SPP on Facebook!

Written by Martin Biefer

Martin Biefer is Senior Pension Writer at Avery & Kerr Communications in Nepean, Ontario. A veteran reporter, editor and pension communicator, he’s now a freelancer. Interests include golf, line dancing and classic rock, and playing guitar. Got a story idea? Let Martin know via LinkedIn.


RRIF rules need updating: C.D. Howe

September 25, 2014

By Sheryl Smolkin

Sept25-CDHoweRRIF

 

A recent policy paper from the C.D. Howe Institute[I] documents how the current mandatory minimum withdrawals from registered retirement income funds (RRIFs) and similar accounts have not kept pace with the increased life expectancies of Canadians – a problem for retired Canadians trying to balance their need for current income against the risk of outliving their savings.

Since 1992, the Income Tax Act has obliged holders of RRIFs and similar accounts to withdraw annual amounts, dictated by an age-related formula, that rise until holders must withdraw 20% each year. But in 1992, the federal government was in a deficit position and needed cash. Now it is close to surplus and the timing of the receipt of those taxes is less critical for the government.

To the RRIF holder, however, the minimums pose a threat. They oblige the holder to run tax-deferred assets down rapidly. Today, people can expect to live much longer after retirement, and real returns on investments that provide secure incomes are much lower. RRIF holders now face serious erosion in the purchasing power of tax-deferred savings in their later years.

Back in 1992, a 71-year-old man who withdrew the annual mandatory minimum from his RRIF could expect to deplete 25 per cent of his initial balance’s real value upon reaching his life expectancy, and had virtually no chance of seeing its real value drop more than 90%. Now, he can expect to live to see his initial balance drop about 70%, and faces a 1-in-7 chance of seeing its real value drop more than 90%.

In the same year, a 71-year-old woman making minimum RRIF withdrawals could expect to deplete about 40% of her initial balance’s real value upon reaching her life expectancy. Now, she can expect to deplete about 80% of it. And she faces a 1-in-4 chance of seeing its real value drop more than 90%.

The study authors William B.P. Robson and Alexandre Laurin admit these are stylized examples that will not apply to everyone. Some seniors, especially those who do not anticipate living long, will want to withdraw tax-deferred savings faster than the RRIF minimums. In the coming decades, more seniors, enjoying better health and working at less physically demanding jobs than their predecessors, will work longer and replenish their savings notwithstanding the disadvantage of losing tax deferrals after age 71.

Couples can delay the impact of the drawdown rules by gearing their withdrawals to the younger spouse’s age. High-income seniors whose incremental withdrawals do not trigger OAS and GIS clawbacks will find the burden of paying ordinary income taxes on them tolerable. As room to save in TFSAs grows, more seniors will be able to reinvest unspent withdrawals in them, avoiding repeated taxation.

For other seniors, however – even if they do have room to reinvest in TFSAs – these forced drawdowns make no sense. These seniors include those whose withdrawals – reinvested in TFSAs or not – trigger clawbacks and other income and asset tests; who find tax planning and investing outside RRIFs daunting; who cannot easily continue working; or, who anticipate sizeable late-in-life expenses such as long-term care.

Moreover, foreseeable demands on individual and public resources suggest we should be encouraging saving, rather than discouraging or at best complicating it. Roughly 203,300 Canadians are now age 90 and older; in about 25 years that number will roughly triple. To the extent future seniors have ample assets to finance their needs – especially those such as health and long-term care that rise with age – all Canadians will benefit.

Therefore, the  authors of the paper argue minimum drawdowns from RRIFs and similar vehicles should start later and be smaller, or even disappear entirely.

They say that since tax is payable on RRIFs upon the death of the last to die of the account holder and his/her spouse, in a present-value sense, elimination of mandatory minimum withdrawals would have no significant fiscal impact for the government. Elimination would also have the additional benefit of removing the need for future updates as longevity, yields and possibly other circumstances change again.

Table 1 below illustrates how the RRIF minimum drawdown schedule could be modified to reflect both the increased longevity of Canadians in 2014 and revised interest rate assumptions.

[I]  This blog contains excerpts from the C.D. Howe Institute report Outliving Our Savings: RRIF Rules Need a Big Update:

Age Current RRIF Prescribed Minimum Withdrawal RRIF Minimum Withdrawals to Replicate 1992 Account Depletion Probabilities
71 7.38 2.68
72 7.48 2.72
73 7.59 2.76
74 7.71 2.80
75 7.85 2.85
76 7.99 2.91
77 8.15 2.96
78 8.33 3.03
79 8.53 3.10
80 8.75 3.18
81 8.99 3.27
82 9.27 3.37
83 9.58 3.48
84 9.93 3.61
85 10.33 3.76
86 10.79 3.92
87 11.33 4.12
88 11.96 4.35
89 12.71 4.62
90 13.62 4.95
91 14.73 5.36
92 16.12 9.48
93 17.92 10.54
94+ 20.00 11.76

Source: Outliving Our Savings: RRIF rules need a Big Update: C.D. Howe Institute


[1]  This blog contains excerpts from the C.D. Howe Institute report Outliving Our Savings: RRIF Rules Need a Big Update:


Jan 27: Best from the blogosphere

January 27, 2014

By Sheryl Smolkin

185936832 blog

RRSP season is in full swing and since the beginning of the year, we have been bombarded with a media blitz suggesting few Canadians are saving enough and exhorting us to maximize contributions to our retirement savings plans by the end of February.

If you wonder what all this retirement planning is for, anyway, take a look at Sandi Martin’s blog or boomer & echo. She says planning for that inevitable day when you stop collecting a paycheque, or invoicing clients, or collecting ad revenue is an exercise that will let you spend more money than vaguely worrying about “saving enough” or “running out” will.

In order to save enough to retire worry-free, you need to figure out how much you will need. On the Canadian Finance blog Tom Drake suggests that for every dollar of annual income you need in retirement you should plan to have $20 in savings. That doesn’t include the value of your home because it is not earning income.

You can save in many different kinds of accounts including the Saskatchewan Pension Plan, employer-sponsored pension plans and RRSPs. But Jonathan Chevreau at MoneySense says investing in a tax-free savings account (TFSA) should be a priority for most Canadians. In fact he says the moment you make your January contribution, you should start accruing for the next year’s installment, even if it means parking in short-term cash vehicles and paying a little tax for the balance of the calendar year.

Brighter Life discusses how you can pay yourself from your retirement savings when you retire. Some of the options are annuities, registered retirement income funds, and payments from several kinds of locked-in accounts holding funds transferred from locked-in company pension plans.

And Jim Yih on retirehappy.ca reminds us that one area of tax planning that does not receive enough attention is the designation of beneficiaries when it comes to Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs) and Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs).

When you open up an RRSP or RRIF, you are opening up a special contract under the Income Tax Act, which allows you to designate one or more beneficiaries. Far too often, this is done too casually and without enough thought. More importantly, as your circumstances change, like marriage, divorce or children, you should consider reviewing your beneficiaries to make sure you have the right people designated.

Do you follow blogs with terrific ideas for saving money that haven’t been mentioned in our weekly “Best from the blogosphere. Share the information with us on http://wp.me/P1YR2T-JR and your name will be entered in a quarterly draw for a gift card.