Articles

FINANCIAL FACELIFT: Bob, 62, was laid off last year. Can he and Roberta afford to retire with the income they want?

0 Comments

Below you will find a real life case study of a couple who is looking for financial advice on how best to arrange their financial affairs. Their names and details have been changed to protect their identity. The Globe and Mail often seeks the advice of our VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager, Matthew Ardrey, to review and analyze the situation and then provide his solutions to the participants.

gam-masthead
Written by:
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published August 19, 2022

Bob had been planning to retire from his sales job this spring, but he was “packaged” – laid off with a severance package – early last year. His wife, Roberta, is planning to work until February, 2023. Bob is age 62, Roberta 59.

“With this unexpected transition, and change in income, we thought it was time for a financial checkup as we begin the next chapter of our lives,” Bob writes in an e-mail. Since he was laid off, Bob has been working part-time, which he enjoys.

Because the couple married late in life, they have had a number of major expenses over the past few years – buying their Alberta house for cash and spending a substantial sum renovating it, joining a country club and buying new vehicles. To pay for it all, they both made large withdrawals from their investment portfolios and “cleaned out” their tax-free savings accounts.

Bob, in addition to his defined benefit pension of $20,580 a year, is drawing Canada Pension Plan benefits of $12,000 a year, for a total of $32,580. Their retirement spending goal is $120,000 a year after tax.

“Can we retire as planned with our income target and not have any financial concerns?” Bob asks. How can they keep income taxes to a minimum?

We asked Matthew Ardrey, a financial planner and portfolio manager at TriDelta Financial in Toronto, to look at Bob and Roberta’s situation. Mr. Ardrey holds the certified financial planner (CFP), advanced registered financial planner (RFP) and chartered investment manager (CIM) designations.

What the expert says

“Looking at their situation, the first thing that jumps out is the significant amount of company stock Roberta owns,” the planner says. The shares in Roberta’s employer represents about 34 per cent of their total investable assets.

“Though the stock has been quite profitable for them, it represents a significant concentration risk in their investment portfolio,” the planner says. If something happened to Roberta’s company, it would have “major ramifications” on their ability to retire.

Including Roberta’s company shares in their investment asset mix, Roberta and Bob have about 79 per cent of their portfolio in stocks, 9 per cent in bonds, 8 per cent in equity alternative investments and 4 per cent in cash. “As they move into retirement, they will need to reduce their volatility risk and increase their focus on income,” the planner says.

Roberta is contributing the maximum to her RRSP and TSFA, which she has built up again. She is making no other savings. Bob is collecting his pension and has just started his CPP benefits.

To rebuild Bob’s TFSA, they asked whether a spousal loan from Roberta might make sense. Instead, the planner recommends an RRSP meltdown strategy in which Bob takes $20,000 a year from his RRSP from now to age 69. That would put him just over the lowest Alberta income tax bracket, which changes from 25 per cent to 30.5 per cent at $50,197 a year of income.

If Bob wanted to withdraw even more, he could do so at 30.5 per cent up to a limit of $100,392, at which point the tax rate would increase to 36 per cent. The planner’s forecast assumes Bob withdraws $20,000 a year and deposits it in his TFSA. Doing this for the next five years would enable him to catch up on his TFSA room, the planner says. Once he had contributed as much as possible, Bob could continue to contribute the annual maximum thereafter.

In 2023, when Roberta retires, she will have an additional $65,000 of income from her stock options and employee stock plan (based on the current stock price). “Thus, she would not start her RRSP meltdown until 2024,” the planner says.

“In 2024, I assume a $25,000 RRSP withdrawal for Roberta and a redemption of company shares of $50,000,” the planner says. Roberta will sell the company stock over 10 years to mitigate capital gains taxes and diversify the portfolio, he says.

Bob and Roberta assume they will live to age 95. Because of that and the meltdown strategies, the planner recommends Roberta wait until age 70 to take her CPP. This will increase Roberta’s CPP benefit by 42 per cent from age 65 and Old Age Security benefits for both of them by 36 per cent.

“This is an important consideration given their expected longevity and inflation,” which the planner estimates will average 3 per cent a year. The forecast rate of return on a balanced portfolio is 5.25 per cent before retirement, and 4.5 per cent after.

The annual fees on their investments average 1.22 per cent, excluding Roberta’s company shares. “They are being charged an account fee of 0.80 per cent, included in the 1.22 per cent,” the planner says. This 0.80 per cent fee is assumed to be on the company shares.

“I would suggest Bob and Roberta request that the fees on the Roberta’s company stock be waived,” the planner says. “I have clients in similar situations and do not charge for holding their company shares. It is a material expense – about $8,000 per year.”

Based on the above assumptions, Bob and Roberta likely can meet their retirement goal of spending $120,000 per year, the planner says. To be sure, he stress tests the projection using a Monte Carlo simulation, which introduces randomness to a number of factors, including returns.

For a plan to be considered likely to succeed, it must have at least a 90-per-cent success rate. If the rate is below 70 per cent, success is considered unlikely. Bob and Roberta’s simulation indicates a probability of success of 76 per cent.

They could benefit by further diversifying their portfolio, and potentially increasing their returns, by adding exposure to non-traditional asset classes such as income-producing, privately owned real estate funds, the planner says. These investments tend not to move up and down with the stock market. As well, they can be expected to offer higher returns than fixed-income securities such as bonds.

“Real estate investment trusts that invest in a large, diversified residential portfolio, or perhaps in specific areas like wireless network infrastructure, are preferable to REITs that have a large exposure to retail,” the planner says.

“By diversifying their portfolio, we estimate could achieve at least 5 per cent return net of fees (post-retirement) and significantly reduce the volatility risk of the portfolio.”

Many private real estate investments are tax efficient because their distributions are part or all return of capital, the planner says. “With this adjustment, the change in the Monte Carlo simulation would be material, moving up to a 97 per cent probability of success.”

Client situation

The people: Bob, 62, and Roberta, 59.

The problem: Can they still achieve their retirement goals even though Bob was laid off?

The plan: Bob begins to melt down his RRSP now. When Roberta retires, she does the same. She also begins to sell off her company stock. They take steps to improve their rate of return.

The payoff: All their goals achieved.

Monthly net income: $14,265.

Monthly outlays: Property tax $525; water, sewer $165; home and car insurance $375; electricity $170; heating $195; maintenance, security $120; garden $100; transportation $250; groceries $1,000; clothing $310; bank fees $75; gifts, charity $210; vacation, travel $3,000; dining, drinks, entertainment $1,050; personal care $300; club memberships $1,000; golf $400; hobbies $105; subscriptions $80; health care $200; health, dental insurance $300; communications $360. Total: $10,290. Surplus goes to RRSPs, TFSAs, health care and other unallocated expenses.

Assets: Her bank account $49,000; his bank account $40,000; her registered stock plan $36,000; her non-registered company stock $95,000; her non-registered investment portfolio $1,107,120; his portfolio $6,600; her TFSA $121,315; her RRSP $1,381,995; his RRSP $571,000; residence $850,000. Total: $4.25-million.

Want a free financial facelift? E-mail finfacelift@gmail.com.

Some details may be changed to protect the privacy of the persons profiled.

Matthew Ardrey
Presented By:
Matthew Ardrey
VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager
matt@tridelta.ca
(416) 733-3292 x230

FINANCIAL FACELIFT: Should Leo and Linda reboot their retirement spending plan to buy a bigger townhouse?

0 Comments

Below you will find a real life case study of a couple who is looking for financial advice on how best to arrange their financial affairs. Their names and details have been changed to protect their identity. The Globe and Mail often seeks the advice of our VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager, Matthew Ardrey, to review and analyze the situation and then provide his solutions to the participants.

gam-masthead
Written by:
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published July 10, 2022

In their early 50s, with well-paying executive jobs, Leo and Linda want to sell their two-bedroom Toronto townhouse and buy a larger one, which would mean taking on substantial new mortgage debt.

They have no children “and are in the sweet spot of our respective careers,” Leo writes in an e-mail. He grosses $200,000 a year while she makes $125,000. Their existing townhouse is valued at $800,000 with a mortgage outstanding of $180,000 that they plan to pay off in four years. They have some savings but no work pensions.

“Can we afford to upsize our house and still hit our retirement goals?” Leo asks. “Is it advisable to carry mortgage debt into retirement?”

Leo plans to retire from work at age 67, Linda at 65. They plan to travel extensively for the first few years. Their retirement spending goal is $120,000 a year. “This covers our typical living and spending patterns and would provide a sleep-at-night factor,” Leo writes.

We asked Matthew Ardrey, a vice-president and portfolio manager at TriDelta Financial in Toronto, to look at Leo and Linda’s situation. Mr. Ardrey holds the certified financial planner (CFP), advanced registered financial planner (RFP) and chartered investment manager (CIM) designations.

What the expert says

“First, we looked at a base case scenario where they did not buy a larger home,” Mr. Ardrey says. Each month, they save $2,000 to Leo’s RRSP and $1,400 to Linda’s. They save another $1,000 a month to Leo’s tax-free savings account. Each year, they have a surplus that also goes to savings. They spend about $9,500 a month on their lifestyle, plus another $3,400 on accelerated mortgage payments.

“In this scenario, we first assume from their surplus that they maximize their RRSPs,” the planner says. “Being in high tax brackets, this makes sense for their retirement.” The remaining surplus is assumed to be split between each of their TFSAs.

By 2026, Leo’s TFSA is maximized and by 2028, so is Linda’s, Mr. Ardrey says. They continue to make maximum annual TFSA contributions and any additional surplus is saved in a joint non-registered investment account.

Leo and Linda both spent part of their lives working abroad so they will have a slight reduction in their Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan entitlements. Some of the CPP benefits may be offset by other social security agreements.

Leo and Linda went into the recent tumble in financial markets fully invested in stocks. They have since pared their holdings to 60 per cent with the balance in cash. They intend to rebuild their stock portfolio in time. They’ve asked the planner to assume they are 100 per cent in stocks going forward while they are working.

“Though I did use their assumption, I do have concerns with them liquidating a substantial part of their portfolio during a downturn,” he says. “I feel that their asset mix may not have been appropriate for their risk tolerance.” Indeed, “history has shown us that one of the worst things you can do for your returns is to exit when the market goes down. Not only do you crystalize your losses, but you also often miss out on a good part of the market recovery.”

In preparing his forecast, Mr. Ardrey assumes Leo and Linda shift from 100 per cent in equities to a balanced portfolio of 60 per cent stocks and 40 per cent bonds when they retire. He assumes they live to age 95 and the inflation rate averages 3 per cent. They earn 6.01 per cent on their investment while they are working and 4.74 per cent after they have retired. Total assets at Leo’s age 65 are estimated to be $3.1-million in future dollars.

“Under these assumptions, they do not meet their spending goal,” the planner says. Leo runs into a shortfall at age 92. “When we run the Monte Carlo simulation, the result is only a 38-per-cent probability of success.” (A Monte Carlo simulation is a computer program that tests a forecast against a number of random factors.) For a plan to be considered likely to succeed, it must have at least a 90-per-cent success rate.

Leo and Linda could benefit by further diversifying their portfolio, and potentially increasing their returns, by adding exposure to non-traditional asset classes such as private real estate funds that are not correlated to the stock market, Mr. Ardrey says. As well, many private real estate investments are tax efficient because they have distributions that are part or all return of capital, he adds.

Real estate investment trusts that invest in a large, diversified residential portfolio, or perhaps specific areas such as wireless network infrastructure, are preferable to ones that have a large exposure to retail, the planner says.

For Linda and Leo to reach the likely to succeed range, they will need to not only improve their investment returns, but also reduce their spending in retirement to 90 per cent of their target; that is, from $10,000 a month to $9,000, “which is not unrealistic.”

In the second scenario, the planner looks at what would happen if Leo and Linda sell their current home and buy a larger one for $1.5-million. They would need to take on a mortgage of about $870,000.

“It’s not surprising that the larger home purchase further impairs their ability to retire as planned.” They face their first shortfall at Leo’s age 81. The Monte Carlo simulation shows only a 6-per-cent probability of success.

To reach the likely area in the Monte Carlo simulation, they would need to improve their investment returns and also reduce their retirement spending to 60 per cent of their target, the planner says. This would be a material change in their lifestyle. “Linda and Leo must decide what is more important to them, a larger home or a larger lifestyle.”

Unfortunately, there is no magic bullet when it comes to retirement planning, Mr. Ardrey says. “If the plan is not working, we have to look to higher returns, an increase in the amount and duration of savings or a reduction in spending.”

With the increasing cost of housing in Canada’s major cities, the decision facing Leo and Linda is the one facing many Canadians, the planner says: their house or their lifestyle.

Client situation

The people: Leo, 55, and Linda, 52

The problem: Can they afford to buy a bigger house without jeopardizing their retirement spending goal?

The plan: Give up the idea of upsizing and taking on debt. Take steps to improve investment returns and lower expectations for retirement spending from $10,000 a month to $9,000.

The payoff: Understanding their financial limitations, which will help them feel more satisfied with what they have.

Monthly net income: $19,870

Assets: Bank account $30,000; his TFSA $13,000; her TFSA $1,000; his RRSP $225,000; her RRSP $300,000; residence $800,000. Total: $1.37-million

Monthly outlays: Mortgage $3,400; property tax $250; home insurance $50; electricity, heat $250; maintenance $1,050; transportation $600; groceries $1,300; clothing $300; car loan $700; vacation, travel $1,200; dining out $1,000; entertainment $1,000; other personal $1,000; health care $225; health, disability insurance $250; communications $350; RRSPs $3,400; RESP for niece and nephew $350; TFSAs $1,000. Total: $17,675

Liabilities: Mortgage $180,000 at 3.17 per cent; car loan zero per cent $9,000. Total: $189,000

Want a free financial facelift? E-mail finfacelift@gmail.com.

Some details may be changed to protect the privacy of the persons profiled.

Matthew Ardrey
Presented By:
Matthew Ardrey
VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager
matt@tridelta.ca
(416) 733-3292 x230

FINANCIAL FACELIFT: Can Brandon and Michelle achieve financial independence in six years’ time?

0 Comments

Below you will find a real life case study of a couple who is looking for financial advice on how best to arrange their financial affairs. Their names and details have been changed to protect their identity. The Globe and Mail often seeks the advice of our VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager, Matthew Ardrey, to review and analyze the situation and then provide his solutions to the participants.

gam-masthead
Written by:
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published May 6, 2022

Inspired by the FIRE movement, Brandon and Michelle – both in their mid-30s – have built a portfolio of income-producing properties and dividend-paying stocks they hope will free them soon from having to work. Characterized by extreme saving and investing, FIRE stands for “financial independence, retire early.” It helps if you earn a good income.

Brandon earns $127,000 a year plus bonus and employer pension plan contributions, while Michelle earns $92,000 a year. Their combined employment income totals $238,000.

Michelle has a defined benefit pension plan partly indexed to inflation. They have two children, ages one and three.

Their aspirational goal is to “become financially independent, non-reliant on employment income, before 40,” Brandon writes in an e-mail. Ideally, they could live off their dividends and rental income. Their more realistic goal, perhaps, is to have enough rental and dividend income to allow them to work part-time – “resulting in about 50 per cent of current pay” – in five years or so, Brandon writes.

Their retirement spending goal is $120,000 a year. Achieving it on half the salary will be a challenge.

“When can our passive income cover our expenses?” Brandon asks.

We asked Matthew Ardrey, a vice-president and portfolio manager at TriDelta Financial in Toronto, to look at Brandon and Michelle’s situation. Mr. Ardrey holds the certified financial planner (CFP), advanced registered financial planner (RFP) and chartered investment manager (CIM) designations.

What the expert says

Brandon and Michelle are looking to pull back from full-time work in mid-2028, Mr. Ardrey says. “Before engaging in what would seem like a pipe dream for many Canadians in their mid-30s, they want to ensure they are on secure financial footing,” the planner says.

In addition to their principal residence, they have four rental properties. They also rent out an apartment in their home. Their rental properties generate $1,100 a month, net of all expenses including mortgage payments, and the unit in their home another $1,600 a month. Brandon earns $400 a month for managing a relative’s rental property.

Dividend income from their non-registered accounts is about $2,500 a year, Mr. Ardrey says. Brandon’s $15,000 of employer-matched contributions is going to a defined contribution pension plan. As well, they maximize their tax-free savings accounts and contribute $2,500 per child to their registered education savings plans each year. They have no unused contribution room in their registered plans.

“After all of these savings and their spending, they still have a $50,000 a year surplus, which they put toward non-registered savings,” the planner says. He assumes they divide this surplus 50/50 to maximize tax efficiency. “This amount grows annually at a projected 4.9 per cent rate until they reach semi-retirement and have to use some of it to supplement their lower income,” Mr. Ardrey says. Inflation is projected at 3 per cent.

In mid-2028, he assumes Michelle and Brandon reduce their work by 50 per cent. Brandon will be 39, Michelle 41. Brandon’s bonus and employer contributions to his DC plan end. Michelle’s DB pension contributions drop by half. Brandon is assumed to maximize his RRSP each year based on 50 per cent of his current salary.

Adjusted for inflation, Brandon will be earning $78,000 a year and Michelle $56,000. They’ll have $3,000 in dividend income, $6,000 in property management income and gross rental income of $93,000.

At the same time, their spending is forecast to increase, the planner says. “They feel that in another five years’ time, things will be drastically more expensive. As well, less work will provide more leisure time and increased expenses. Thus, they have requested we estimate spending of $10,000 per month starting when they semi-retire in 2028 and continuing thereafter, adjusted for inflation.”

They will still be about 17 years away from full retirement. They continue working part time until Michelle is 58, when she can get an unreduced pension. “At this point we assume they move to full retirement,” Mr. Ardrey says. Michelle will be entitled to an estimated pension of $37,845. Her pension is indexed 60 per cent to inflation, or 1.8 per cent.

In their first full year of retirement, Michelle’s pension will have risen slightly to $38,526, property management income $10,000 and gross rental income $154,000. The mortgages will be paid off.

At age 65, they will start collecting Canada Pension Plan benefits (estimated at 70 per cent of the maximum) and full Old Age Security. “Under these assumptions, they meet their retirement spending goal of $120,000 a year after tax,” Mr. Ardrey says.

“However, when we stress test the scenario under the Monte Carlo simulator, their probability of success drops to 77 per cent, which is in the ‘somewhat likely’ range of retirement success,” he says. A Monte Carlo simulation introduces randomness to a number of factors, including returns, to test the success of a retirement plan. For a plan to be considered “likely to succeed” by the program, it must have at least a 90 per cent probability of success.

“Looking at their portfolio construction, it is great for accumulation, but the inherent volatility of an all-equity portfolio is less desirable for drawdowns,” Mr. Ardrey says. They have a portfolio of exchange-traded funds with a geographic breakdown of 55 per cent U.S., 25 per cent international and 20 per cent Canadian.

As they approach semi-retirement, Brandon and Michelle could benefit by diversifying their portfolio by adding some non-traditional, income-producing investments, such as private real estate investment trusts that invest in a large, diversified portfolio of residential properties, or perhaps in specific areas such as wireless network infrastructure, mainly in the United States, the planner says. Such investments are not affected by ups and downs in financial markets.

“By diversifying their portfolio, we estimate they could add at least one percentage point to their overall net return – taking it to 5.9 per cent – and significantly reduce the volatility risk of the portfolio.” In conclusion, Brandon and Michelle are on track to achieve something only most Canadians can dream of,” Mr. Ardrey says, “semi-retirement by their early 40s and full retirement before 60.”

Client situation

The people: Brandon, 33, Michelle, 35, and their two young children.

The problem: Can they achieve financial independence in six years’ time, allowing them to work part-time and still spend $120,000 a year?

The plan: Keep saving and investing. Go part-time in 2028 and retire fully at Michelle’s age 58, when she gets her pension. Add some non-traditional, income-producing assets to their investments as they approach retirement.

The payoff: Plenty of time off to reap the benefits of their hard work while they are still relatively young.

Monthly net income: $13,910

Assets: Cash $14,000; exchange-traded funds $100,000; his TFSA $153,000; her TFSA $127,000; his RRSP $154,000; her RRSP $44,000; market value of his DC pension $188,000; estimated present value of her defined contribution pension $125,000; registered education savings plan $46,000; rental units $915,000; residence $605,000. Total: $2.47-million

Monthly outlays: Residence mortgage $1,700; property tax $385; water, sewer, garbage $145; home insurance $70; electricity, heat $255; maintenance $200; transportation $435; groceries $900; child care $415; clothing $230; gifts, charity $375; vacation, travel $300; dining, drinks, entertainment $555; personal care $50; pets $80; sports, hobbies $30; health care $75; communications $130; his DC pension plan $1,000; RESP $415; TFSAs $1,000; her DB pension plan contributions $1,000. Total: $9,745. Surplus $4,165

Liabilities: Residence mortgage $428,000; rental property mortgages $707,000. Total: $1,135,000

Want a free financial facelift? E-mail finfacelift@gmail.com.

Some details may be changed to protect the privacy of the persons profiled.

Matthew Ardrey
Presented By:
Matthew Ardrey
VP, Wealth Advisor & Portfolio Manager
matt@tridelta.ca
(416) 733-3292 x230

TriDelta Financial Webinar – Investing in Real Estate – Hear From the Experts – April 20, 2022

0 Comments

Real estate is a hot topic frequently discussed in the media and in conversation. Will the price of my home continue to rise? How will rising interest rates influence the market? What sectors of real estate are poised to outperform?

TriDelta is pleased to welcome 3 leading industry experts in Real Estate who will share their thoughts on strategy and outlook for the future. On Wednesday April 20th we were joined by Greg Romundt, President & CEO of Centurion Asset Management, Dave Kirzinger, Chairman of Rise Properties, and Corrado Russo, CFA, MBA, Managing Partner & Head of Global Securities of Hazelview Investments. These 3 speakers have over 75 years of combined experience investing in Real Estate and over $8 billion of assets under management.

Hosted by:
Ted Rechtshaffen, MBA, CIM, CFP, President and CEO, TriDelta Financial

↓