Wouldn't it be prudent to adjust it every year - spend more after high returns, spend less after poor returns? No plan is going to survive a 30 year retirement without some adjustments.
@@j.frankparnell3087or another option could be to let the good return years pay for some of the down years so income doesn't have to fluctuate as much each year. I like the idea of having a more consistent spend rate rather than feast and famine depending upon markets in the previous year. I also realize this would probably depend upon the preferences of the person so to each his own.
Yes….i travel more and splurge the following year after a big market year. I don’t feel the need to spend large every year anyways. I’ll let the market decide for me …kinda
Yes…Im most happy at home but my wife and I still have a bucket list. If there’s a 2 year downturn in the market I’ll wait it out cause it always recovers. It’s worked well for us.
Too bad he is already taking CPP and OAS. Normally if you do an RRSP meltdown you would delay these until 70. Also does he have any other assets like a house? Looks like he could have retired younger too.
Hi - one comment that I would like to make. In the end the 5.62% rate of return was the average over the next 23 years. Just because 2024 was a good year market wise should you really adjust your plan after one year of good returns? Next year or the year after you could very easily experience a market correction causing a swing the other way. I would suggest if Neil has the money he needs his plan goes into a watch state over the next 2-4 years to see the trend ... If no correction happens and he continues outpacing the 5.62% average rate of return assumption then changes should be made. Neil should be given some options to think about and decide on. For instance he could opt to withdraw more from his RRIF (raising his income target) on an annual basis or maybe take some risk off the table since he clearly has more than enough lifetime assets to meet all his needs.
Reducing risk would probably be a good idea. A 25% return would indicate close to 100% allocation in equities. Some would say that's a pretty risky asset allocation for a 67 year old in retirement.
Isn't the OAS clawback effectively an additional 15% tax. Why not take out more, pay the clawback and reduce the final amount which could be taxed at 50%.
A +25% performance this year could be followed by a -30% the next year. How can you be so sure you need to adjust the meltdown so early?
Wouldn't it be prudent to adjust it every year - spend more after high returns, spend less after poor returns? No plan is going to survive a 30 year retirement without some adjustments.
@@j.frankparnell3087or another option could be to let the good return years pay for some of the down years so income doesn't have to fluctuate as much each year. I like the idea of having a more consistent spend rate rather than feast and famine depending upon markets in the previous year. I also realize this would probably depend upon the preferences of the person so to each his own.
Yes….i travel more and splurge the following year after a big market year. I don’t feel the need to spend large every year anyways. I’ll let the market decide for me …kinda
@@RC-fh2lk and so does that mean in years of negative returns you also cut down spending?
Yes…Im most happy at home but my wife and I still have a bucket list. If there’s a 2 year downturn in the market I’ll wait it out cause it always recovers. It’s worked well for us.
Too bad he is already taking CPP and OAS. Normally if you do an RRSP meltdown you would delay these until 70.
Also does he have any other assets like a house?
Looks like he could have retired younger too.
Hi - one comment that I would like to make. In the end the 5.62% rate of return was the average over the next 23 years. Just because 2024 was a good year market wise should you really adjust your plan after one year of good returns? Next year or the year after you could very easily experience a market correction causing a swing the other way. I would suggest if Neil has the money he needs his plan goes into a watch state over the next 2-4 years to see the trend ... If no correction happens and he continues outpacing the 5.62% average rate of return assumption then changes should be made. Neil should be given some options to think about and decide on. For instance he could opt to withdraw more from his RRIF (raising his income target) on an annual basis or maybe take some risk off the table since he clearly has more than enough lifetime assets to meet all his needs.
Reducing risk would probably be a good idea. A 25% return would indicate close to 100% allocation in equities. Some would say that's a pretty risky asset allocation for a 67 year old in retirement.
If you are in the high tax bracket during your retirement, would this still be important?
Isn't the OAS clawback effectively an additional 15% tax. Why not take out more, pay the clawback and reduce the final amount which could be taxed at 50%.