I wrote the following on my Facebook business page last night (http://on.fb.me/e6ke8E):
Due to the magic of compound interest: if you have two 22-year-olds earning 12% on their money, the first contributes $2,000 annually for the first 7 years and the second contributes the same amount for the next 37 years – they both end up with $1,200,000 at age of 65.
I don’t know what else needs to be said here other than time cannot be made up by extra deposits. $2000 a year is only $167 dollars a month. How much is your cable? What would you rather have at the end of the day: nothing (maybe some good shows which you can download or stream for a fraction of the cost) or 1.2 million. Its unfortunate that most people will say cable. I don’t have cable. With all the free access to stuff online why the hell would I pay 166 dollars a month so I can sit 5hrs a day in front of Jerry Springer. I would rather have 12% (or even 5% or 8%) growth than 100% loss.
It’s doubly unfortunate, and I’m not mocking, that most people don’t think they can ever achieve that kind (or proportionately similar amount) of income. It’s just a matter of putting money into a well diversified, protected, and properly managed financial plan and waiting “x” amount of time. We accept limits much too easily I believe. Our limits are defined by our belief and nothing else; and our habits become dictated by that belief. It’s a human failing to accept the comfort of resignation over the assumed anxiety of effort. We should be putting the same sensibility to our financial health. The ‘wait-and-see’ attitude frankly takes way too much time. Act now and talk about a plan with your advisor. It is exciting and fun to see the possibilities that arise when you simply tweak a few lifestyle decisions. You actually have more money through a plan; you are not sacrificing your weekly coffee (unless its three a day). Discipline reveals your dreams; and, in this case, does not need to exist for long. Time and choice are not scary, they are opportunity.
Potential Dangers of RRSP. Yes or No?
January 29, 2011Though I am being a bit derivative by posting this I thought it was a very important consideration for those of you who rely solely on RRSP’s strategies for their source of future wealth. I had not previously come across this research, or this thesis, but I believe it to be worthy of note.
Very briefly, it suggests that we are all told to invest heavily in RRSP’s in order to earn investment gains and defer paying tax until much later in life, when presumably your marginal tax rate will be lower (i.e. when you retire and have less annual income). It claims that this will do the investor no good since your tax rate may not actually be lower in the future. Either you will retain enough disposable income to maintain your MTR, or the Government of Canada will continue to increase the tax rates. In either of these cases, it maintains, at retirement you will either see no taxable advantage or, in other cases, you may even lose money since your tax rate could actually higher than it was when you first begun making your contributions.
Yesterday (and coincidentally), I posted an article on Twitter (@nextgeninvestor) called “The Great RRSP//RRIF tax-grab” (http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/01/28/the-great-rrsprrif-tax-grab-one-ex-pats-solution/). This article spoke about this exact phenomenon. In this case, retiring Canadians realized that they would lose money on their RRSP withdrawals due to the fact that the promised-lower-tax-rate-in-retirement was, in reality, actually higher. They claim the Government new this and conveniently raised the tax brackets to take advantage of a huge amount of the population having a huge amount of money in RRSP’s that it was soon looking to withdraw. To combat this, the Reiterees actually withdrew everything, left the country, and became ex-pats. It is another interesting consideration.
Regarding these arguments, I will save my recommendations for a later time. At this point I will allow you to draw your own conclusions. I will say, however, that it says nothing of income splitting (that is transferring your RRSP deposit to the lowest tax paying spouse) and that it assumes a government increase in tax rates over time. Furthermore, I suppose that this would only effect those who are relatively close to the next tax bracket in the first place. For others, it would likely take a substantial increase in the rates by the Governenment to make it disadvantageous for them to not invest for a time when they will not be taking as much taxable income. Whatever the case may be, it does make a good argument against having all your retirement eggs in one basket.
Posted in Investment and Market Commentary, Research | Tagged Financial Health, Financial Post, Market, Personal Finance, TFSA, TIPS | 1 Comment »