The Retirement Drawdown Question
I published this a year ago, but it still seems relevant so I wanted to put it back out there. -Jay A recent article from Yahoo Finance (The Risks of Spending Your Retirement) had an interesting take on issues related to drawing income from one’s nest-egg in...
The High Cost of ‘Free’ Money
We know – by the rule of 72 – that money growing at 7.2% will double in 10 years. So $100 pre-tax dollars grows to $200 in 10 years; and $75 after-tax dollars grows to $150 in 10 years. That’s their proof.
However, when that $200 is taxed at the same 25% rate, the qualified account ends up with – surprise – $150. There is no mathematical advantage to tax deferral.
The Paid-Off Home Myth
If I have $1,000,000 in an IRA – the reality is – I really only ‘own’ the after-tax equivalent – say $700,000 if my tax rate is 30%. The rest belongs to Uncle Sam – I’m just ‘holding’ it for him, temporarily. So if my account grows by 10%, my portion of that growth is $70,000, and my deferred tax liability (debt) grows by $30,000.
The Good, the Bad, and the Solution
If you didn’t know something as seemingly old and boring as life insurance could do all those things, perhaps it’s time to visit with your agent. Especially those of you in your 20s, 30s, and 40s should take a look into Indexed Universal Life – unless of course, you want to be sitting in an audience someday lamenting the fact that nothing good financially – happens to older people.
…So Why Do They Say That?
… the advisor lives in a world where all growth is taxed. I live in a world where no growth is taxed. In my world, the $1,400 ending balance would bear no tax liability whatsoever – in which case my original statement – “there is no mathematical advantage to tax-deferral” – is 100% true and accurate.
