6 years from ER and sky is falling help

[jollystomper]

I would keep the house and rent in the new location. The expenses would be higher but if your focus is on preserving your retiree health insurance that is probably the best option. Maybe try to cut spending in other areas as best as possible. I have also seen the "move and 12-24 months later be forced to resign with no severance" action happen often at my Megacorp. Given you are so close to RE you might just have to bite the bullet and deal with rental/travel expenses for the next few years.

 

[Scuba]

My first instinct was keep the current house, find a tenant, and rent in the new town. As long as what you pay in rent doesn't exceed what your tenant pays you, you're in an equivalent financial position and can move home in six years. Best of luck!

+1
Exactly my opinion

 

[Scuba]

You have to pay taxes on the rent of your house unfortunately. Don't forget.

Yes rental income is taxable but only if you generate a net profit. Once depreciation, property management, and other costs are considered, depending on your income, you may get a nice tax deduction while still generating positive cash flow.

 

[Scuba]

Regarding retiree healthcare, I agree that it's a very nice benefit. However there are many plans available for purchase so worst case if you lost that coverage, you could buy your own insurance. More expensive than retiree medical provided by employer. However many large corporations are buying out their retirees and eliminating their retiree coverage anyway so there is no guarantee that your employer will continue this benefit indefinitely.

 

[Olbidness]

Maybe you could move, live cheap and work in the new city until you find something in the old one within a couple years. It will slow you down but not knock you out.

+1

All of the above. I would let my present employer know I was planning on relocating for the new job and at the same time look for a job in the old city.
Rent something cheap in the new town while things become clearer. I would hold off renting or selling the present house until some decisions are made as to where you eventually end up. This is the time to horde cash and prepare to move. I've gone though this exact scenario twice. Came out better both times. It's hard to think of it as an adventure but that's what it is. Positive attitude.

 

[Brat]

$150T house would not buy a granny pad in most cities in the west.

Option 1: Keep your current home because you likely will want to move back when you retire. Rent it out, rent in your new location.

Option 2: Make a huge effort to find a job in your current area.

You really need to consider why your current employer is asking you to move. Are they closing the office for economic reasons? Do they need you more in the new location than in your current location? The first reason is troubling because it implies they are in a downsizing mindset.

I have heard of high tech employees who live in Portland but work in the Silicon Valley. They share an apartment with several other colleagues where they sleep weeknights returning home on the weekends. There is a reason why it is tough to find a seat on a before-dawn flight Monday mornings PDX-SJC, early evening SJC-PDX.

 

[pj.mask]

Sub 200k house sounds like we're on a low budget and not much room for a mistake. You probably don't have a few grand here or there as cushion. Also means your job isn't a high salary and likely you can replace it at either location.

With the new info - unless you are giving up a big severance package - if I were you I might keep my family where they are, find a 1br rental for a few months and job hunt back at the old location. But I have a few years savings set aside and am early in my career with 15+ years left to work. My basis for a decisions is will probably be aggressive, emotionally detached from location and property, and higher risk based on dollar amounts than you are willing to accept.

There are really a lot of additional details needed but this sounds really like a very emotional based decisions ("like" your house, "unicorn", etc). Realize that people go through setback all the time and make it either way - you will too.

People talk investments 'what will it take for you to sleep at night' - that is usually directed towards investments but apply that to living. There are relocation benefits usually when required to move. See what house hunting expenses are included and what restrictions are on them. Take 3-4 days to scope out the new town if you can - even if out of pocket (driving + motel 6 etc will total maybe $500) see if you can take emotions out of the decisions and look at it clearly as to what will matter long term and make a clear decisions.

 

[Yarnstormer]

It's not clear if your desire to stay with the company is because you will retire with benefits, or if you just want to keep the job. For me, if health care after early retirement was offered that's a biggie - I would rent out the existing house and try the new job. Find a rental in new city that compares to what you will get for your rental. Give it a shot! If you have lots of stuff and moving would be a nightmare then maybe job shopping is the solution.
I would not move 1000 miles unless there were a financial incentive, or a view of the beach included

 

[DrRoy]

Move 1k miles, rent, live CHEAP, and buy a new house in 6 years.

+1. This is what occurred to me also.

 

[pb4uski]

I think your best option is to take the move, rent an apartment there, rent out your owned house and absorb any difference in rent as part of the cost of the benefits that are increasing by staying with your current employer.

 

[FIREd]

Sub 200k house sounds like we're on a low budget and not much room for a mistake. You probably don't have a few grand here or there as cushion. Also means your job isn't a high salary and likely you can replace it at either location.

Careful with your assumptions. Before retirement we used to make a top 1% income and had a 7-figure portfolio while living in a sub $200K house (where we still live).

 

[pb4uski]

+1 but probably top 2% income, seven figure portfolio and our house was just a tad over $200k in our case. LBYM.

 

[kgtest]

I ran some numbers and determined I would be money ahead getting a home equity loan, converting it to cash and burning those $100 bills in my front yard, instead of moving.

Every time I'm more sure of DW in terms of a financial "win" I start to simultaneously pull out my lighter from one pocket and a Benjamin from the other.

My wife knows I will light that damn bill which usually results in a quicker resolution on disagreement

 

[IMATERP]

For what it's worth, I relocated at age 40 from DC to NC. My work and constant travel gave me no personal life as I was typically engaged in a new project at a moments notice. Never had one regret and I am happy that I relocated.

I value friends, community, and a low key modest lifestyle over making a lot of money. My wife and I live in a beautiful retirement community and all of our needs are met.

Anyway, I'm planning to walk away from work on Dec. 14, 2017 or April 16, 2018. This will be at age 57 which is 2 to 7 years past my original goals of 50 or 55.

I guess my advice is - it's alright to make plans, but don't plan the outcome. Look inward and figure out where you will be the most happiest.

Michael

 

[badatmath]

Yes, I am sure renting is that much more, give or take $100.

The office I work in is brand spanking new paint has barely dried. They are still moving people into it. The gist of it is that we have people who do my job in more than one location and they want to change that. Some folks think that we will get an exception because my job (IT) is kind of necessary to not get wiped out all in the same tornado. . .

And I have a lot of time with this employer so shocking to think it was all for nothing (in terms of the pension/health).

 

[badatmath]

I have to admit I take great comfort, perhaps more than average, in the fact the house is paid for. I feel it means I could always get by and not live in my car or something. . .

 

[brucethebroker]

I think your best option is to take the move, rent an apartment there, rent out your owned house and absorb any difference in rent as part of the cost of the benefits that are increasing by staying with your current employer.

+1
Or, stay put and if you can't find another full time job, part time it. (Just find a way to survive to 59-1/2, w/d some IRA/401-k money and make it to 62 and take early SS). Your income will be greatly reduced so you might just qualify for Obamacare w/subsidy. Can you cut some expenses if needed? Make it work.

 

[Brat]

Yes, I am sure renting is that much more, give or take $100.

The office I work in is brand spanking new paint has barely dried. They are still moving people into it. The gist of it is that we have people who do my job in more than one location and they want to change that. Some folks think that we will get an exception because my job (IT) is kind of necessary to not get wiped out all in the same tornado. . .

And I have a lot of time with this employer so shocking to think it was all for nothing (in terms of the pension/health).

You might suggest that it would be wiser to disperse IT professionals if for no reason other than the fact that one facility could be impacted by an outage of many types. Talk about it from a risk management point of view.

My daughter's employer prohibits more than one manager on a commercial flight or in a motor vehicle. Accidents do happen: she was on a business trip in early 2010 and happened to see a private aircraft crash - killing 3 Tesla managers. Now they also have more than one office.

 

[cyber888]

cyber888, how will you get health insurance in retirement?

Buy private insurance before reaching 65. I have already included that in my expenses calculation.

 

[Spock]

Yes, I am sure renting is that much more, give or take $100.

The office I work in is brand spanking new paint has barely dried. They are still moving people into it. The gist of it is that we have people who do my job in more than one location and they want to change that. Some folks think that we will get an exception because my job (IT) is kind of necessary to not get wiped out all in the same tornado. . .

And I have a lot of time with this employer so shocking to think it was all for nothing (in terms of the pension/health).

The "IT" job says it all. If you are "over 45", odds are low you will find another job in IT. My former company is relocating or retiring WFH employees and then laying off the ones that chose to relocate.

You stated earlier your primary concern is health insurance. Use the following calculator to see what your Obamacare costs would be. Note that you have to have a minimum income (interest, unemployment, IRA/401K withdrawals, etc) to get the subsidy.
https://www.healthcare.gov/lower-costs/qualifying-for-lower-costs/

 

[brett]

IF you are in IT, over 45, been with the company for some time chances are they will bring in an HR specialist firm. They do the math on salary, vacation, benefits, health, vacation and then cut the most expensive. Then replace them with someone younger, faster, and less expensive.

Or they outsource it.

I saw this during my years in IT and managing outsourcing sales and ops folks.

It happens so quickly.

Do some networking, get your resume updated, and see what is out there. You will never know until you shop.

 

[kcowan]

+1
I laid off a 62 year old and told him to contact the consulting companies. (I helped him write his resume.) He got hired on a contract basis and worked until age 68 when he retired. He told me it was some of the best years of his life!

 

[jollystomper]

Yes, I am sure renting is that much more, give or take $100.

The office I work in is brand spanking new paint has barely dried. They are still moving people into it. The gist of it is that we have people who do my job in more than one location and they want to change that. Some folks think that we will get an exception because my job (IT) is kind of necessary to not get wiped out all in the same tornado. . .

The phrase in bold set off warning bells from me. I have observed my Megacorp consolidating jobs doing the same function into one location... and then reducing or eliminating those jobs since they believe that with folks in one location, they can be better leveraged to support more with less... or easier to train others where the function can be outsourced. I would keep that in mind.

 

[brett]

My experience is that long term employees of large companies often get lulled in to a sense of security and company loyalty.

The company is NOT loyal to you. You can be replaced by someone cheaper, smarter, younger, and faster. So don't be loyal to a company.

Determine what is best for you and your family. Then move forward in that direction. I have terminated numerous people in my career. The ones that moved on the fastest, did the best, and were the happiest were the ones that understood this. Always be ready or the tap on your shoulder and make change work for you.

 

[badatmath]

Yep, all of you make some very good points! We use a mix of employees/contractors/offshoring now so I am not completely blind to that side of the world but still perhaps spoiled/lucky so far.

Insurance appears less than I expected but only one provider in my county . . .

I really need to think about this some more.