Poll: monthly retirement income

[REWahoo]

I based my answer on my annual draw which includes I come axes I pay...

Some people hate paying income taxes so much they can't bear to say - or write - the words!

 

[exnavynuke]

I plan to be spending between $4-5k/month on average during the first few years of retirement so I selected $5k.

 

[almost there]

Forgot to add in SS.....

 

[2017ish]

I'm not quite sure what you are driving at with this. We are comfortably FIREd. My 1040 income can be pretty much what I want it to be. So it is really meaningless. What I decide to draw as "income" is what we spend.

If someone is pre-FIRE, then maybe you have a point.

Quite true. Due to Roth Conversions, we expect to have income for tax purposes of roughly twice the poll cap. We won't be spending that much--and if for some reason we wanted to, we could have a good number of years with zero taxes while still doing some minimal conversions. In that scenario, we would spend far more than the taxable income--at least until age 70.5...

Thus, the 1040 "income" will not mean much in real life once we retire.

 

[kitesurfer2]

A married couple each with their own SS income can get together up to $7,000 a month from SS alone.

I would like to see figures to back that up. anything is possible...hence why i'd like to see those figures you created.

 

[Mulligan]

Quite true. Due to Roth Conversions, we expect to have income for tax purposes of roughly twice the poll cap. We won't be spending that much--and if for some reason we wanted to, we could have a good number of years with zero taxes while still doing some minimal conversions. In that scenario, we would spend far more than the taxable income--at least until age 70.5...



Thus, the 1040 "income" will not mean much in real life once we retire.

I just simply responded to the literal question of income. And since I have a pension, that was easy to think in those terms. However, in reality what you stated is the ultimate reality. But even then converting to a question of what one spends has too many caveats also...paid home, free healthcare, discretionary dollars spent (of course that could be a separate thread in itself), etc...
But with that all said, I still find the these threads interesting anyhow.

 

[2017ish]

Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
A married couple each with their own SS income can get together up to $7,000 a month from SS alone.

I would like to see figures to back that up. anything is possible...hence why i'd like to see those figures you created.

From the social security website's FAQ regarding max lifetime earners:

What is the maximum Social Security retirement benefit payable?

The maximum benefit depends on the age you retire. For example, if you retire at full retirement age in 2017, your maximum benefit would be $2,687. However, if you retire at age 62 in 2017, your maximum benefit would be $2,153. If you retire at age 70 in 2017, your maximum benefit would be $3,538.

https://faq.ssa.gov/link/portal/340...um-social-security-retirement-benefit-payable We are close to this, but still not counting social in our planning; probably the safest course for anyone in this position ....

 

[molly312]

What you have in monthly income can be entirely different from the amount you spend.

 

[NanoSour]

I suppose technically my income is my $3318/month pension. I double this from my investments. Therefore, I have $6638/month to spend. In reality, over the past 36 months of ER I've spent $5469/month. So I guess I'm still a saver...even in ER.

 

[audreyh1]

Some people hate paying income taxes so much they can't bear to say - or write - the words!

So difficult to type on an iPad mini in vertical mode!

 

[dtbach]

The poll isn't what you SPEND, it's what you could draw from your investments. I'm in the >10K/mo part of the poll but that doesn't mean I will SPEND that much per month. When I travel I spend lots more, but when I'm home I don't. Don't make this too hard. . . .

 

[kcowan]

I answered it as income. What I spend is another poll.

 

[Looking4Ward]

Firecalc says I could pull around $10K a month out of my portfolio with a 95% success rate. But I don't spend anywhere near that much so I only pull enough to cover expenses.

 

[RobbieB]

Income is income, yeah you get taxed on that.

Spending is spending, dough that you blow.

This is not a hard concept?

 

[RunningBum]

Not a hard concept at all. Of course, on page 2, the OP says:

I was thinking of total dollars spent per month, either planned (pre-FIRE) or long-term averaged (post-FIRE), NOT including net worth increases.

emphasis mine. So who knows what he was thinking. He never gave a reason, just that it would be "interesting". "Income" for retirees is practically a useless measure, as you, RobbieB, are proof of. Me too. One can harvest CG losses and generate all kinds of cash to live on without it being income.


Anyway, I almost never answer these polls about personal financial situations, especially when the purpose isn't clear, and the options can and are interpreted differently by people.

 

[LOL!]

I would like to see figures to back that up. anything is possible...hence why i'd like to see those figures you created.

As noted 2017ish googled the easily found numbers from the ssa.gov web site. That is, I did not create the figures at all ... I just looked them up.

Also note that one doesn't have to be a "max lifetime earner" either. That's because only 35 years of SS-applicable wages are counted in the benefit formula. Back in the 1970's when I was working in high school, one didn't need particularly high income to hit the max.

Yes, it is true that only a small percentage of people will get the max. I am not one of them.

 

[2017ish]

...
Also note that one doesn't have to be a "max lifetime earner" either. That's because only 35 years of SS-applicable wages are counted in the benefit formula. Back in the 1970's when I was working in high school, one didn't need particularly high income to hit the max.

....

True--by "max lifetime earner," I [silently!] meant the 35 years.

We neither one will hit it, but DW will be very close and under current law, my welfare stipend would not be far behind her. A zero year or two (or close to it) doesn't really make that much of a difference--and definitely not worth working more for! Still, it amazes me that the system currently pays that much out to people who log the time at max and delay to 70.

 

[Major Tom]

I'm the poll starter. I am surprised at the somewhat uniform distribution, also I wish I'd put more choices above 10k to sort out the high rollers ...

There's not an insignificant number of people in the very first category either. How about splitting it up into <4K and <2K? Us poor people get no respect

OTOH, I quite enjoy being something of an outlier. If I began a poll for particularly low income retirees, then I might discover there are a fair few of us, and you know that Groucho quote about not wanting to join any club that would have him.....

 

[Nemo2]

If I began a poll for particularly low income retirees...

What means this word "income"?

 

[Major Tom]

What means this word "income"?

I think it's a grown-up form of an allowance, though I still think of it as me granting myself an allowance each month

 

[almost there]

A better question would be how much after all bill's and financial obligations are met. Example. $10K per month $4k after bills.
Or $7k per month, $5k after bills. LOL LOL Which would you rather have?
(You get the idea)
Also, some are set to go up over the years, while others go down......
Not an easy poll to answer.

 

[devans0]

I kept it simple. Income and draw for spending is $5300 /mo for two. Conversions for Roth and associated taxes are considered reinvestment, thus not accounted. SS will come later, when we reach 70.

That puts us at the 25% mark, here.

 

[meierlde]

So, if one's income is greater than one's spending throughout your retirement, you heirs are going to be very happy and rich? Lots of folks want to tailor their spending to what their means can reasonably provide over retirement. I think that's the MoneyMoustache idea, right?

Or you may be able to buy a named room at your favorite university, such as a class room, or perhaps more likley set up a scholarship.

 

[Luck_Club]

Originally Posted by JeffInSeattle View Post
So, if one's income is greater than one's spending throughout your retirement, you heirs are going to be very happy and rich? Lots of folks want to tailor their spending to what their means can reasonably provide over retirement. I think that's the MoneyMoustache idea, right?

Or you may be able to buy a named room at your favorite university, such as a class room, or perhaps more likley set up a scholarship.

One of the interesting facts I picked up touring the Newport mansions of the robber barrons Rockafella's caranagies, etc was that as they discussed the family histories it was often 3 or 4 generations of pretty strong wealth before reaching super wealthy. With zero taxes you could do that, now the government wants to make sure they get there half of the inheritance.

 

[GTFan]

Who cares about income? Poll expenses.