Advisors Expect Most Clients To Postpone Retirements

[mickeyd]

According to this article, there will much less ERing in the future. Where will we get new ER blood? I wonder how the upcoming sequestration due on 3/1 will alter this?

The biannual survey also found that advisors expect more than 33 percent of their clients will retire after age 68, and of this one third, 10 percent are expected to retire after age 71.

Of the financial advisors surveyed, more than one-third (35.2%) ranked accumulating enough assets for their clients’ retirement as their top concern.

Potential fallout from the “fiscal cliff” followed a close second, with 34.3 percent of advisors ranking it as their primary concern. The survey of 2,521 financial advisors was conducted in fall 2012, before action was taken on the fiscal cliff – automatic tax increases and federal spending cuts set to go into effect January 1, 2013.

Financial Advisors Expect Most Clients To Postpone Retirements

 

[Original Wally]

Bummer. I would have died in the saddle if I had to wait that long.

 

[W2R]

Glad I did not get an advisor, then!

I suspect that many advisors feel that most of their clients don't want to face reality, so they are not having them save nearly fast enough for retirement. That sounds like the advisors' fault, not their clients' fault.

 

[Stanley]

IMHO, those of us who have retired before 65 are rare. Those who retired before 60 are very, very rare. Despite the negative expectations, I still think there are many who will retire early and some who will retire very, very early. Good luck to all!

 

[ERhoosier]

IMHO Much of this is due to generational spending patterns. The recent economic downturn has contributed, but also current generation seems to have forgotten (or at least ignores) basic financial planning principles like building a 6mo cash "emergency fund". This is the age of NO pension, and LBYM has become a foreign concept. It may take a generation to learn how to deal with the "NO pensions" retirement system.

 

[Badger]

Would this improve this improve the stability of SS as more folks contribute longer and possibly more folks don't make it to draw benefits? Assuming, of course, that the funds aren't siphoned off and left with a useless IOU. Seems like I have heard this story (people not saving enough for retirement and/or living above their means) a few times over the last 10 years. So what's new?

Cheers!

 

[HighRoller]

Glad I did not get an advisor, then! .

Then or now.....

 

[cinman2000]

Glad I did not get an advisor, then!

+1
Think about how most advisers make their money. The more you make the more they make. Ours does not seem interested in helping us find a way to retire early, but rather tries to convince us that working longer is necessary (it may very well be. The pain of dying rich is not felt by advisers, but only by us.

 

[traineeinvestor]

Glad I did not get an advisor, then!

Another +1

However, I have to wonder:

1. whether the clients of the advisers surveyed are representative of the population as a whole - there will be plenty of people who have no adviser either because they don't have enough to interest the adviser or because, like many here, the do not feel they need one; and

2. there is no break down of the 43.1% who will retire before 67 - we just don't know what percentage of this group are or expect to be genuinely early retirees.

 

[Tyro]

Financial Advisors Expect Most Clients To Postpone Retirements

Think about how most advisers make their money. The more you make the more they make. Ours does not seem interested in helping us find a way to retire early, but rather tries to convince us that working longer is necessary (it may very well be. The pain of dying rich is not felt by advisers, but only by us.

Were there any figures on what age(s) the advisors expect to retire at?

Tyro

 

[Lazarus]

The advisors can take my advice. I have actually retired early. They seem to still be working.

 

[Midpack]

1. whether the clients of the advisers surveyed are representative of the population as a whole - there will be plenty of people who have no adviser either because they don't have enough to interest the adviser or because, like many here, the do not feel they need one;

You left off the blissfully unaware who also have no advisor? Some would say it's a large group...who may "retire" even later.

 

[Tyro]

You left off the blissfully unaware who also have no advisor? Some would say it's a large group...who may "retire" even later.

If at all.

 

[ziggy29]

Pfft. I've just moved my retirement date *closer* by a few years recently...

 

[timo2]

Would this improve this improve the stability of SS as more folks contribute longer and possibly more folks don't make it to draw benefits?

Cheers!

I think that is correct.

 

[ejman]

I think everybody else should work forever to continue to fund my SS and medicare and get off my lawn too!

 

[Midpack]

Would this improve this improve the stability of SS as more folks contribute longer and possibly more folks don't make it to draw benefits?

Yes, but not substantially. FICA taxes are withheld as long as you are working. However, you can work and take Soc Sec benefits beginning at age 62 (with tax penalties between age 62 and FRA unless income is very low), and you must take benefits at age 70 even if you continue to work.

Very few people don't "make it to draw benefits" - many will live beyond 70 and many others will take benefits at age 62 thru 70. **

** From SSA in 2010, less than 4% of the population aged 62–84 will never receive Soc Sec benefits. Late-arriving immigrants and infrequent workers composed around 90 percent of the never-beneficiaries. Only 5.7% of the 4% or 0.22% never receive Soc Sec benefits because they died without taking benefits.

 

[BuysToys]

I wonder how much the media "touting" of waiting until 70 to retire has rubbed off onto the advisors who participated in this survey? Is there any way to measure how much it has influenced their clientele's outlook?

 

[Tyro]

FICA taxes are withheld as long as you are working. However, .... you must take benefits at age 70 even if you continue to work.

I probly shouldn't ask (and may regret it) but is there any logic or rationale to this?

 

[Free To Canoe]

Very few people don't "make it to draw benefits" - many will live beyond 70 and many others will take benefits at age 62 thru 70. **

** From SSA in 2010, less than 4% of the population aged 62–84 will never receive Soc Sec benefits. Late-arriving immigrants and infrequent workers composed around 90 percent of the never-beneficiaries. Only 5.7% of the 4% or 0.22% never receive Soc Sec benefits because they died without taking benefits.

At 19-20 years old, there are about 99% that have survived.
At 62 there are about 84% that have survived. 15% of workers don't
make it to collect their SS.
My personal observation is that this 15% number should be higher.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/LEWK3_2009.pdf

 

[Alan]

IMHO, those of us who have retired before 65 are rare. Those who retired before 60 are very, very rare. Despite the negative expectations, I still think there are many who will retire early and some who will retire very, very early. Good luck to all!

I recently passed my 58th birthday, but I can always feel young by hanging out with the retirees at the gym since none of them retired in their 50's, and we often get invited to come along along to one or event or another, and love responding that we are too young, as the events in question are mostly for the over sixties.

I probly shouldn't ask (and may regret it) but is there any logic or rationale to this?

Probably not

70 is the age at which SS benefits have to be taken in the same way that 70.5 is the age that IRA withdrawals have to start. However, while there are penalties for not doing RMD's I would be surprised that SSA would come after you aggressively if you didn't claim SS at age 70.