monthly pension vs. lump sum
- Thread starter kbst
- Start date
FinanceDude
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 12,483
Do you have the option of a joint and survivor at 50% payout?
Is the pension COLA'ed? What is your wife's age?
Running_Man
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,844
How old is your wife? In general it appears to me the yearly payout is far superior and better than you could get with any annuity assuming your wife is within the 55-65 age bracket. A relatively "safe" 4 percent withdrawl rate on the 500K would result in 20K per year meaning you could/should use that as your retirement income level and increase with inflation and bank the remainder 28K less any taxes in savings for future years.
I calculate on my excel sheet if you assume 4% inflation 40% marginal tax on the amount over the inflated 20K each year that would be available for savings and ability to earn 5.5% on the balance that it will be 23 years before the $48,000 per year will be insufficient to meet the inflated 20K per year demand. At that time the balance assuming 5.5% after tax earnings on the after tax money would be 501K while the balance on the original 500K would be 361K. At a 6.3% after tax return is required for the balances after 23 years are equal, yet you would still be receiving the $48,000 per year from the pension, so I think you can see the 48K is a far greater value.
I calculate on my excel sheet if you assume 4% inflation 40% marginal tax on the amount over the inflated 20K each year that would be available for savings and ability to earn 5.5% on the balance that it will be 23 years before the $48,000 per year will be insufficient to meet the inflated 20K per year demand. At that time the balance assuming 5.5% after tax earnings on the after tax money would be 501K while the balance on the original 500K would be 361K. At a 6.3% after tax return is required for the balances after 23 years are equal, yet you would still be receiving the $48,000 per year from the pension, so I think you can see the 48K is a far greater value.
ziggy29
Moderator Emeritus
$48K annual pension? Will she marry me?
RetireeRobert
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Lots of good explanations already mentioned for $48K pension probably the good choice.
Another reason, if she takes the lump, then she and you have to worry about *managing* that lump or paying someone to manage it for you, and making it last the rest of her and maybe your lives.
Assuming the pension is from a large pension fund, it already has the professional management, which by the way is "free of charge", as her $48k pension is net of all fund management expenses.
Unless she is in ill health with very short life expectancy, or she is already 92 or something, the the lump amount promised does not live up to the $48k monthly pension.
One other thought---what is the funded ratio of the pension plan. That is, how fiscally sound is it? Assuming that checks out, go for the monthly. If there are serious questions on the financial well-being of the plan over the longhaul, then consider the lump.
Puzzley
Recycles dryer sheets
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 169
I will have this option as well, and one issue I have considered is that if my wife and I are both killed in an auto accident (as an example) 6 months after I retire, my monthly pension is gone... If, however, I take it as a lump sum, it's mine and my estate's to do with or invest as I will. Another issue is that should you need a large influx of cash, (due to illness, as another example) you won't be able to get it from the monthly payment, but you could tap the lump sum. Mine is a non-cola pension...
Life is a gamble I agree. One thing DW and I have done to cover this possibility is take out life insurance to cover this as I wil be taking the pension in a couple of years time, and also opting for a 25% survivor benefit as the difference is greater than the life insurance premiums.
In the example in this thread the choice is between $48k/year or $500K lump sum. I'm sure I would take the $48k/year plus take out life insurance. The amount of insurance needed will be dependent on the survivor benefit, which is one of the 1st questions asked.
There is that option with a lower annual payout ~ 40k
kbst
It isn't COLA'ed. She's 59 and will take the pension at 62.
kbst
FinanceDude
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 12,483
I'd take that option, just in case. Do you NEED the entire $40K or $48K to meet expenses?
Lots of options.
She's 59 and will take the pension at 62. 2 years after we retire. So the only way we could go wrong with the monthly pension is if inflation is very high?
kbst
hope not
kbst
FinanceDude
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 12,483
Well, SS is COLA'd to "some extent", and I guess we are assuming your have funds in the market, like 401K's or non-qualified mutual funds as an inflation hedge??
RetireeRobert
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Another thought is what other assets do you and DW have? If you will already be getting sufficient income to live comfortably without a pension for her, that might point you toward lump.
But just from a pure finanacial standpoint of maximizing total dollars to be received, all other things being equal, the $40k with survivorship or the $48k single life monthly pension both look better to me than the $500k lump.
How wouild you find out what the funded ratio is?
kbst
FinanceDude
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 12,483
It should be available from the folks who are running the pension plan, or maybe a quick call to HR.
Most banks are good at putting aside enough to meet their pensioner's ongoing payments.........
Bikerdude
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,901
Well, If you also have a $500K or 48K per year option that means with cash of 1 mil. for both of you your safe WR of 4% is 40K/yr. vs. 96K/yr. pension.
I would just save $56K/yr. to pay for unknown things or to build up an estate.
We don't really need it all as we will have ~120k income with ~80k expenses after 2 years. We are thinking seriously about taking the 50% surviver option as I'm 12 years younger.
kbst
The difference between the 2 options is $8k/year. Insurance policy to cover you for $500K may well be much less than that, I'd look into that before deciding. With 40k/year, and she dies you get $20k/year. If you get a $500K policy for $4k/year you still get equivalent of $20k/year but you have an extra $4k/year while she is still alive.
RetireeRobert
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
The pension plan should be issuing annual reports. Go to your HR dept. or to the pension plan administrator and ask. Or lots of times you can access these reports on the web.
The "funded ratio" refers to how many assets does the plan have in relation to promised retirement benefits in force. A plan 90-100% funded is strong. A few plans can conceivably be at over 100%. 80 to 90% is fair to middlin. If the ratio gets down in the low 70's, the 60's, the 50's, or even further south, I'd worry how/where money would come from in the future to get plan back on an even keel.
TeeRuh
Recycles dryer sheets
I'm looking at my Pension calculations to give some perspective (These could be different due to a QDRO 10 years ago).
Lump Sum = $380K
Single Life = $1,940 per month
100% Survivor = $1,708 per month
So compared to MegaTech your offer of $48K versus $500K is way more slanted towards taking the Annuity; whereas mine is not so much.
t.r.
Lump Sum = $380K
Single Life = $1,940 per month
100% Survivor = $1,708 per month
So compared to MegaTech your offer of $48K versus $500K is way more slanted towards taking the Annuity; whereas mine is not so much.
t.r.
I agree, these annual reports should be available. I'm surprised you have not received one as the pension protect act last year requires them I believe. The act also provides protection so you don't lose all your private pension in a financial melt-down.
The Pension Protection Act Of 2006
My wife's one of the few at the company that's grandfathered with the option of a monthly pension due to an earlier merger. That may be why it's slanted in that reguard.
kbst
donheff
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I would go with the pension with survivor benefits. That is what I did with my pension. It would be a shame if your wife got hit by a car a couple of years out. With a lump sum it would all still be there. With the annuity, 50% is still a decent amount. Check to be sure they don't offer a 100% option.
