RevoRetire isn’t a life annuity. The longest payout period available is 30 years.
I wouldn’t generally recommend that. An insurance company can provide some value in handling the unknown variable: lifespan. And that’s really where it’s best to focus precious premium dollars. Accumulated wealth appropriately invested and gradually drawn down works great for the earlier years. Insurance companies are pretty lousy values in terms of straight up investing — that part you can handle on your own.
SRS is fundamentally incompatible with early payout start because the minimum tax qualified withdrawal date for SRS is age 62. You can start that early with a SRS funded life annuity but no earlier, at least not without a penalty. (And you might not want to start at age 62, depending on your taxable income level.) Conceivably you could use SRS funds for age 62+ and buy a fixed payout term annuity to handle some number of years before age 62, but see above regarding trying to use an insurance company to accomplish rather plain vanilla investing goals.
Sure. Since they were born before 1958, they can join CPF LIFE any time up to about age 79 1/2.
It should be more than 20 years at least, but that's a good question to ask CPF. Please note it'll be level nominal payouts, with decreasing real purchasing power.
Or her; lifespan is not usually predictable.
That's a good idea, but I would still also look at whether choosing CPF LIFE combined with redeposits is more attractive in the circumstances.
Somebody got to clean tables.
Inflation is real, and it’s possible or even likely it matters. One typical scenario is that a member defers payouts when he/she is still working, and the deferral itself is an effort to try to combat inflation.
Do you seriously want to argue that elder poverty is not a problem in Singapore? You can argue with the government about that if you’d like. They’re convinced. I agree with the government on this one. Maybe we could quibble about the degree to which it’s a problem (number of people), but the government’s own behaviors betray the fact it’s a significant problem. There were multiple minimum age and bonus interest patches to the old scheme at something of a panic pace, as these programs go. Demographic changes in Singapore happened incredibly fast (notably longevity, birth rate), and then economic development happened really rapidly, too.
About 20 years is calculated from his drawn age at 62. The member deferred and is forced to commence drawdown at 70. With accumulated interest over the 8 years of deferment and introduction of extra interest and additional extra interest, the payout would easily go to above 100 yo. Of course payouts are nominal but does it really matter for one who has been deferring payout till being forced to?
Do we hear of many problems with those batches that have fixed payouts of about 20 years? The first batch have finished their payouts around 2006 and so have next 12 cohorts that should have finished their payouts about this year. Somehow those who managed to survive beyond 80 yo (then payout started at age 60) have their ways to fight inflation with the fixed and finite payouts of $442 for the cohort of 1998. Of course, those who had or no min sum, god bless them
No, I do not assume that Singaporeans wish a continuously decreasing, continuously less dignified, continuously more uncomfortable real standard of living during their golden years, however long those golden years last. And I do NOT assume that the longer those golden years last, the more reduced, the less dignified, and the more uncomfortable their lives should be.
That question is well settled. Civil societies simply do not tolerate their elderly citizens falling into destitution. Either individuals must be required to defend their risk of elder destitution themselves, the general taxpayer must bail them out, or some of both. (Some of both, in practice. Disabled orphans really exist, and then you can take it from there.) Inflation most definitely factors into the definition of the (real) level below which no citizen will be allowed to fall.foozgarden said:
Many older folks would think like my father?
My father was 90yo and had 100k plus in his savings account. He hardly spent more than $400pm. Yet he kept asking me why he can't draw out his RA of more than 100k plus in one go. Obviously the money would be of no use to him at all, even though he had no major health problems to enjoy life. Yet ........ we can't understand
