Why Retirement Spending Is More Art Than Science

September 11, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (8)

Retirement experts have long advocated a conservative approach to spending down retirement assets. That's to ensure people don't outlive their funds. The most common rate recommended is 4 percent a year, although 5 percent and even 6 percent are sometimes considered appropriate, depending on an individual's financial circumstances and health. In the real world, however, there are wild variations when it comes to how people spend their money.

[See 3 Ways to Get Your 401(k) Back on Track.]

Research on the spend-down patterns of retirees leaves some to be desired. Fidelity Investments says its 18 million customers spend down their assets at a rate slightly above 4 percent. But that's an aggregate average that masks wild variations in behavior. And even at Fidelity, which beats the drum of retirement planning loudly and regularly, only 20 to 25 percent of those 18 million customers have ever completed a retirement plan, let alone followed its recommendations.

At the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists James Poterba, Steven Venti, and David A. Wise have performed numerous retirement income studies, including looking into how people actually use their nest eggs. Before 401(k)'s, IRAs, and other self-directed retirement accounts began replacing traditional pensions, most people depended on the regular streams of income produced by pensions and Social Security. Individual decisions did not play a big role in retirement income.

[See the 10 Biggest Pension Failures.]

Now, of course, it's all about individual decisions. The three economists say that both their own research and their review of other studies show that people use their retirement assets as a piggy bank: They tend to break in only during emergencies and other shocks, such as divorce, the death of a spouse, or a serious health problem. Home equity, traditionally a retirement funding source, is used for such emergencies but otherwise not tapped (in other words, it's regarded as a personal rainy-day fund.)

Ditto for 401(k) and IRA assets. According to the economists, less than one quarter of all account holders withdrew assets from these accounts until required to take a minimum distribution at age 70½. And in later years, people take out less money than the accounts have earned. Even at advanced ages—up to the early 90s—people preserved their retirement assets. "Personal retirement plan assets, like home equity, seem to be husbanded in retirement—at least by many households."

The accumulation of retirement assets is interrupted by two major events: a change in family status and a change in health. People who experience a divorce or the death of a spouse also experience a big financial shock that can reduce their retirement funds for the rest of their lives. Two may not live quite as cheaply as one, but couples fare much better in retirement than singles.

Major health events are another significant factor that drives people to break into their nest eggs. The association between health and retirement assets "is striking," the economists found. People in the bottom 20 percent of the population in terms of their health had median assets only half those of people in the top 20 percent when the research period began in 1994. When it ended 12 years later, the least-healthy group had only one third the retirement assets of the healthiest group.

Joan Bloom, executive vice president for Fidelity Investments Life Insurance Co., said that the economists' findings were not surprising. If anything, they reinforce the need to plan. "Nobody likes to plan, particularly around money," she says. "It can be intimidating. It can be overwhelming. But the value in going through the pain of planning is that you really do understand what you can do." She emphasizes that planning is not a one-day-per-year exercise but something that must be more fluid. "You need to be constantly looking at what you're doing. It needs to be adjusted on an ongoing basis." And that 4 percent draw-down rate? Forget it, she says. "A static draw-down rate is not the right way to think about it. The process has to be more dynamic."

Bloom says that people should calculate their fixed expenses—mortgage, property taxes, utilities, insurance, and the like—and fund them with assets that produce fixed income streams. This can include Social Security, interest income from bonds, and annuities. Discretionary spending should be approached with a more diverse portfolio. Stocks historically have produced higher returns than other asset classes, but they are riskier holdings. Using stocks to fund part of your discretionary spending makes sense. You'll probably experience solid gains, but if you don't, you can cut your discretionary spending. It's also important not to underspend, she notes. What's the virtue of hoarding assets, she asks, if it means you don't make trips to visit your family?

Tags:
401(k),
retirement,
IRA

Reader Comments Read all comments (8)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

This is not overblown nor unstated, America's largest population in it's history has been robbed by the Congress' of the United States of North America - for decades, swindled by Wall Streeters - time and time again, and now abandoned by there live at home children - who do not want to work to support their aging parents. Those few who have remained solvent are now looking elsewhere for shelter and protection for there assets. IRS are close on their heels, with threats and coercive methods to governments of off shore countries. We as a nation have sold our birth rights, for cheap good made in other places. America's manufacturing base is gone and must be restored to assure any real recovery in the near future. Those who toiled in the fields, mines, factories, and offices, of the past, and paid their bills and unfair share of taxes; have also lost by robbery their work earned right to some years of peace and security; because they believed the lies of the conservative politicians, and there own invisibility as North American Citizens. September 11, chatter that too. Michael Milken helped to wake up a few more, and Maddoff scared the hell out the rest, and their Junks Bonds went floating down the toilet, not to mention a few Saving and Loan closings that we may be still paying off, because they liked Telecommunications so much; and just as we reached the golden parachute year – a world wide financial Real-estate inspired collapse. No, this is not overblown, it was just predictable, most of the wealth of our nation was stolen from us and many will have to work and pay more taxes; until, the day they die.

Mar Chand of CA 9:57PM September 22, 2009

I am 56 and my wife is 57. We both retired in 2009.

We have downsized our house and our stock holdings. We started 2009 at 80% stocks 5% cash and 15% bonds. This week we realocated our money. We are now 45% stock 45% bonds and 10% cash.

So I think there may be a lot of boomers that will sell stocks when they retire and buy bonds instead. There of course will be a lot that do not change a thing or go to all cash because of the bad market we are just coming out of.

For those that know something about financial planning or use a financial planner bonds will be a much larger % of their holdings than while they were working.

When you quit saving because you have retired you realize how important capital preservation is and bonds do a better job at that than stocks. Bonds will be more important in the next couple decades than they have in the past.

Gary of TX 12:18PM September 16, 2009

I don't know why this issue of the post-war boom generation retiring is so overblown. People will worry about anything given the opportunity. These people are working, paying taxes, buying stocks, and saving retirement funds. This will continue for the next 10 years. The global economy has massive numbers of people. It's illogical to think one generation or Americans dwarfs all others. I compare this to the Y2K drama. Nothing happened. I see nothing significant happening here either. Have some faith in people under 55.

Woodie of GA 11:33AM September 16, 2009

The Best Life

Philip Moeller, contributing editor for U.S. News Money, writes about achieving success and happiness in older age. He also is a research fellow at the Sloan Center on Aging & Work at Boston College.

advertisement

Our retirement readiness calculator will provide a rough idea of how long your retirement savings and income will last.


Latest Video

advertisement