/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/3TUHUCAOKNCXLPZIHDWRC67PFU.JPG)
Her existing portfolio is a mixture of ETFs and mutual funds with an asset mix of 48-per-cent stocks and 52-per-cent cash and fixed income.
Fred Lum/The Globe and Mail
At the age of 60, Lucinda is going from being without contract work and collecting the Canada Emergency Response Benefit to wondering how to invest and manage about $1.5-million – the net proceeds from her house sale in downtown Toronto. The deal, for a total of $1.7-million, is set to close in September.
“The [COVID-19] pandemic accelerated my decision to sell my house in case of a significant drop in housing prices,” Lucinda writes in an e-mail, and because contract work in communications is now hard to come by.
“I fear I won’t be able to find work anymore, meaning I might need to cut into my savings, which I wanted to avoid. So now I need guidance on how to map out my retirement savings strategically,” she adds.
“My plan had been to take a few months off to attend to house repairs and then look for another contract in the spring,” Lucinda writes. “Then the pandemic hit and the contracting job market – combined with my experience level – led me to conclude it may take a very long time, if ever, for me to be employed again.”
She has no plans to buy another place and has rented an apartment for September. A key goal is to help her daughter, her only child, who has just graduated from university, to get established.
A self-directed investor who uses a mixture of mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, Lucinda wonders how best to structure her investments to last a lifetime. She also wants to leave as much as possible to her daughter. She wonders, too, when to begin collecting Canada Pension Plan benefits. Her target retirement spending goal is $45,000 a year after tax.
We asked Matthew Ardrey, a vice-president and portfolio manager at TriDelta Financial Partners in Toronto, to look at Lucinda’s situation.
“Like many Canadians these days, Lucinda’s working life has been cut short by COVID-19,” Mr. Ardrey says. “So taking stock of her financial picture today and where it is going in the future is a prudent exercise.”
Lucinda estimates she will net $1,474,000 from her house sale after she pays off her mortgage and covers closing costs, the planner says. Her existing portfolio is a mixture of ETFs and mutual funds with an asset mix of 48-per-cent stocks and 52-per-cent cash and fixed income. The stocks are slightly overweight to Canada, but are otherwise well diversified geographically, he says.
“The historical returns on her portfolio asset mix are 4.39 per cent, with investment costs of 0.79 per cent, leaving her with a net return of 3.6 per cent,” Mr. Ardrey says. If inflation is assumed to be 2 per cent, this leaves her with 1.6 per cent above inflation, he adds.
If Lucinda sticks to her modest spending target of $45,000 a year to the age of 90, she would leave an estate of about $2.4-million in 2050, the planner says. She could spend another $42,000 every year before exhausting her capital. “That being said, I would not recommend this level of spending unless it is nearer to the end of her life, because there is no real estate to fall back on as a cushion.”
Lucinda has expressed concern about the direction of the stock market and low returns on fixed-income securities, the planner says. “She certainly has justification for her concerns.” The five-year Canadian government bond yield is a scant 0.31 per cent. “Though bond [prices] have had a great 2020 so far, in part due to interest-rate cuts, the long-term future of this asset class is definitely in question,” Mr. Ardrey says.
First off, Lucinda may want to look to an actively managed bond fund portfolio with solid yields that she can continue to hold for the coupons (interest payments), Mr. Ardrey says. Actively managed funds tend to do better in difficult markets. She is holding bond ETFs, most of which passively track market indexes.
With her increased wealth, Lucinda should consider hiring an investment counselling firm, which is required by law to act in the best interests of its clients, he says. (For a list of such firms, see the Portfolio Management Association of Canada website at https://pmac.org/.)
These firms can “create a strategy for her that will provide solid, ongoing income from both traditional and alternative asset classes,” the planner says. He recommends an asset mix of 50-per-cent equities, 20-per-cent fixed income and 30-per-cent alternative income – a class that includes funds that invest in private debt and income-producing real estate. The addition of alternative income investments, which do not trade on public markets, has the potential to boost fixed-income returns while offsetting the volatility of stock markets.
“The next couple of years will continue to be volatile in stocks,” he says. “But if she can ignore the volatility and focus on the dividend payments, she can use that income to pay for her lifestyle (with government benefits) without drawing on her capital.”
Lucinda should invest her new capital gradually, especially when it comes to buying stocks, Mr. Ardrey says. “I would not want to see Lucinda invest a substantial amount of capital, only to have the markets fall 20 per cent the following month.”
As for when to start taking Canada Pension Plan benefits, the planner suggests Lucinda wait until she is 65. “If Lucinda took her CPP at age 60, she would get $7,848 a year. So by the time she turned 74, she would have collected a cumulative total of $109,872 ($7,848 multiplied by 14 years).”
If she waited until age 65, Her CPP would be $12,144 a year. In 9 years, she would have collected $109,296.
“So, if Lucinda lives beyond age 74 and a few months, she would be better off taking CPP at age 65 than 60,” the planner says. Getting the larger amount starting at 65 would overtake the advantage of getting the smaller amount earlier starting in her 74th year, he adds.
The person: Lucinda, 60, and her daughter, 26.
The problem: How to invest the proceeds of her house sale to last a lifetime and leave an inheritance for her daughter. When to take CPP.
The plan: Start CPP at 65. Consider hiring a professional investment counselling firm. Enter the stock market gradually. Consider actively managed bond funds and alternative fixed-income investments to potentially boost returns and lower volatility.
The payoff: The comfort of knowing she may be able to spend a little more than she plans and still leave a substantial estate.
Monthly net income (budgeted): $3,750.
Assets: Bank accounts $52,000; mutual funds $48,400; TFSA $61,500; RRSP $374,600; net proceeds of house sale $1.5-million. Total: $2-million.
Monthly outlays (forecast): Rent $1,650; home insurance $15; electricity $50; transportation $150; groceries $400; clothing $50; vacation, travel $300; personal discretionary (dining, entertainment, clubs, personal care) $500; health care $230; phone, TV, internet $90; miscellaneous future discretionary spending $315. Total: $3,750.
Liabilities: None.
Want a free financial facelift? E-mail finfacelift@gmail.com.
Some details may be changed to protect the privacy of the persons profiled.
Be smart with your money. Get the latest investing insights delivered right to your inbox three times a week, with the Globe Investor newsletter. Sign up today.
Canadian investors might come across a lot of arguments out there for or against index funds and stocks. When it comes to investing, some might believe clicking once and getting an entire index is the way to go. Others might believe that stocks provide far more growth.
So let’s settle it once and for all. Which is the better investment: index funds or stocks?
Index funds can be considered a great investment for a number of reasons. These funds typically track a broad market index, such as the S&P 500. By investing in them you gain exposure to a diverse range of assets within that index, and that helps to spread out your risk.
These funds also tend to have lower expense ratios compared to an actively managed fund. They merely passively track an index rather than a team of analysts constantly changing the fund’s mix of investments. This means lower expenses, and lower fees for investors.
Funds also tend to have more consistent returns compared to individual stocks, which can see significant fluctuations in value. You therefore may enjoy an overall market trending upwards over the long term. This long-term focus can then benefit investors from the power of compounding returns, growing wealth significantly over time.
That doesn’t mean that stocks can’t be a great investment as well. Stocks have historically provided higher returns compared to other asset classes over the long run. When you invest in stocks, you’re buying ownership of stakes in a company. This ownership then entitles you to a share of the company’s profits through returns or dividends.
Investing in a diverse range of stocks can then help spread out risk. Whereas an index fund is making the choice for you, Canadian investors can choose the stocks they invest in, creating the perfect diversified portfolio for them.
What’s more, stocks are quite liquid. This means you can buy and sell them easily on the stock market, providing you with cash whenever you need it. What’s more, this can be helpful during periods of volatility in the economy, providing a hedge against inflation and the ability to sell to make up income.
In some jurisdictions as well, even if you lose out on stocks you can apply capital losses, reducing overall tax liability in the process. And while it can be challenging, capital gains can also allow you to even beat the market!
I’m sure some people won’t like this answer, but investing in both is definitely the best route to take. If you’re set in your ways, that can mean you’re losing out on the potential returns which you could achieve by investing in both of these investment strategies.
A great option that would provide diversification is to invest in strong Canadian companies, while also investing in diversified, global index funds. For instance, consider the Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap Ex Canada Index ETF Unit (TSX:VXC), which provides investors with a mix of global equities, all with different market caps. This provides you with a diversified range of investments that over time have seen immense growth.
This index does not invest in Canada, so you can then couple that with Canadian investments. Think of the most boring areas of the market, and these can provide the safest investments! For instance, we always need utilities. So investing in a company such as Hydro One (TSX:H) can provide long-term growth. What’s more, it’s a younger stock compared to its utility peers, providing a longer runway for growth. And with a 3.15% dividend yield, you can gain extra passive income as well.
Former chief executive officer of RBC Dominion Securities Tony Fell is campaigning to require the Canadian financial industry to account for inflation in how it reports investment returns.Neville Elder/Handout
While the average Canadian is fixated on the price of gasoline and groceries, inflation may be quietly killing their investment returns.
Compounded across many years, even modest inflation can deal a powerful blow to a standard investment portfolio. And investors commonly underappreciate the threat.
But a legend of the Canadian investment banking industry is trying to change that.
Tony Fell, the former chief executive officer of RBC Dominion Securities, is campaigning to require the Canadian financial industry to account for inflation in how it reports investment returns.
“I think they will find this very hard to argue against,” he said in an interview. “It’s a matter of transparency and reporting integrity. But that doesn’t mean it will happen.”
Mr. Fell made his case in a recent letter to the Ontario Securities Commission, arguing that Canadian investors are being misled. He has not yet received a response from the regulator.
Canadians with an investment account receive a statement at least once a year detailing how their investments have performed. For the most part, rates of return are calculated on a nominal basis, meaning they have no inflation component factored in.
A real return, on the other hand, accounts for the hit to purchasing power from rising consumer prices.
These figures, Mr. Fell argues, would give investors a clearer picture of how much they have gained from a given investment.
And since Statistics Canada calculates inflation on a monthly basis, the investment industry would already have access to the data it needs to make the switch to real returns. It would be very little trouble and no extra cost, Mr. Fell said.
Still, he said he expects the investment industry will resist his proposal. “The mutual-fund lobby is so strong, and nobody wants to rock the boat too much.”
He points to the battle to inform Canadians of the investment fees they pay. For 30 years, investor advocates have been pushing for improvements to disclosure.
One major set of regulatory changes, which took effect in 2016, required financial companies to disclose how much clients paid for financial advice.
But the reforms left out one major component of mutual-fund fees. The cost of advice is there, but many investors still don’t see how much they pay in fund-management fees, which amount to billions of dollars paid by Canadians each year.
Total cost reporting, which should finally close the fee-disclosure gap, is set to come into effect in 2026. “It’s outrageous,” Mr. Fell said. “That should have been done years ago.”
So, it’s hard to imagine the industry warmly receiving his proposal, or the regulators enthusiastically pushing for its consideration.
The OSC said it agrees that retail investors need to be attuned to the effects of inflation, which is where investment advisers come in. “Professional advice requires an assessment of risk tolerance and risk appetite in order for an adviser to know their client, including the effect of the cost of living on achieving their financial objectives,” OSC spokesman Andy McNair-West said in an e-mail.
And yet, Mr. Fell said, the need exists for more formal reporting of inflation-adjusted performance.
Inflation often goes overlooked by the industry and investors alike. It can be seen in the celebration of stock indexes at all-time nominal highs, which wouldn’t look so great if inflation were factored in.
The inflationary extremes of the 1970s provide a stark illustration. In 1979, the S&P 500 index posted a total return of 18.5 per cent – a blockbuster year until you consider that inflation was 13.3 per cent.
That took the index’s real return down to a lacklustre 5.2 per cent.
More recently, investors in Canada and the United States piled into savings instruments promising 5-per-cent nominal rates of return. But the rate of inflation in Canada averaged 6.8 per cent in 2022, more than wiping out the return on things such as guaranteed investment certificates, in most cases.
“A lot of people don’t connect those dots,” said Dan Hallett, head of research at HighView Financial Group. “Over 10 years, even 2-per-cent inflation really eats away at purchasing power.”
He worries, however, that reporting after-inflation returns may confuse average investors, many of whom still fail to understand the basic investment fees they’re paying.
All the more reason to get Canadian investors thinking more about inflation, Mr. Fell argues.
“The impact of inflation on investing is sort of forgotten about,” he said. “The only way I can think of turning that around is to highlight it in investors’ statements.”
Capital gains tax hike a sure way to repel the tech sector
Published Apr 18, 2024 • Last updated 23 minutes ago • 4 minute read
If there’s an uncomfortable economic lesson of the past few years, it’s this: The vibes matter.
As much as economists point to data, the reality in politics and policy is that public expectations and perceptions are important too. And from a business perspective, the vibes of the 2024 federal budget are rancid.
Article content
The budget document’s title is “Fairness For Every Generation” and in practice, what that meant was a “soak the rich” tax hike on capital gains.
Advertisement 2
Article content
You can see how this looked like good politics. In her budget speech, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said that only 0.13 per cent of Canadians with an average annual income of $1.4 million will pay higher taxes — hardly a sympathetic lot, at a time when many Canadians are struggling to pay for food and housing.
The problem is that the proposed capital gains tax hike won’t only soak a handful of rich Canadians as advertised. In its current design, it broadly punishes individuals and families of small business owners, tech entrepreneurs, dentists and countless others who have often spent decades trying to build their businesses for a potential once-in-a-lifetime capital gains event. Together, our analysis suggests that those people represent closer to 20 per cent of Canadians.
This tax proposal simply amounts to a systemic tapping on the brakes on the investment in a productive and prosperous future, being made by innovative, hardworking Canadians. And it does so at the very time Canada needs them to accelerate their investing.
But among the innovators and business leaders I talk to in the Canadian tech sector, this week’s budget was a chilling shock. There is a sincere and widespread belief that if something does not change, the budget will do widespread and irreparable damage to Canada’s tech sector.
Platformed
Article content
Advertisement 3
Article content
That’s why more than 1,000 CEOs have signed a public letter to Prime Minister Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland at ProsperityForEveryGeneration.ca, calling on the government to stop this tax hike. Innovators understand what’s at stake.
Firstly, we are at a moment when capital is harder to access than at any time in the past generation. Higher interest rates and economic uncertainty mean that many high-growth companies with innovative products struggle to secure growth capital on favourable terms.
South of the border, we’re seeing strong growth, driven by significant government investment through strong industrial policy, alongside significant growth in bleeding-edge artificial intelligence applications. The U.S. is an exciting place to invest right now.
And capital is highly mobile. If Canada is seen as an unfriendly place to invest, due to high taxes, investors will simply take their money elsewhere, and propel the growth of promising tech companies in other countries.
What’s more, highly skilled talent is more mobile than ever before, and among innovative high-growth companies, stock options — subject to capital gains tax — are a key form of compensation.
Advertisement 4
Article content
We’re not talking purely about CEOs and tech founders here either. The dedicated early players of a promising tech startup earn their stock options with sweat equity. Their dedication, taking a risk in the prime of their career, is often the key ingredient for the success of future innovation champions.
Innovators are intimately aware of these concerns, because this isn’t the first time the Liberal government has tried to tax stock options. Nearly a decade ago, they promised to hike taxes on stock options in their 2015 campaign platform, and it took years of public advocacy from tech leaders to help the government understand the potential unintended damage that a reckless tax hike could do on the ability to attract and retain talent.
All along the way, we were assured by the government that they knew what they were doing, and there was nothing to worry about. In truth, after many frank conversations, they changed course.
In the days and weeks ahead, I’m expecting to hear the same kind of thing again. Already we’ve heard from government officials pointing to the “Canadian Entrepreneurs’ Incentive” carve-out, which will soften the blow of higher capital gains tax rates overall. The details of this carve-out are not yet fully clear, and it’s possible that the government will tinker with the thresholds to help mitigate the damage of a tax hike on capital gains.
Advertisement 5
Article content
But the reality is that without a significant change in messaging, the danger to Canada’s economy is real.
Capital gains are taxed at a different rate because they are taxes on investment. Every investment comes with risk; you are not guaranteed to make a profit. The tax code takes this into account.
If the vibes are off, and the global perception of Canada is that we’re not a place where the investment risk is worth it, because the federal government is just going to tax you to death, then we simply won’t see capital or talent flow to Canada.
Innovation and entrepreneurship are about hope. You fundamentally need to be an optimist to risk it all, and invest yourself in growing a business. Right now, Canada’s federal government is not sending a hopeful vibe. And the vibes matter.
Benjamin Bergen is president, Council of Canadian Innovators.
Article content
Jeremy Hansen – The Canadian Encyclopedia
Save $700 Off This 4K Projector at Amazon While You Still Can – CNET
UK Mulls New Curbs on Outbound Investment Over Security Risks – BNN Bloomberg
'Kingdom Come: Deliverance II' Revealed In Epic New Trailer And It Looks Incredible – Forbes
Auston Matthews denied 70th goal as depleted Leafs lose last regular-season game – Toronto Sun
Supervised consumption sites urgently needed, says study – Sudbury.com
Sick of Your Blue State? These Real Estate Agents Have Just the Place for You. – The New York Times
Giant, 82-foot lizard fish discovered on UK beach could be largest marine reptile ever found – Livescience.com
Comments