What you think you want to do and what you end up really doing for your retirement appears to be different.  Should those of us nearing retirement adjust our expectations to reflect a more realistic view of what will really happen?  It is somewhat in our human nature to dream a little without firmly determining how realistic those dreams are given the various realities that can impact how our future life unfolds.  Some interesting facts have jumped out from a recent poll including the general finding that retirement expectations held by Canadians (how you think you’ll spend your time) often turn out very different once reality sets in and you get to those retirement years.

Based upon the results of a 2011 poll sponsored by RBC and reported on in the December 14th addition of the Ottawa Citizen, retirement dreams of spending winters in the sunny south are just that, dreams.

The poll focused on the expectations of near retirees versus those already retired.  Some of the interesting results include:

• nearly 75% of Canadian over 50 think they’ll spend retirement days travelling but only 58% of those retired spend their time away from home
• 30% of those nearly retired or over 50 believe they will spend winters down south and summers in Canada – the snowbird lifestyle – but only 14% of those retired live the snowbird lifestyle
• 60% of women near retirement expect to do volunteer work once retired but 41% actually do
• 53% of men near retirement expect to do volunteer work once retired but 35% actually do

The poll was conducted on line by Ipsos Reid between February and March and surveyed 2,245 adults in the 50 and over age group with assets of at least $100K.

More poll details are available at the following link:

http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/pdf/1213-2011-snowbirds-poll.pdf

Given RBC sponsored this poll, financial planning is being pushed to assist the near retirement group to examine options.  The results of this poll and other polls described in Lifepast50 posts, point to the fact that flexibility is needed as you consider how you’ll spend your time.  Working through your retirement expectations and determining how you might get there along with your capability to achieve those expectations is a worthwhile endeavour.

I recently attended a workshop sponsored by the Bank of Montreal (BMO) and Nesbitt Burns entitled “Taking Charge Of Your Retirement”.  I must state upfront that I have a family member that works for BMO.

I want to present an honest overview of what I learned despite the family connection to the organization running the workshop.  I did find the workshop very useful and informative as it made me look at a number of retirement associated factors that I hadn’t fully considered.

The workshop was led by Dr. Amy D’Aprix.  She is the BMO Life Transition Consultant and her role for BMO is to help coach clients on retirement planning.  She clearly notes that she isn’t a banker but a gerontologist.

Ideally the workshop should be attended by you and your significant other…..allowing you to compare notes and see where differences may exist associated with your “retirement picture”.

The workshop began with a short introduction pertaining to Dr. D’Aprix and then workshop participants interactively worked through the various components guided by a “workshop companion” – a collection of forms identifying topics to be discussed.  The forms allowed you to take notes and to fill in your responses to the various topics and questions posed.

The first form presented a series of statements and participants noted whether these statements were true or false.  The statements covered various topics which were intended to get you thinking about other lifestyle factors instead of just financial data.  Some examples included: “For the first time in history, Canadian adults have more parents than children”, “11% of Canadians expect that some of their retirement income will come from from the lottery”.   By the way, both of these statements are true.

The workshop then gently slides into a presentation regarding your retirement picture containing 4 corners covering relationships, lifestyle, health and home.  These 4 corners are then “framed” with financial implications that give your retirement picture stability.  These frames are identified as Cash Flow, Investments, Tax Considerations, and Contingencies.  To see more details regarding this, head to the BMO website and find the “Take Charge of Your Retirement” web presentation.

After gaining an understanding of the “retirement picture” structure, the workshop heads into discussing your individual and particular preferences regarding the who, what, how and where factors (these are relationships, lifestyle, health and home respectively) – who will you spend time with when you retire, what do you picture yourself doing in retirement, where will you live in retirement, and how might your health impact your retirement. The interactive nature of the workshop allows you to gain a better understanding of these “4 corner” topics and compare your answers and feelings to what others identify.

Some of the key items I walked away with:

• think about your life and not just the money
• think of your wants, needs and desires as you look at retirement (your picture) and then set up or assess your plan (the frame) to help you meet your desires – examine your future based on the workshop directed questions intended to allow you to articulate your retirement expectations
• work with your significant other to see how things align (the next steps associated with alignment or lack of alignment are entirely up to each individual / couple)

Overall the workshop is an obvious shift by a bank away from a traditional number crunching approach to a more people and lifestyle oriented approach targeted at helping you visual your retirement future based upon lifestyle factors as well as the numbers.  The workshop also promotes retirement planning and, as expected but done in a soft sell way, contacting your BMO representative.  As I stated above, I was glad I attended and did learn something ….. Lane@lifepast50.ca

As a result of another survey, this time commissioned by the CIBC (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce) and conducted by Harris/Decima, reveals that 70% of Ontario residents plan to continue working in retirement.  This includes activities such as starting their own business, consulting, or taking on part time hours.  Overall the poll shows that people of all ages across Canada plan to continue some for of work in retirement.  This repeats findings uncovered from other surveys so we shouldn’t be surprise by these results.

More highlights of the Ontario residents retirement results include:

• 45% believe they will work part time
• 21% believe they will do occasional consulting
• 8% say they will start a new business
• 9% say they will continue working full time
• 1% plan to spend their retirement travelling

Similar results appeared nationally across all age groups and across regions:

• 80% aged 18 to 24 believe they will work in retirement
• 65% aged 25 to 34 believe they will work in retirement
• 69% aged 35 to 44 believe they will work in retirement
• 68% aged 45 to 54 believe they will work in retirement
• 73% aged 55 to 64 believe they will work in retirement
• Atlantic – 60% plan to continue working into retirement
• Quebec – 61% plan to continue working into retirement
• Ontario – 70% plan to continue working into retirement
• Manitoba / Saskatchewan – 73% plan to continue working into retirement
• Alberta – 78% plan to continue working into retirement
• British Columbia – 80% plan to continue working into retirement

One conclusion to draw from this is that many Canadians are making a conscious choice to keep working in some form or other.  As you combine this survey with other survey results noted in other lifepast50 posts and general data about our boomer lives, we are living longer, entering our senior years in relatively good health, and we understand the importance of keeping our minds engaged.

Given the survey was commissioned by a large Canadian bank, their obvious goal is to focus the bank’s service offerings towards retirement planning and related services, not only for the boomer part of the population but also for younger Canadians.  We all understand that some planning needs to be undertaken in order for individuals to fully comprehend what lies ahead as we age.

This survey was conducted in early September 2011 and involved 1116 working and 683 retired Canadians.

An article published in the Ottawa Citizen on Sept. 13th entitled “Low Savings Forcing Retirement Delays” indicates that Canadians are putting off retirement because they aren’t saving enough and the majority are living paycheque to paycheque.  These findings are based upon a recent survey by the Canadian Payroll Association, their 3rd annual survey on these topics.  They surveyed 2070 employed Canadians between July 6 and August 2, 2011.

These findings shouldn’t be a surprise, given other similar findings described in related past lifepast50 posts.  The results continue to show that a majority of Canadians are not adequately ensuring that they are in good financial shape for today and for their retirement in the future.  Combine this with today’s uncertainty of economic recovery and Canadian demographics, and the potential exists for many Canadians to be working longer into their senior years.

Some of the survey findings:

• 57% say they would be in financial trouble if their pay was delayed by just 1 week.  Most financial planners recommend that you have an emergency fund to cover 3 months of essential expenses.
• 40% expect to postpone their retirement due to lack of savings – not saving enough for retirement.
• 74% saved less than a quarter of the money they expect to need to retire with 71% of the respondents being over the age of 35.  The bulk of savings usually occurs between the ages of 35 and 54.
• 63% feel they will need to set aside more than $750,000 to retire comfortably.  The majority also indicated they need to do more to improve savings.
• 50% were putting away 5% or less of their net pay.  Financial planners generally recommend putting aside 10% of each paycheque.
• 22% had paying off credit card debt as their #1 priority.  Based upon recent data from TransUnion, Canadian are carrying an average non-mortgage debt of $25,603.

The survey indicated the recession and the slow recovery have impacted Canadian employees.  The survey indicated respondents have modest expectations regarding pay increases and economic improvements.

Here is a link to the Canadian Payroll Association website for survey results – Survey Results.

I ran across an interesting Canadian Senate government report on aging entitled Canada’s Aging Population: Seizing the Opportunity.  This was published in April 2009.  I had never heard of this report before and it does contain a lot of information regarding Canada’s aging population with topics covering care for the aging, access to services, seniors healthcare, poverty, caregivers, etc.

Follow this link to access the report:  http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/402/agei/rep/AgingFinalReport-e.pdf

The parts of the report that I found most interesting discussed active aging.  The information provided probably won’t astound you because most of us realize that we need to remain active, mentally and physically, in order to maintain a desired quality of life.  The report urges the government to encourage the aging population to remain active on many fronts – improved access to education / training (life long learning), physical activities, continued work activities, volunteer opportunities, and implementing age-friendly designs regarding many aspects of our social and physical needs.  It also points out that many of us live in communities where a vehicle is needed to function in our society and what happens when we get too old to drive?

Other parts of the report provide pension facts that I wasn’t aware of.  As an example, most of us understand that CPP has limits but the maximum benefit payable is limited to 25% of the average industrial wage.   The report continues with further information regarding the pension plans, RRSP, OAS and GIS in relationship to having enough to live off of and poverty levels.

Throughout the report there are various recommendations – some of these I’ve seen discussed by Members of Parliament.

I believe most of you will find this report interesting as it provides information which we may see reflected as Canadian government policy in the near future, especially as the impact of our aging Canadian population becomes better understood.  It will take a while to digest all the information.  I would suggest reading it in sections as the entire report is over 230 pages in length.

This post is summarized from a recent article in the Globe and Mail (Feb 14, 2011, Special Report)

The resurgence of the loonie and continued degradation of U.S. home prices are spurring more Canadians to invest in property south of the border.

But while this might appear an opportune time to snatch up a retirement home or dream vacation property, experts warn that jumping into these major purchases without doing extensive research is a recipe for disaster.

The list of things to consider before buying in the United States is long, ranging from estate taxes to property maintenance to insurance.

“There are lots of things that most people don’t think about,” says Laura Parsons, a mortgage expert with Bank of Montreal. “I know quite a few people who went into the market in the U.S. without a lot of knowledge about what that means.”

First and foremost, experts caution that speculative investments in U.S. real estate continue to be a roll of the dice.

“If you are buying a recreational property for personal use, [the situation now is] probably about as good as it gets,” says Bob Gorman, chief portfolio strategist at TD Waterhouse, noting that the dollar is high, prices are low, and interest rates are low for those who need financing. “I draw a distinction, though, for those people who ask me about buying for investment purposes, who are not going to use it themselves.”

A key reason is real estate prices. As low as they’ve sunk, it’s still possible they could sink lower. And even if they don’t, no one expects them to bounce back quickly.

As a result, speculators who might be thinking of investing in a place to rent or flip might be wise to hold off. “We’re not quite sure it’s the bottom, and there’s no rush because once it does hit bottom it’s going to stay pretty flat for an extended period of time,” says Sam Sivarajan, head of private wealth management in Canada for UBS.

High levels of unsold homes are overhanging the market, Mr. Gorman said. Historically, the number of homes for sale at any given time in the U.S. has been equal to about fourth months worth of sales. Right now, it’s closer to 10.

But that hasn’t been scaring away investors, who accounted for 19 per cent of purchases in November of 2010, up from 12 per cent one year earlier.

Jamie Golombek, managing director of tax and estate planning at Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, agrees that speculators need to be more cautious. “If you’re using it for personal use, then I think the resale potential is not as important,” he says. “No one wants to lose money, but if you’re really buying it because you’re going to enjoy it with your family – then if you find something you like and it’s a reasonable price range, and interest rates are low if you need to borrow money, and the dollar’s relatively high – then you may want to consider it.”

In other words, favourable conditions or not, it’s still a gamble, but one that might be worth it for a property you will enjoy and would love to own.

For those thinking of taking the chance, one of the first considerations should be taxes. Be aware that in some jurisdictions property taxes for foreigners are higher than for local residents. If you rent the property out, the rental income could be subject to withholding tax. A key consideration for wealthier individuals will be estate taxes.

Brand new tax rules increase the exemption on U.S. estate taxes to $5-million, which essentially means that Canadians who are not U.S. citizens and who have a worldwide estate that’s worth less than $5-million don’t have to worry, says Mr. Golombek.

“It’s really important to get advice before you buy,” Mr. Golombek says. “I would approach a U.S. tax adviser in particular, or a Canadian adviser who specializes in cross-border issues. This may not be the regular accountant who does your tax return; chances are it won’t be, but hopefully that person can refer you to a specialist.”

Another thing to think about is the amount of your total assets that you want to allocate to real estate. A recent survey by the Royal Bank of Canada suggests that Canadian millionaires tend to have about 15 per cent of their assets in real estate (12 per cent for those with more than $5-million of investable assets).

Insurance is another item for the pre-purchase checklist, especially in hurricane-prone areas, Mr. Gorman says.

Sherry Cooper, Bank of Montreal’s chief economist, has another tip if the property is to be a vacation home: check the price, availability and frequency of flights from Canada. “Where we are they fly direct only in the winter, and that’s fine with us,” says Ms. Cooper, who has a rental property, a vacation property and a property for her mother in Florida.

Ms. Cooper knows first hand that property is not always a liquid investment: she bought a small condo in Florida about eight years ago when her mother wanted to start spending winters there. Ms. Cooper later bought another property for her mom but found that she couldn’t unload the first condo. “It was on the market for six months. I cut the price a few times, but never even got a single offer,” she says.

But, she adds, prospective buyers can take heart in the fact that she has found a steady supply of renters. “I listed it on Craigslist and two sites for vacation property rentals and I was overwhelmed with requests. And on Craigslist I got someone who rents it 12 months a year.”

For those like Ms. Cooper who do make the splash, Mr. Golombek suggests considering a separate will dealing just with that U.S. property. “It’s a lot simpler for your executor to deal with a will in, for instance, Florida, with Florida rules than trying to have it dealt with in Ontario,” he says.

And, no matter how much preparation you do and professional advice you seek, be prepared for the unexpected.

As one of Ms. Parsons’ acquaintances discovered, a new climate can lead to surprises. “I would never have thought that you have to put Saran Wrap on your toilets to keep the water from evaporating,” Ms. Cooper says. “They actually have to have neighbours come in and flush the toilets, because it can affect the pipes.”

An article published in the Ottawa Citizen by J. Chevreau (from the Financial Post) on Thursday January 27^th, highlights some interesting aspects of RRSPs and RRIFs that I wasn’t fully aware of.  The article calls these the “dark side” of RRSPs.

We shouldn’t be surprised by the fact that tax is owed when RRSPs are deregistered and converted to RRIFs.  The details surrounding this probably aren’t as well known.  The RRIF forced withdrawals are phased in at 7.48% at age 72 and increase to 20% at age 94.

As markets recover after the recessions of the 1^st decade of the 21^st century, and as more boomers approach retirement, the taxes owed are being looked at more seriously.  That money will be taxed at one’s marginal rate.  Should you be fortunate to have a large RRSP and consequently large withdrawals as a result of a RRIF, your tax bill could be significant.  Your tax deferred gains which you may have enjoyed earlier now may come back to unexpectedly hit you.  Current RRSP rules may force you to take out more than you need to spend to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle.  In some cases, if one spouse dies, the surviving spouse then has the total RRIF value of both spouses to deal with – a larger tax liability.

Some will argue the benefits of growing money in a tax deferred plan over many years outweighs the disadvantages.  Additionally, those that re-invested taxes saved as a result of their RRSP contributions, have most likely benefited even more than the tax liability that remains once it is converted to a RRIF.

TSFAs may be a rescue option for some seniors with large RRIFs.  Putting $10,000 of RRIF income into a TSFA per senior couple could grow to $200,000 in 20 years and be completely tax free.  Of course you need to live long enough to realize this advantage.

Other strategies exist if you retire early (before age 65) including RRSP early withdrawal with tax paid at a lower marginal rate in advance of receiving other retirement benefits once you turn 65.  This might be a benefit if you can stay below the Old Age Security claw back level once you turn 65.  In other cases, putting stocks in non-registered plans may make sense since only 50% of capital gains is taxed.  A long term buy and hold investment plan means no tax is paid until you sell and take the profits.  If you had losses in other securities, those can offset taxes on gains.

This all points to the fact that the Canadian federal government needs to examine the RRIF withdrawal rules given rising life expectancies.  Combine that with today’s and recent year’s small investment returns and it may be time to get some action on this point.  As the new boomers turn 65, with waves to follow, it won’t be long before a serious segment of the Canadian population nears 71 when the RRIF rules kick in.  Some tax surprises may be forthcoming.

Another survey indicates Canadians fear being forced to work well into their golden years.  Given other recent surveys noted in LifePast50 posts, this shouldn’t be a surprise.  Many of these past surveys have indicated the same thing.  Survey summary results were published in many Canadian newspapers, including the Ottawa Citizen, on December 14, 2010.

This telephone survey was conducted between October 28th and 31st by Harris / Decima in Canada and Caravan in the US.  The survey was commissioned by Edward Jones involving more than 1000 Canadians and more than 1000 US adults.

Overall the poll highlights the importance of saving early.  Amongst the younger survey participants aged 25 to 34 in Canada, 40% said having to work longer was the #1 retirement concern.  This is up 12% since 2006 (presumably from another similar survey).  Similar results exist in the US where almost 25% share the same fear compared to 15% in 2006.

The article identifies a national advocacy group called CARP (www.carp.ca) which represents Canadians over age 50.  CARP says its members are overwhelmingly against extending the age of retirement and they recognize people they aren’t saving as they should.  CARP noted that it isn’t any good at 55 saying “oops, I better save for retirement”.

Other interesting survey points:

• 16% of Canadians fear having to rely on others for support in old age
• the biggest fear amongst young Canadians (the 18 to 24 age group) was having to cut back on their desired lifestyle
• for Canadians over 55 cutting back on their desired lifestyle topped the worry list
• young Americans, 25%, fear having to rely on others for support
• middle aged Americans and those over 55 were most concerned about health care

With the recent recession, it shouldn’t be a surprise that these fears have increased.  When the recovery fully takes hold, it will be interesting to see if these fears change.

I've concluded that the objectives of the Financial Industry is to make your money – theirs!  Perhaps a bit harsh but the following article on Blue Chip GICs shows that you can't make much on low risk instruments but those who sell you these instruments can.

Tony Amonte – enjoy the article

They want to gorge on pizza and chocolate cake, and still lose weight. They want to drive an SUV, and still get good gas mileage. And when it comes to investing, they want to take minimal risk and still get big returns.

Sorry, folks, doesn’t work that way.

This thought crossed my mind as I read a press release from Bank of Montreal touting a new “market-linked” guaranteed investment certificate that offers “the potential for bigger gains with the same safety net attached.”

Hey, sounds good, right? We could all use bigger gains with no extra risk.

So this week, we’re going to lift the hood on this product – officially called the BMO Blue Chip GIC. We’re going to delve into the arcane terms and conditions that investors need to understand before they sign on the dotted line. Then we’re going to show you why this product – and similar ones offered by other financial institutions – are a great deal for the bank, but a lousy deal for you.

The Sell

Buying the BMO Blue Chip GIC is a bit like spinning a roulette wheel where you can only win – or so it seems. The GIC has a guaranteed minimum return of 0.2 per cent over its one-year term. That’s the worst case.

The best case is that investors can earn up to an additional four percentage points – the “variable return” – for a total of 4.2 per cent. That seems pretty good considering most one-year GICs are yielding less than half of that.

But as we’ll see, this roulette wheel favours certain outcomes over others.

The Variable Return

The GIC’s variable rate of return – that is, the premium over and above the guaranteed 0.2 per cent – is determined by the performance of a “reference portfolio” of 10 blue-chip stocks: Power Corp. of Canada, Goldcorp Inc., SNC-Lavalin Group Inc., Thomson Reuters Corp., Fortis Inc., Toronto-Dominion Bank, Rogers Communications Inc., Brookfield Properties Corp., TransCanada Corp. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.

These are stocks that any investor would be proud to own, except that if you buy the BMO Blue Chip GIC, you don’t actually own the stocks. Nor do you collect the dividends. The stocks are merely used as a “reference” for calculating the variable return.

Problem is, the formula the bank uses to calculate the variable return is complex and heavily tilted in its favour.

The Formula

For starters, if a stock in the portfolio posts a positive return – regardless of how big – the “effective return” of that stock is deemed to be 4 per cent. That’s great if the stock rises 1 or 2 per cent, because the “effective return” will be boosted to 4 per cent. The bad news? If a stock soars 50 or 100 per cent, the “effective return” is still 4 per cent.

In other words, any big gainers will have little impact on the portfolio. Making matters worse, dividends are not included in the return calculation. In the real world, of course, dividends matter a great deal. Here, they are conveniently ignored.

It Gets Worse

Now, let’s look at how losses are treated. If a stock drops by between zero and 10 per cent, the “effective return” is the same as the actual loss. Only when a stock drops by more than 10 per cent is the “effective return” capped at negative 10 per cent. The bottom line here is that the formula is asymmetrical: Stocks that plunge have more influence than those that soar.

We’re Almost There

Now we come to the final step: Determining the variable return of the GIC.

The variable return is calculated as the average of the “effective returns” of the stocks in the reference portfolio. In other words, add up the “effective returns,” divide by 10, and that’s your variable return.

Now think about the implications here: Because of the way the formula is constructed, the only way to achieve the maximum variable return of 4 per cent is for all 10 stocks to rise. If just one or two stocks fall, the variable return will shrink, possibly a lot.

To use a baseball analogy, even if you hit a bunch of home runs, a few strikeouts could quickly wipe out your gains.

Let’s illustrate this. Imagine a scenario where seven of the 10 stocks rise by 100 per cent each, and the others fall by 8, 10 and 15 per cent, respectively. If this were a real portfolio – assuming equal investments in each stock – the return would be a juicy 67 per cent. Plus, the investor would get the dividends, which would add nearly three percentage points in yield.

Now, care to guess what the Blue Chip GIC would return under identical circumstances? 3 per cent? 2 per cent? 1 per cent? Nope. The minimum 0.2 per cent. Worse, after inflation, you’d be losing money.(If you’re wondering about the math, the seven winning stocks would generate a total “effective return” of 28 per cent. Subtract the three losses of 8 per cent, 10 per cent and 15 per cent – capped at 10 per cent – and you’d be left with a variable return of zero.)

So Much for Safety

What if markets collapse, you ask? Won’t it be better to make 0.2 per cent instead of losing 20 or 30 per cent? Absolutely. But if you want safety, you could put a portion of your money in a one-year GIC paying 1.75 per cent (or more if you lock in for a longer period). That’s a lot better than 0.2 per cent, and it’s both predictable and guaranteed.

With some of your money locked up safely, you could invest another chunk of your capital directly in blue-chip stocks or in a low-cost index fund. That way, if the stock market rises, you would actually get market-like returns – including dividends – instead of an “effective return” based on a lop-sided formula.

For its part, the bank says the product, which matures one year from its issue date of Dec. 8, has met with strong consumer response.

“We talk to our customers regularly and overwhelmingly they have told us they feel the product effectively balances their objectives of growth and protection at a fair price,” Martin Nel, vice-president of personal lending and investment products at Bank of Montreal, said in an e-mail.

“We’ve priced this product to do well in the marketplace. … It’s the right product for the times for those looking for a potentially higher return than a traditional GIC without risking principal.”

Running the Numbers

But BMO’s own performance data are less than flattering.

The bank generated a series of hypothetical results for the product, assuming it had been issued at monthly intervals between October, 2006, and September, 2009. Result: In 69.4 per cent of cases, the GIC would have returned a paltry 0.2 to 1.2 per cent. In just 5.6 per cent of cases, the return would have ranged from 3.2 per cent to the maximum 4.2 per cent.

This is a safe investment alright – for the bank.

The lesson here is clear: If you want market-like returns, you have to accept market-like risk. And if you want safety, there are better ways to achieve it.

This article was written by John Heinzl and published in The Globe and Mail on Dec 7, 2010.

A recent Survey by Investors Group, conducted by Harris / Decima from October 28th to November 9th, 2010, that surveyed 1014 Canadians between the ages of 45 and 64 produced more interesting results reflecting the retirement opinions of baby boomers.

59% of boomers who participated in the poll said the Beatles song, “When I’m 64”, doesn’t accurately portray their idea of retirement.  More than half said the part of the song about “doing the garden, digging the weeds” described something they would be doing in retirement and 73% cited reading and 67% cited watching television as other activities that they will undertake.

Some of the poll results include:

• 61% view retirement as “an exciting new stage of life”
• 59% have concerns about their finances
• 55% said they would not be able to afford their “dream retirement”
• 54% feel retirement will be comfortable
• 52% have worries about health
• 43% anticipate retirement to be fulfilling
• 42% expect retirement to be busy
• 36% said they would have started saving money for retirement earlier in life if they could do it over again
• 30% said they lacked enough money to pay for basic expenses

Here is what the survey said about what boomers are looking forward to in retirement:

• Lack of work pressures
• Opportunity to travel
• Additional time for recreation, hobbies and fitness
• Chance to become more involved in the community

I wonder how this matches up with your thoughts?