^KNOWLEDGE is POWER^ *APPLICATION is WISDOM*

http://business.asiaone.com/print/Business/My%2BMoney/Planning%2BYour%2BRetirement/Investment%2BAnd%2BSavings/Story/A1Story20100426-212465.html

What if you can't afford to retire?

Options for low-income elderly folk.

Fri, Apr 30, 2010
The Business Times

By Lorna Tan

The reality of just how much it costs to retire is sinking in for many people.

As a result, more expect not to be able to retire completely - they will need to turn to part-time jobs in their golden years.

Next >>





Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS)

Launched on March 1 last year, the scheme allows low-income elderly Singaporeans living in three-room and smaller flats to monetise their flats to supplement their retirement needs.

It is believed that these households need more financial help, as they are unlikely to be able to take advantage of other options such as downsizing to a small flat or subletting a room.

Under the scheme, the HDB will buy back the tail end of a flat's 100-year lease at market valuation, leaving a 30-year lease for the owner. For example, if a flat has 70 years left, the HDB buys 40 years of the lease from the owner. It pays the market rate for the 40-year lease and this money goes to the CPF Life national annuity scheme in the flat owner's name. He will then receive a monthly income stream for life.

According to a study last year on unlocking housing equity for retirement by Dr Ngee-Choon Chia and Dr Albert Tsui, a three-room flat which is now worth $236,000 has an estimated housing value, unlocked from a 40-year lease, of about $109,000 at present.

The monthly annuity payouts from CPF Life through the buyback of the three-room flat is $694 to $724 for a man and $620 to $650 for a woman. Monthly payouts for women are lower than for men because of the longer life expectancy of women, on average.

Both the study's authors are from the economics department at the National University of Singapore (NUS).

To be eligible for LBS, the homeowner must be aged at least 62, have enjoyed only one housing subsidy and must have occupied the flat for at least five years, among other conditions. If the owner dies before his lease runs out, his family gets the refund of the balance.

At the start of this month, the scheme was broadened to include those who previously owned four-room or bigger flats.

It also includes those with outstanding housing loans exceeding $5,000, but who are able to buy an annuity under CPF Life for at least $60,000 with the HDB payout. Previously, the household had to have less than $5,000 outstanding on a home loan.

With the revision in rules, the number of elderly households that stand to benefit from LBS has risen to 34,800 or 82 per cent of elderly households in three-room and smaller flats.

One key advantage of the LBS is that you get to live in your home and at the same time receive a lifelong income.

Mr Ben Fok, chief executive of Grandtag Financial Consultancy, says: 'This option is viable for owners who are comfortable to stay where they are and do not wish to move or downgrade to a smaller flat. They prefer not to sublet their flat as privacy may be important to them.'

The downside is that upon the death of the retiree, he may not leave behind anything for his loved ones. In Asian culture, this may not be well accepted, says Mr Christopher Tan, chief executive of wealth management company Providend.

And retirees may also not like the idea that the house they are living in no longer belongs to them.

Mr Leong Sze Hian, president of the Society of Financial Service Professionals, however, believes that the owner will be worse off under this option.

He believes that HDB flats will be worth more 30 years down the road. After all, they have always increased in value historically, as old flats may be selected for en bloc redevelopment. Under this programme, the residents of affected blocks will be offered replacement flats. In fact, he notes that older flats have generally appreciated more, as they are in mature estates with more amenities.

Based on an annual price appreciation of 5 per cent for an HDB flat, Mr Leong works out that a flat valued at $200,000 now will be worth $864,388 in 30 years.

<< Previous      |      Next >>





Subletting

Another viable option is for elderly people to sublet their rooms. Mr Leong says this option is suitable for the retiree who wants to grow old in his own flat and still have some rental income.

According to the NUS study, about seven in 10, or 74 per cent, of the elderly prefer to 'age-in-place'.

The retiree can also opt to sublet his entire flat by moving in with his children. One key advantage of this is that the appreciating equity of the flat is retained by the flat owner, adds Mr Leong.

Mortgage consultancy Housing LoanSG.com founder Dennis Ng prefers this option to LBS, as he believes it is possible to rent out a room for $400 to $500 a month while the elderly person still retains ownership of the home.

Mr Fok cautions, however, that the owner may have to pay income tax for rent collected.

Of course, the inconvenience of having strangers in the house cannot be avoided. The owner will have to contend with losing some degree of privacy as well as putting up with strangers who may have different lifestyle habits.

Says Mr Tan: 'Not only is your privacy being intruded upon, but your whole life may be disrupted too. You share his friends if he brings them back, and you have to share the kitchen, the bathroom, the TV set and more. I am not sure whether a retiree is willing to sacrifice so much during his golden years.'

<< Previous      |      Next >>





Downsizing

Another option is for elderly people to sell their flats and downgrade to smaller flats or to HDB studio apartments.

According to the NUS study, significant sums will be cashed out if elderly people downgrade to smaller units. On average, $79,000 or $132,000 can be cashed out by downgrading from four-room to three-room or two-room flats, respectively. The sums could be even higher now, given the current trend of appreciating HDB prices.

If, say, $79,000 is placed in an annuity, a man can get a monthly payout of $502 to $526, and a woman can get $450 to $472 a month, for life.

If the elderly person opts to downgrade to an HDB studio apartment, which costs less than $100,000 currently, the cash proceeds would be even higher, says Mr Ng.

Most financial experts agree that downsizing seems to be the best financial option. After all, most retirees will conclude that they do not need to live in a big flat upon retiring.

The advantages are clear, says Mr Tan.

'You may get some cash for selling your bigger house and buying a smaller one, and at retirement, you do not have to spend so much energy cleaning the bigger premises. At the same time, expenses such as utility costs are lower with a smaller apartment.'

Mr Fok likes this option because it can help to reduce one's debt if there is an outstanding mortgage.

'You clear your debt and use the proceeds to buy a smaller home and be debt-free,' he adds.

<< Previous      |      Next >>





Working longer

Mr Tan believes that the real option is really retiring later and working longer. But in order to do that, he proposes the following:

• Accept that you have to work through your golden years. This is really a mindset shift, and you must make this shift at least five years before your planned retirement age or before you leave your current place of work.
  
  To suddenly realise that you have to work longer without mentally preparing for it may be very tough to accept for a retiree.

• Keep yourself healthy. Many may want to work but find that they no longer have the health to keep working.
• Keep yourself relevant to the corporate world. Decide what is needed in the job market now; find something you would like to do and go for training. After all, you are bound to want to do something that you like, so it is best to start preparing yourself early.
• If you want to go into business, prepare a business plan and do a cost-benefit analysis. Ask yourself if you can afford to lose your money.

REVIEW & FORUM  Saturday: 9 OCTOBER 2010 

Beggaring the World Economy

Raghuram Rajan

CHICAGO – Global capital is on the move. As ultra-low interest rates in industrial countries send capital around the world searching for higher yields, a number of emerging-market central banks are intervening heavily, buying the foreign-capital inflows and re-exporting them in order to keep their currencies from appreciating. Others have been imposing capital controls of one stripe or another. In recent weeks, Japan became the first large industrial economy to intervene directly in currency markets.

Why does no one want capital inflows?

Which intervention policies are legitimate, and which are not?

And where will all this intervention end if it continues unabated?

The portion of capital inflows that is not re-exported represents net capital inflows. This finances domestic spending on foreign goods. So, one reason countries do not like capital inflows is that it means more domestic demand “leaks” outside. Indeed, because capital inflows often cause the domestic exchange rate to appreciate, they encourage further spending on foreign goods as domestic producers become uncompetitive.

Another reason that countries do not like foreign capital inflows is that some of it might be “hot” (or dumb) money, eager to come in when foreign interest rates are low and local asset prices are rising, and quick to leave at the first sign of trouble or when opportunities back home beckon. Volatile capital flows induce volatility in the recipient economy, making booms and busts more pronounced than they would otherwise be.

But, as the saying goes, it takes two hands to clap.

If countries could maintain discipline and limit spending by their households, firms, or governments, foreign capital would not be needed, and could be re-exported easily, without much effect on the recipient economy. Problems arise when countries cannot – or will not – spend sensibly.

Countries can overspend for a variety of reasons.

The stereotypical Latin American economies of yesteryear used to get into trouble through populist government spending, while the East Asian economies ran into difficulty because of excessive long-term investment. In the United States in the run up to the current crisis, easy credit, especially for housing, induced households to spend too much, while in Greece, the government borrowed its way into trouble.

Unfortunately, though, so long as some countries like China, Germany, Japan, and the oil exporters pump surplus goods into the world economy, not all countries can trim their spending to stay within their means. Since the world does not export to Mars, some countries have to absorb these goods, and accept the capital inflows that finance their consumption.

In the medium term, over-spenders should trim their outlays and habitual exporters should increase theirs. In the short run, though, the world is engaged in a gigantic game of passing the parcel, with no country wanting to take the habitual exporters’ goods and their capital surpluses. This is what makes today’s beggar-thy-neighbor policies so destructive: though some countries will eventually have to absorb the surpluses and capital, each country is trying to avoid them.

So which policy interventions are legitimate?

Any policy of intervening in the exchange rate, or imposing import tariffs or capital controls, tends to force other countries to make greater adjustments. China’s exchange-rate intervention probably hurts a number of other emerging-market exporters that do not intervene as much and are less competitive as a result.

But industrial countries, too, intervene substantially in markets. For example, while US monetary-policy intervention (yes, monetary policy is also intervention) has done little to boost domestic demand, it has spurred domestic capital to search for yield around the world. The US dollar would fall substantially – encouraging greater exports – were it not for the fact that foreign central banks are pushing much of that capital right back by buying US government securities.

Singapore Banks, Temasek, GIC, MAS,  were  SELLING US$ Bonds to  weaken  US$  and  Strengthen S$  ? ? ? ?

All this creates distortions that delay adjustment – exchange rates are too low in emerging markets, slowing their move away from exports, while the ease with which the US government is being financed creates little incentive for US politicians to reduce spending over the medium term.

Rather than intervening to obtain a short-term increase in their share of slow-growing global demand, it makes sense for countries to make their economies more balanced and efficient over the medium term. That will allow them to contribute in a sustainable way to increasing global demand.

China, for example, must move more income to households and away from its firms, so that private consumption can increase.

++++++++        ALL BANKS  nEEd to  raIse  DepOsIt  Interest Rates  tO  mOve  IncOme  tO  hOUsebOlds  and  retIrees  frOm the fIrms.        ********

The US must improve the education and skills of significant parts of its labor force, so that they can produce more of the high-quality knowledge and service-sector exports in which the US specializes. Higher incomes would boost US savings, reducing households’ dependence on debt, even as they maintained consumption levels.

Unfortunately, all this will take time, and citizens impatient for jobs and growth are pressing their politicians. Countries around the world are embracing shortsighted policies that cater to the immediate needs of domestic constituencies. There are exceptions. India, for example, has eschewed currency intervention thus far, even while opening up to long-term rupee debt inflows, in an attempt to finance much-needed infrastructure projects.

India’s willingness to spend when everyone else is attempting to sell and save entails risks that need to be carefully managed. But India’s example also provides a glimpse of what the world could achieve collectively.

After all, beggar-thy-neighbor policies will succeed only in making us all beggars.

Raghuram Rajan, a former Chief Economist of the IMF, is Professor of Finance at the Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, and author of Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010.

www.project-syndicate.org

For a podcast of this commentary in English, please use this link:

http://media.blubrry.com/ps/media.libsyn.com/media/ps/rajan10.mp3

You might also like to read more from Raghuram Rajan

Pasted from <http://www.sharejunction.com/sharejunction/postMessage.htm?topicId=8799&msgbdName=User Research/Opinions>

Search Results