Canadian Money Forum banner

1 - 20 of 68 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,

Does somebody have information regarding Canada senior stimulus because of coronavirus?

Thank you!

Selena
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,105 Posts
https://globalnews.ca/news/6694574/coronavirus-trudeau-economic-measures/

Keep scrolling down, you'll see that minimum mandatory RRIF withdrawals will be reduced by 25% for 2020. That's all I see specific to seniors.
And that is the right way to address the issue for seniors whose 2020 withdrawal, if not yet done at the start of the year, will take a bigger chunk of the nest egg. Of course, no one has to spend the withdrawal amount, though that is what seems to be the concept stuck in many minds.

Other than being in higher risk groups for a fatal experience with COVID-19, there really is nothing else in the current crisis that should create a hardship for seniors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
I think all of us over 75 are supposed to get a 10% OAS boost around midyear.

They could just do it for all recipients.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,540 Posts
It looks like seniors who are still working will be able to collect the same benefits as everyone else.

I know my wife is a senior who still works and contributes and is eligible for EI. It doesn't look there is anything for seniors who are not working.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,355 Posts
I think all of us over 75 are supposed to get a 10% OAS boost around midyear.

They could just do it for all recipients.
Why boost for everyone? Most seniors (the retired ones anyway) already have a steady income and don't need special financial help at this time.

It's the people unable to work who are hurting the most.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,355 Posts
It looks like seniors who are still working will be able to collect the same benefits as everyone else.

I know my wife is a senior who still works and contributes and is eligible for EI. It doesn't look there is anything for seniors who are not working.
The retired seniors before Coronavirus weren't working but they had pensions, CPP, OAS, investments, RRSP's, etc. I expect that most of them are not and shouldn't be eligible for EI "just because".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,105 Posts
I think all of us over 75 are supposed to get a 10% OAS boost around midyear.

They could just do it for all recipients.
No reason for seniors (not in the workforce and RRIFing) to get anything specific and temporary (2020) for COVID-19 beyond the RRIF 25% reduction for this year only. Obviously if a senior is still in the workforce, they will be part of the EI thingy. The only ones not getting anything is a senior who is not working and not withdrawing from a RRIF. Presumably they live on annuity and investment income alone and thus wealthy enough not to worry about such things.

Still, JT did indicate something for seniors is coming. Stay tuned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
The only ones not getting anything is a senior who is not working and not withdrawing from a RRIF.
But, as you know, there's a minimum mandatory yearly withdrawal. I would say that the only ones not getting anything are those that withdraw more than the mandatory minimum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,267 Posts
But, as you know, there's a minimum mandatory yearly withdrawal. I would say that the only ones not getting anything are those that withdraw more than the mandatory minimum.
I dont see that reducing the rrif required min withdrawal helps anyone except those who dont need to withdraw. They may reduce their taxable income by withdrawing less.

Others may still withdraw the same amount in $$, because that is what they need to live off. So no help to them.

We have already made our withdrawal. Maybe we could move some of that back? They allowed that previous time min was reduced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,517 Posts
... The only ones not getting anything is a senior who is not working and not withdrawing from a RRIF ...
... But, as you know, there's a minimum mandatory yearly withdrawal. I would say that the only ones not getting anything are those that withdraw more than the mandatory minimum.
I'm confident AltaRed is aware that RRIFs have mandatory minimum withdrawals, based on other posts.

My guess is that the "not withdrawing from a RRIF" really means those who skipped RRSPs/RRIFs and/or those who are retired but have not opened a RRIF yet.


Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,033 Posts
I heard the tail end of a comment on the news yesterday about 'what happens to retirees who are seeing their savings invested in stocks tank right now.' Something like that.

It made me shake my head. First, their savings are not tanking, only the 'paper' value is tanking. Second, when they chose to GAMBLE on the stock market, they made their choice. I do not see any reason why anyone should expect the government to aid them in such a case. If they don't sell, they have no loss, only a diminished value on the market. Again, their choice to make.

I don't see how anything about Covid-19 that doesn't apply to how it will affect all ages should be different for retirees. As a retiree, I see NO affect on me financially at all. Perhaps some prices of goods and services will become higher as a result, just as the price of gasoline is currently lower as a result but I see no major implications to me financially. But then, I am not sitting here saying, 'oh my savings that I GAMBLED on the stock market are tanking. What if I go broke.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,850 Posts
That's one way of looking at it LTA.

I agree that the stock market is a gamble, put in its best light. But very few of us think that way. The word drilled into people, particularly since the days when the older crowd could park their life savings in GICs, CSBs and such interest-bearing things, with returns at 10-20% p.a., is that one must get into "equities". Or gold. Or something. Don't just sit there dammit, is what we have been told.

I have eschewed both the stock market and gold. Well, not quite. Back in the 80s I got suckered into putting some money into mutual funds as an RRSP "investment". It was a popular thing to do once upon a time. I chipped in for a few years then got cold feet. I think perhaps in light of the market meltdown that occurred circa 1987 or so (which was probably a mere piffle compared to what's happening in the market now). I put in maybe a total of $20,000 or so and forgot about it. The last time I saw a statement my "market value" was reported at something like $140,000. No, I have not bothered to look lately. Probably now worth half of that or less and still vanishing. Not material to my retirement (unless all else fails, as it might).

So it's that "unless all else fails" that I would like you to address. You retired around age 40 and I am guessing you do not have something like an indexed civil service pension paying $75,000 or so a year. But you are faring well and seem unconcerned. So in what are you "invested"? Or are you? Is it that you simply have a warehouse full of cash that will not be exhausted in your lifetime come what may?

In my case, I have an indexed pension that will not likely go bankrupt, but it only pays about $38,000 a year, so not enuff to live on. I'll soon be able to add to that the current max CPP of $1,000 a month or whatever current max is. A bit of help. I'll be told I am too rich for OAS, not that anyone with an income under about $250,000 a year is anywhere close to rich. I have rental real estate in Los Angeles that pays in US dollars. But, if the world goes to hell in a handbasket, as it well might, that might well crap out on me. There are dire reports out of California. The tenants will be allowed to discontinue paying rent, they will be protected by law from eviction and I'll be paying their way for as long as I can afford to subsidize them. It will be me that pays the $1,000 US a month property tax on the place, and a few other bills, not them. And, thanks to Proposition 13, I am lucky after owning the place for about 25 years that the tax is at that low level. But Prop 13 might disappear in the new order.

I have forest lands in my portfolio and a goodly number of cubic meters of mostly Douglas fir and western red cedar I can harvest, but will it be worth anything in the times ahead? I have no idea.

In brief compass, what i am saying is that I "gambled" on the stock market with my mutual RRSP funds. That has proven to be a loser. I accept I gambled and lost. Mind you, if the taxpayers want to bail me out, well.... Then I "gambled" in real estate. Plainly a gamble by any yardstick. The outcome there remains at large. Then I "gambled" with forest lands. Again, I knew all along that timber prices were not guaranteed to climb forever. What might lead to a loss of value was never sure, but one could guess. Maybe, for eg. Doug fir would no longer be used for framing houses. It would be aluminum or something else. Maybe some disease would kill the trees. Or climate change would usher in their demise. Now, maybe COVID-19 will kill off a large part of the world population and no new construction of any kind will be needed for a long, long, time. There will be vacant houses everywhere and selling or renting real estate will provide no income.

LTA, in you post you profess to be immune to any financial difficulty come hell or high water and I would really like to know, if you care to share, how you are able to pull that off. I am mostly in the gambling camp, as revealed above, and might get walloped. Even my government pensions might not be so secure. If government moves to hand out money hand over fist (as would appear to be the current tack), how long can governments maintain payments to pensioners? Perhaps the only hope is for COVID-19 to kill all the pensioners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,105 Posts
I'm confident AltaRed is aware that RRIFs have mandatory minimum withdrawals, based on other posts.

My guess is that the "not withdrawing from a RRIF" really means those who skipped RRSPs/RRIFs and/or those who are retired but have not opened a RRIF yet.


Cheers
Indeed. There are retired seniors who are not yet 72 and not yet RRIFing and/or don't even have RRSPs/RRIFs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
Indeed. There are retired seniors who are not yet 72 and not yet RRIFing and/or don't even have RRSPs/RRIFs.
O.K. Guess I didn't see it. Seniors without registered retirement savings income b/c 1. They never had any money they could put towards it. 2. They have so much money that they don't need RRSP/RRIF. 3. They are pre-RRIF withdrawal age. 4. Anyone else?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,540 Posts
Inconsequential perhaps, but a few seniors will see a bump in the child benefits if they are raising kids or perhaps serving as a temporary home for the Children's Aid Society.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
I heard the tail end of a comment on the news yesterday about 'what happens to retirees who are seeing their savings invested in stocks tank right now.' Something like that.

It made me shake my head. First, their savings are not tanking, only the 'paper' value is tanking. Second, when they chose to GAMBLE on the stock market, they made their choice. I do not see any reason why anyone should expect the government to aid them in such a case. If they don't sell, they have no loss, only a diminished value on the market. Again, their choice to make.

I don't see how anything about Covid-19 that doesn't apply to how it will affect all ages should be different for retirees. As a retiree, I see NO affect on me financially at all. Perhaps some prices of goods and services will become higher as a result, just as the price of gasoline is currently lower as a result but I see no major implications to me financially. But then, I am not sitting here saying, 'oh my savings that I GAMBLED on the stock market are tanking. What if I go broke.'
I think the point is that they are forced to sell when taking their RIF payment. Lowering the minimum allows them to preserve more of their capital in the hopes of a rebound. Agree that the portfolio should be positioned to withstand some downturns, but I guess this is one way to help them recover a bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,105 Posts
I think the point is that they are forced to sell when taking their RIF payment. Lowering the minimum allows them to preserve more of their capital in the hopes of a rebound. Agree that the portfolio should be positioned to withstand some downturns, but I guess this is one way to help them recover a bit.
It is a gesture so that almost everyone gets something, and it is a logical outcome for this year for those that didn't organize their RRIFs properly. Plus it theoretically helps all those with RRIFs because that lower withdrawal this year allows the residual to compound and grow tax deferred for the life of the RRIF. I say theoretically because in practice, less than perfect investment decisions and market returns will overwhelm the effect of that deferred withdrawal in mere months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,267 Posts
I think the point is that they are forced to sell when taking their RIF payment. Lowering the minimum allows them to preserve more of their capital in the hopes of a rebound.
That preservation doesn't help those who live off the current minimum (or a higher) withdrawal. Unless they tighten their belts and live off less. It will help those who don't actually need the withdrawal. For those, an eventual recovery will be a benefit if they yet have to make their withdrawal. As will lower taxes for current year. Based on past reductions, we will likely be able to return some of our early withdrawal, if we so wish. Details still to come? I doubt I would do that anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
I usually wait till mid December to make the RRIF withdrawal - so that's the TFSA contribution early in January. If the 2020 adjusted minimum means that I'll not have as much excess to deal with, then that's a benefit for me, I guess.
 
1 - 20 of 68 Posts
Top