Author Topic: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article  (Read 14681 times)

anisotropy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« on: February 18, 2014, 10:00:00 AM »
Some of the points are valid and deserve more thoughts (ie, healthcare, lost salary). I still think this belongs in the "wall of shame and comedy" though....

http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/high-cost-early-retirement-160154709.html

We occasionally hear about a friend who somehow saved up enough money, or just decided to chuck it, and walks off to retire at age 60, 55 or even 50. It can be done.

Also, some people live in a McMansion, drive a Tesla, and vacation in the south of France. But we know it's a very expensive lifestyle. And we know we all can't afford it, as the real estate bust of the 2000s so cruelly reminded us. We need to appreciate that, like buying a McMansion, taking early retirement is a very expensive proposition. Yes, a fortunate few can afford it. But most of us just have to get real.

Why does early retirement cost so much? Let's say you have a job at 55 and want to retire next year. Even if you don't have to worry about kids, what's it going to cost you? Here's an itemized bill:

1. There's the salary you'll never get. If you retire at 56, instead of your full retirement age of 66 as defined by the Social Security Administration, you'll lose 10 years of wages. If you make $80,000 a year, that adds up to $800,000. But wait. You'd likely get a cost-of-living raise or a merit increase. If you average a 3 percent annual salary increase, you'd be making over $100,000 a year by the time you reach full retirement age. So you're really facing more like $1 million in lost salary. The $1 million would be subject to income tax, so it's not that much out-of-pocket. But it's still a lot of money.

2. And the benefits you lose. If you're not working, the company will no longer contribute to your 401(k). You're not going to have an expense account anymore, or any company subsidized perks. The average employee receives almost 40 percent of their salary in the form of extra benefits. For the $80,000 employee, that's an additional $30,000 a year, every year for the next ten years. Of course, that includes your medical benefits, which is a whole other issue.

3. You're responsible for your own health care. Do you get health insurance through your workplace? If so, you benefit from a group rate. Your employer probably pays a portion of your premium. Plus, the premium you pay is not taxed, all adding up to a pretty sweet deal. If you retire before the Medicare eligibility age of 65, unless you have medical insurance through an early retirement contract, you will have to purchase your own policy. The Affordable Care Act may make health insurance less expensive for some people -- the details still need to be shaken out -- but it could easily cost you between $500 and $1,000 a month. And since you're purchasing the insurance yourself, rather than through your job, you get no tax deduction.

4. You sacrifice Social Security benefits. Social Security deducts approximately 7 percent from your monthly check for every year you retire early. If you elect to begin Social Security at 62 -- the youngest age you're eligible -- you give up about 25 percent of your monthly check. Yes, you receive benefits for a longer period of time, so in the end the amount is likely to equal out, but that doesn't help when you're trying to pay your bills with $970 a month instead of the average $1,295 a month. And you're stuck with those lower payments for the rest of your life.

5. You rob your future. Instead of using your prime earning years to build up your savings, in early retirement you'll be spending down those savings. You'll have a smaller nest egg when you get to your 70s and 80s. Maybe you don't think that matters because by then you'll be too old to travel or spend money on other things. (If that's what you think, talk to some 70-somethings who routinely go out to dinner, take cruises and attend theater productions.) But regardless, you will likely have medical bills and you'll still want a roof over your head, unless your retirement dream includes living in one of your children's spare bedrooms. Is that what you really want for your future?

It's possible to retire early if you're lucky enough to strike it rich, or if you plan ahead, watch your budget and want a more modest lifestyle. But the price tag for early retirement is high. For some people it's worth it, but it's not for everybody.

Tom Sightings is a former publishing executive who was eased into early retirement in his mid-50s. He lives in the New York area and blogs at Sightings at 60, where he covers health, finance, retirement and other concerns of baby boomers who realize that somehow they have grown up.




Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4038
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2014, 11:33:10 AM »
This one's just plain wrong:
Quote
4. You sacrifice Social Security benefits. Social Security deducts approximately 7 percent from your monthly check for every year you retire early.

SS doesn't care whether you're 'retired' or not, just how much you pay into the system, and when you start collecting.  So you could start collecting at 65, but keep on working for years.

Now what is true is that if you were to retire at say 40, you would not be paying into the system between then and 65 (or whenever you start collecting benefits), so your eventual benefit would be much smaller.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3179
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2014, 12:10:11 PM »
I posted an article about how many companies are squeezing the 401K. They are not matching, matching very little, or making employees work 3-5 years before being fully vested (hard to do with so many layoffs these days).

As for health insurance, I have paid more for it every single year. When I first started working, my health insurance was free!!  This is a benefit that is slowly eroding.


mgreczyn

  • Guest
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2014, 01:14:07 PM »
The problem is that the analysis neglects the opportunity cost of not retiring early.  If you could retire at 56 but you keep working until 66, then you're trading 20,000 hours of life for a slightly larger pile of cash.  The hours are priceless, but the cash is, well, the exact opposite of priceless. 

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4038
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2014, 03:33:55 PM »
...then you're trading 20,000 hours of life for...

No, 'cause you're still living those 20,000 hours, aren't you?  And I'll argue that it's certainly possible to find something interesting/worthwhile to do with those working hours that also makes you money.

mgreczyn

  • Guest
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2014, 03:35:06 PM »
...then you're trading 20,000 hours of life for...

No, 'cause you're still living those 20,000 hours, aren't you?  And I'll argue that it's certainly possible to find something interesting/worthwhile to do with those working hours that also makes you money.
Speak for yourself company man.

mgreczyn

  • Guest
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2014, 03:39:10 PM »
...then you're trading 20,000 hours of life for...

No, 'cause you're still living those 20,000 hours, aren't you?  And I'll argue that it's certainly possible to find something interesting/worthwhile to do with those working hours that also makes you money.
Ha, apologies for the hip shot response.  I read the rest of your post and point conceded, sure you can.  But now we're splitting hairs retirement-police style. If I "retire" early but do work that makes me feel alive in exchange for money am I really "retired" by the author's definition and am I really experiencing  the downsides he writes about?

Heart of Tin

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Location: Kansas City
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2014, 05:35:50 PM »
The majority of the article is fear mongering, and I don’t think the last paragraph makes up for that fact. Also, he’s just plain wrong on many of his points, and his assumptions keep changing without any warning or justification.
 
Quote
If you make $80,000 a year, that adds up to $800,000. But wait. You'd likely get a cost-of-living raise or a merit increase. If you average a 3 percent annual salary increase, you'd be making over $100,000 a year by the time you reach full retirement age. So you're really facing more like $1 million in lost salary. The $1 million would be subject to income tax, so it's not that much out-of-pocket. But it's still a lot of money.

First of all, he assumes a cost-of-living adjustment which is essentially equivalent to inflation then proceeds to treat money from different years as equivalent. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth here. If we assume that some of the 3% raise is a direct result of inflation, then we cannot then add money from different years to an intelligible sum without discounting by inflation.
 
Second, and this bit really makes me mad, only the last two years of the ten earn more than $100,000. The total from all ten years is only about $920,000. What irks me is that he can do the math to quote the $100,000+ salary at the end of the period, but then, suddenly, it becomes too onerous to calculate the other years’ salaries and find the actual sum. Instead he extrapolates to the inflated $1,000,000 statistic. This is not only lazy; it is misleading. If this man has any concept of what a geometric sum is he should realize how inappropriate it is to use the last years' salary alone to estimate the total earnings over all ten years.
 
Quote
The average employee receives almost 40 percent of their salary in the form of extra benefits. For the $80,000 employee, that's an additional $30,000 a year, every year for the next ten years.

Citation? The Bureau of Labor Statistics has average benefits for September of 2013 at 30% of total compensation (my citation: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf). Also, I have no idea what form of backwards, voodoo math he used to get $30,000 in benefits if an $80,000 wage is just over 60% of total compensation. By my math, $80,000/60% * 40% = $53,000 in benefits. Or, working backwards from $30,000 in benefits and $80,000 in wages, benefits are about 27% of total compensation. Has this man never used a calculator before? Is he not capable of elementary arithmetic? He clearly did not check the numbers he's using in this article for any semblance of correctness.
 
Quote
Do you get health insurance through your workplace? If so, you benefit from a group rate.

No. Just, no. SOME people benefit from a group rate. Do you remember those “distressed babies” from a few weeks ago? If you’re in AOL’s group, then you are not benefiting from having those expensive members as a part of your group rate. If you are a non-smoker in a group of smokers, then you are not benefiting from a group rate. Does your employer have fewer than 50 full time employees? Then the ACA mandates that your group be priced using individual underwriting standards, and you might not be benefitting from a group rate.
 
Quote
The Affordable Care Act may make health insurance less expensive for some people -- the details still need to be shaken out -- but it could easily cost you between $500 and $1,000 a month.

His low estimate is too high. I live in Kansas where health insurance premiums are lower than many other states, but a 60-year-old non-smoker in my zip code can get a bronze plan for $377 per month. And there are still a few states where health insurance is less expansive than it is here. I'm not sure whether his high estimate is appropriate, but so far he hasn't put any effort into research for this article, so I don't hold out hope that it is.
 
Quote
And since you're purchasing the insurance yourself, rather than through your job, you get no tax deduction.

Yet again, no. Health insurance premiums can be included in Schedule A of Form 1040 as medical expenses. You have to itemize to claim them, and only expenses in excess of 10% of AGI can be deducted, but he earlier quoted $500 - $1,000 per month premiums. AGI would need to be upwards of $60,000 and $120,000 for such high premiums to, alone, add up to less than 10% of AGI at those levels, respectively. It is unlikely that premiums are the only medical expense for someone in the age group that this author has specified, driving the necessary AGI up even further. As long as you are itemizing, you should get some deduction from your insurance premiums at his quoted levels.
 
Quote
Social Security deducts approximately 7 percent from your monthly check for every year you retire early. If you elect to begin Social Security at 62 -- the youngest age you're eligible -- you give up about 25 percent of your monthly check. Yes, you receive benefits for a longer period of time, so in the end the amount is likely to equal out, but that doesn't help when you're trying to pay your bills with $970 a month instead of the average $1,295 a month. And you're stuck with those lower payments for the rest of your life.

First, the 25% rule he quoted is only true of those whose full retirement age is 66, so no one currently under 55. It’s actually a 30% reduction for those currently under 55 who begin taking Social Security at age 62. The author seems to have forgotten that his hypothetical audience was giving up a 401k match by not working. What happened to that 401k after retirement? Was it all consumed in the intervening years between retirement and age 62? All 2 - 12 years according to the ages the author cites as possible early retirement ages? He certainly isn’t including any 401k withdrawals in the hypothetical monthly income here.
 
Quote
It's possible to retire early if you're lucky enough to strike it rich, or if you plan ahead, watch your budget and want a more modest lifestyle. But the price tag for early retirement is high.

The second sentence contradicts the second clause of the first. Overall this guy strikes me as a complainypants who doesn’t understand percentages, apparently. He rounds up when it suits his argument, and either didn’t do his research or tailored his results to match his conclusion. This certainly belongs on the Wall of Shame.

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4038
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2014, 08:47:23 PM »
...then you're trading 20,000 hours of life for...

No, 'cause you're still living those 20,000 hours, aren't you?  And I'll argue that it's certainly possible to find something interesting/worthwhile to do with those working hours that also makes you money.
Speak for yourself company man.

Well, I was :-)  I've managed to find interesting things to do that pay.  And BTW, I work for myself. Haven't had a full-time* company job since around the turn of the century.

*Sometimes I'm on payroll as part time, depending what a client's HR department is comfortable with.

vern

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 592
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2014, 08:48:25 PM »
You can't put a dollar value on 20 years of your life. 

The article left that out too.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4226
  • Location: California
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #10 on: February 20, 2014, 11:44:25 PM »
Like most news articles on retirement or very basic online retirement calculators, they all assume your current income is what you should base your retirement off of.  Of course around here we all understand that your spending is what actually matters.  My bank has an retirement calculator/goal chart on my dashboard and it assumes I need 80-90% of my current income to retire.  It thinks I will need $2.5 million to retire at age 60 based on my current income.  My goal is to FIRE in my early-mid 50s and I already know I'll only need half that.

Shropskr

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2014, 12:07:08 AM »
What I get from this article is slightly different.  I get that more people are considering and becoming aware of the idea of FIRE. And the mainstream is trying to scare them back into there holes. 

No No nothing to see here it can't be done
Go back to your consumerist ways. Spend spend spend...

vern

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 592
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2014, 12:28:15 AM »
What I get from this article is slightly different.  I get that more people are considering and becoming aware of the idea of FIRE. And the mainstream is trying to scare them back into there holes. 

No No nothing to see here it can't be done
Go back to your consumerist ways. Spend spend spend...

This!

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2957
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2014, 12:31:27 AM »
I agree with most of what Heart of Tin said except:

Quote
The average employee receives almost 40 percent of their salary in the form of extra benefits. For the $80,000 employee, that's an additional $30,000 a year, every year for the next ten years.

Citation? The Bureau of Labor Statistics has average benefits for September of 2013 at 30% of total compensation (my citation: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf). Also, I have no idea what form of backwards, voodoo math he used to get $30,000 in benefits if an $80,000 wage is just over 60% of total compensation. By my math, $80,000/60% * 40% = $53,000 in benefits. Or, working backwards from $30,000 in benefits and $80,000 in wages, benefits are about 27% of total compensation. Has this man never used a calculator before? Is he not capable of elementary arithmetic? He clearly did not check the numbers he's using in this article for any semblance of correctness.

Overall this guy strikes me as a complainypants who doesn’t understand percentages, apparently.

The math is quite easy and reasonable.  The author said benefit are almost 40% of salary, not compensation.  So $80,000 x 0.4 = $32,000.  If the figure is actually 38% (almost 40), then 80,000 x 0.38 = 30,400.  Round that to the nearest thousand, and you've got $30,000.

Incidentally, that's not too far from your BLS data.  If 30% of total compensation is benefits, that corresponds to benefits of about $34,000 on an $80,000 salary (total compensation = $114,000).

In conclusion: most of your rant is accurate and entertaining.  But before throwing stones about bad arithmetic, you should make sure yours is correct.  The author's was, and actually used a more conservative figure than you for benefits.

gobius

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 165
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #14 on: February 28, 2014, 09:01:20 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2014, 09:49:39 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

I'm sure my firm would say that paying my secretary is a benefit ....

But leaving that aside, last year, they put 3% of salary (up to the eligible compensation limit) into my 401(k) (so about 2% of cash compensation), they paid almost 5% of my cash compensation toward my family health insurance, they paid about .4% of cash compensation for my professional licenses, about .1% for continuing education expenses, an unknown amount for my coverage by the form's professional liability insurance (I would not be surprised if this was a couple of percent, but it's really a firm policy, so it's not really a pure personal benefit). I'm getting toward 10%. What are the big things I'm missing?

Trirod

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2014, 10:10:35 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

I'm sure my firm would say that paying my secretary is a benefit ....

But leaving that aside, last year, they put 3% of salary (up to the eligible compensation limit) into my 401(k) (so about 2% of cash compensation), they paid almost 5% of my cash compensation toward my family health insurance, they paid about .4% of cash compensation for my professional licenses, about .1% for continuing education expenses, an unknown amount for my coverage by the form's professional liability insurance (I would not be surprised if this was a couple of percent, but it's really a firm policy, so it's not really a pure personal benefit). I'm getting toward 10%. What are the big things I'm missing?

Do you get paid leave and holidays?  That could be an additional 10% (assuming 5 weeks of those out of 52 weeks)
Employer's social security and medicare taxes is another 7.65%
Plus worker's comp and unemployment insurance is probably another couple percent.

Getting pretty close to 30% now.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2014, 10:29:29 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

I'm sure my firm would say that paying my secretary is a benefit ....

But leaving that aside, last year, they put 3% of salary (up to the eligible compensation limit) into my 401(k) (so about 2% of cash compensation), they paid almost 5% of my cash compensation toward my family health insurance, they paid about .4% of cash compensation for my professional licenses, about .1% for continuing education expenses, an unknown amount for my coverage by the form's professional liability insurance (I would not be surprised if this was a couple of percent, but it's really a firm policy, so it's not really a pure personal benefit). I'm getting toward 10%. What are the big things I'm missing?

Do you get paid leave and holidays?  That could be an additional 10% (assuming 5 weeks of those out of 52 weeks)
Employer's social security and medicare taxes is another 7.65%
Plus worker's comp and unemployment insurance is probably another couple percent.

Getting pretty close to 30% now.

All good suggestions, but not what you suggest in terms of impact.

I'm salaried and I am always available, so while I get "paid vacation," it doesn't mean that I don't work in that time. I don't think any reasonable person would view it as additional compensation, it's just a quasi-justification for me being somewhat slower to get work done.

Social security and Medicare taxes are less than half that rate, and unemployment and disability contributions total about .4% of my cash compensation, so let's add another 4% for payroll taxes. So we're still at less than half the quoted 30%.

smalllife

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 978
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #18 on: February 28, 2014, 10:38:45 AM »
Do you get paid leave and holidays?  That could be an additional 10% (assuming 5 weeks of those out of 52 weeks)
Employer's social security and medicare taxes is another 7.65%
Plus worker's comp and unemployment insurance is probably another couple percent.

Getting pretty close to 30% now.

All good suggestions, but not what you suggest in terms of impact.

I'm salaried and I am always available, so while I get "paid vacation," it doesn't mean that I don't work in that time. I don't think any reasonable person would view it as additional compensation, it's just a quasi-justification for me being somewhat slower to get work done.

Social security and Medicare taxes are less than half that rate
, and unemployment and disability contributions total about .4% of my cash compensation, so let's add another 4% for payroll taxes. So we're still at less than half the quoted 30%.

SS is 6.2% for BOTH the employee and employer, although it does cap at $117k so your overall percentage is lower if you are highly compensated
Medicare is 1.45%, again for both

7.65%

FUTA = .6%
SUI = anywhere from 0.005% to 3-4% depending on the industry and state

Let's even leave this out since it's capped pretty low for most states.

PTO - average American who HAS paid time off gets two weeks I believe

5%  (just because you have to work on vacation doesn't mean everyone does)

We're at 10.65% excluding SUI/WC.

3% match on retirement = 13.65%

Medical/dental coverage = really really varies here, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see figures in the 15-20% of compensation range here - especially if we're talking median income.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2957
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2014, 10:54:49 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

I'm sure my firm would say that paying my secretary is a benefit ....

But leaving that aside, last year, they put 3% of salary (up to the eligible compensation limit) into my 401(k) (so about 2% of cash compensation), they paid almost 5% of my cash compensation toward my family health insurance, they paid about .4% of cash compensation for my professional licenses, about .1% for continuing education expenses, an unknown amount for my coverage by the form's professional liability insurance (I would not be surprised if this was a couple of percent, but it's really a firm policy, so it's not really a pure personal benefit). I'm getting toward 10%. What are the big things I'm missing?

Do you get paid leave and holidays?  That could be an additional 10% (assuming 5 weeks of those out of 52 weeks)
Employer's social security and medicare taxes is another 7.65%
Plus worker's comp and unemployment insurance is probably another couple percent.

Getting pretty close to 30% now.

All good suggestions, but not what you suggest in terms of impact.

I'm salaried and I am always available, so while I get "paid vacation," it doesn't mean that I don't work in that time. I don't think any reasonable person would view it as additional compensation, it's just a quasi-justification for me being somewhat slower to get work done.

Social security and Medicare taxes are less than half that rate, and unemployment and disability contributions total about .4% of my cash compensation, so let's add another 4% for payroll taxes. So we're still at less than half the quoted 30%.

If you're at more than four times the average household salary, I would expect the percentage of benefits to be much lower than average.  Most benefits don't scale with salary (health care), and others others hit caps (Social Security).  If you have a high salary without generous retirement benefits, it wouldn't surprise me at all for you to be half the average.

For the average wage earner, a $42.5k salary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage) has Social Security and Medicare of 7.65% and health insurance premiums of >$4200 or 10% (http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/single-coverage/).  An average of 4.1% of salary is contributed by the employer to 401k plans (http://www.401khelpcenter.com/benchmarking.html#.UxDNEij4-I0).  Those are averages across the entire country and all salaries, and we're already at 21.75%.  Add in some other benefits (vision plans, dental, life insurance, education), plus a portion of the country who have defined pensions (~14%, according to http://www.ebri.org/publications/benfaq/index.cfm?fa=retfaq14), and I think it's quite easy to see how the number gets to 30%.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2014, 11:20:05 AM »
Does the employer supplying an extra 30% in benefits sound a bit off to anyone else?  That sounds a bit high to me, although I suppose someone making $10/hr + medical care may end up getting 30%.

I'm sure my firm would say that paying my secretary is a benefit ....

But leaving that aside, last year, they put 3% of salary (up to the eligible compensation limit) into my 401(k) (so about 2% of cash compensation), they paid almost 5% of my cash compensation toward my family health insurance, they paid about .4% of cash compensation for my professional licenses, about .1% for continuing education expenses, an unknown amount for my coverage by the form's professional liability insurance (I would not be surprised if this was a couple of percent, but it's really a firm policy, so it's not really a pure personal benefit). I'm getting toward 10%. What are the big things I'm missing?

Do you get paid leave and holidays?  That could be an additional 10% (assuming 5 weeks of those out of 52 weeks)
Employer's social security and medicare taxes is another 7.65%
Plus worker's comp and unemployment insurance is probably another couple percent.

Getting pretty close to 30% now.

All good suggestions, but not what you suggest in terms of impact.

I'm salaried and I am always available, so while I get "paid vacation," it doesn't mean that I don't work in that time. I don't think any reasonable person would view it as additional compensation, it's just a quasi-justification for me being somewhat slower to get work done.

Social security and Medicare taxes are less than half that rate, and unemployment and disability contributions total about .4% of my cash compensation, so let's add another 4% for payroll taxes. So we're still at less than half the quoted 30%.

If you're at more than four times the average household salary, I would expect the percentage of benefits to be much lower than average.  Most benefits don't scale with salary (health care), and others others hit caps (Social Security).  If you have a high salary without generous retirement benefits, it wouldn't surprise me at all for you to be half the average.

For the average wage earner, a $42.5k salary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage) has Social Security and Medicare of 7.65% and health insurance premiums of >$4200 or 10% (http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/single-coverage/).  An average of 4.1% of salary is contributed by the employer to 401k plans (http://www.401khelpcenter.com/benchmarking.html#.UxDNEij4-I0).  Those are averages across the entire country and all salaries, and we're already at 21.75%.  Add in some other benefits (vision plans, dental, life insurance, education), plus a portion of the country who have defined pensions (~14%, according to http://www.ebri.org/publications/benfaq/index.cfm?fa=retfaq14), and I think it's quite easy to see how the number gets to 30%.

Is it clear that payroll taxes levied on employers are properly considered "benefits" for employees? And what of the fact that two of your categories are for benefits that aren't universally provided (401(k) and health insurance)? It seems to me like you're describing an average earner who gets a robust benefits package, and my expectation (which may be totally wrong) wouldn't have been that that was necessarily or event typically the case.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2957
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2014, 11:24:03 AM »
Is it clear that payroll taxes levied on employers are properly considered "benefits" for employees? And what of the fact that two of your categories are for benefits that aren't universally provided (401(k) and health insurance)? It seems to me like you're describing an average earner who gets a robust benefits package, and my expectation (which may be totally wrong) wouldn't have been that that was necessarily or event typically the case.

The payroll tax question is a good one, and I'm not sure of the answer.  But for the second question -- the figures I gave are averages, so it includes the zeros.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2957
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2014, 11:26:04 AM »
Is it clear that payroll taxes levied on employers are properly considered "benefits" for employees? And what of the fact that two of your categories are for benefits that aren't universally provided (401(k) and health insurance)? It seems to me like you're describing an average earner who gets a robust benefits package, and my expectation (which may be totally wrong) wouldn't have been that that was necessarily or event typically the case.

The payroll tax question is a good one, and I'm not sure of the answer.  But for the second question -- the figures I gave are averages, so it includes the zeros.

It appears that both payroll taxes on employers and vacation time are included in benefits: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm

MKinVA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2014, 12:10:39 PM »
But wait, if you are retiring why would you count paid vacation days, or ss payments, or unemployment benefits, or much of that other stuff? You don't need that in retirement so you don't need to account for its value or replace it, so to speak.

By the way, worker's comp is not a benefit for the employee (although it may look like it). Worker's comp is an insurance policy that pays the worker who is injured and in return that worker cannot sue you for negligence. It's an employer's insurance benefit, not an employee's.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 12:13:32 PM by MKinVA »

Tyler

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1198
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #24 on: February 28, 2014, 12:16:29 PM »
All five points of the original article can be summarized as "you make more money if you keep working."  Which is true.  I think they're speaking to early retirees in their late fifties still living high-burn lifestyles, not the crowd here.

Much of (very) early retirement involves a new paradigm where more money is not the ultimate goal.  So to us they totally miss the point.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 12:18:07 PM by Tyler »

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #25 on: February 28, 2014, 12:26:45 PM »
Is it clear that payroll taxes levied on employers are properly considered "benefits" for employees? And what of the fact that two of your categories are for benefits that aren't universally provided (401(k) and health insurance)? It seems to me like you're describing an average earner who gets a robust benefits package, and my expectation (which may be totally wrong) wouldn't have been that that was necessarily or event typically the case.

The payroll tax question is a good one, and I'm not sure of the answer.  But for the second question -- the figures I gave are averages, so it includes the zeros.

"Average Single Premium per Enrolled Employee For Employer-Based Health Insurance" sounds like it presumes that the employee has employer-based health insurance, so while it seems to count the zeros for employees who get no employer contribution toward their employer-based insurance, it doesn't seem to factor that many employees don't have employer-based insurance in the first place. Although less clear, I read the 401(k) site the same way---4.1% for people who have a 401(k) plan in the first place.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2957
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #26 on: February 28, 2014, 12:31:39 PM »
Is it clear that payroll taxes levied on employers are properly considered "benefits" for employees? And what of the fact that two of your categories are for benefits that aren't universally provided (401(k) and health insurance)? It seems to me like you're describing an average earner who gets a robust benefits package, and my expectation (which may be totally wrong) wouldn't have been that that was necessarily or event typically the case.

The payroll tax question is a good one, and I'm not sure of the answer.  But for the second question -- the figures I gave are averages, so it includes the zeros.

"Average Single Premium per Enrolled Employee For Employer-Based Health Insurance" sounds like it presumes that the employee has employer-based health insurance, so while it seems to count the zeros for employees who get no employer contribution toward their employer-based insurance, it doesn't seem to factor that many employees don't have employer-based insurance in the first place. Although less clear, I read the 401(k) site the same way---4.1% for people who have a 401(k) plan in the first place.

Oddly, the BLS data suggests the opposite.  Health benefits range from 7.7% of total compensation for private industry workers to 11.7% of total compensation for state and local government workers.  Whereas defined contribution retirement plans account for 0.8-2.1% of total compensation (defined benefit adds another 1.6-8.5%)

Although my previous links are interesting to get dollar figures, the BLS figures are more inclusive.

pac_NW

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Have the stamina to work on it until it's right
    • Take Next Steps
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2014, 09:01:18 AM »
This one's just plain wrong:
Quote
4. You sacrifice Social Security benefits. Social Security deducts approximately 7 percent from your monthly check for every year you retire early.

SS doesn't care whether you're 'retired' or not, just how much you pay into the system, and when you start collecting.  So you could start collecting at 65, but keep on working for years.

Now what is true is that if you were to retire at say 40, you would not be paying into the system between then and 65 (or whenever you start collecting benefits), so your eventual benefit would be much smaller.

Yes, this one caught me by surprise too.  Where does he get 7%?

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #28 on: March 02, 2014, 06:35:34 PM »
Being able to sleep in and not work for the man = priceless

For everything else= there's the cubicle.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7168
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #29 on: March 03, 2014, 02:09:15 PM »
^+1

nicknageli

  • Guest
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2014, 02:35:39 PM »
Being able to sleep in and not work for the man = priceless

For everything else= there's the cubicle.

Hahahaha.  I like that one. 

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4038
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2014, 03:29:44 PM »
Yes, this one caught me by surprise too.  Where does he get 7%?

That's how much the SS benefit increases per year, if you delay taking it beyond your standard retirement date, or decreases, if you take it early.

TreeTired

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
  • Age: 139
  • Location: North Carolina
  • I think we can make it (We made it!)
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #32 on: March 03, 2014, 03:52:17 PM »
Quote
Tom Sightings is a former publishing executive who was eased into early retirement in his mid-50s. He lives in the New York area

I think the article is mostly sour grapes.   Similar thing happened to me.  My job abruptly ended when I was 54 yrs old.  Turned out to be the best thing that could have happened to me.  Forced us to sell the big expensive house (pre-emptively) and move.  I don't count the dollars that I could have made if my job continued.  I count the $30,000 per year in property taxes I saved by moving (ok, less the $4k I pay here).   Also, I don't plan to draw social security until age 70, so I will benefit from the 7 - 8% annual bump social security gives from age 62 to 70. (unless I die first, in which case I won't care because I will be dead).


"Early retirement"  does not necessarily mean drawing social security benefits early.

annann

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 818
  • Location: Central Florida
Re: The High Cost of Early Retirement --- YAHOO Article
« Reply #33 on: March 09, 2014, 12:42:51 PM »
Payroll Taxes for SS and Medicare are employee benefits.  If you are self-employed you pay double--employee and employer.