Retirement Planning

Bob’s Retirement !"#$$%$&
1

!"# %&'()#*
Bob Davidson is a 46-year-old tenured professor of marketing at a small New England business school. He has a daughter,
Sue, age 6, and a wife, Margaret, age 40. Margaret is a potter, a vocation from which she earns no appreciable income.
Before she was married and for the first few years of her marriage to Bob (she was married once previously), she worked at a
variety of jobs, mostly involving software programming and customer support.
Bob’s grandfather died at age 42: Bob’s father died in 1980 at the age of 58. Both died from cancer, although unrelated
instances of that disease. Bob’s health has been excellent: he is an active runner and skier. There are no inherited diseases in
the family with the exception of glaucoma. Bob’s most recent serum cholesterol count was 190.
Bob’s salary from the school where be works consists of a nine-month salary (currently $95,000), on which the school pays
an additional 10 percent into a retirement fund. He also regularly receives support for his research, which consists of an
additional two-ninths of his regular salary, although the college does not pay retirement benefits on that portion of his
income. (Research support is additional income; it is not intended to cover the costs of research.) Over the 12 years he has
been at the college his salary has increased by 4 to 15 percent per year, although faculty salaries are subject to severe
compression. So he does not expect to receive such generous increases into the future. In addition to salary, Bob typically
earns $10,000 to 20.000 per year from consulting, executive education, and other activities.
In addition to the 10 percent regular contribution the school makes to Bob’s retirement savings, Bob also contributes a
substantial amount. He is currently setting aside $7,500 per year (before taxes). The maximum tax-deferred amount he can
contribute is currently $10,000; this limit rises with inflation. If he were to increase his savings toward retirement above the
limit, he would have to invest after-tax dollars. All of Bob’s retirement savings are invested with TIAA–CREF (Teachers
Insurance and Annuity Association-College Retirement Equities Fund; (homepage: www.tiaa-cref.org), which provides
various retirement, investment, and insurance services to university professors and researchers. Bob has contributed to Social
Security for many years as required by law, but in light of the problems with the Social Security trust fund he is uncertain as
to the level of benefits that he will actually receive upon retirement. (The Social Security Administration’s website is
www.ssa.gov). Bob’s TIAA-CREF holdings currently amount to $137,000. These are invested in the TIAA long-term bond
fund (20 percent) and the Global Equity Fund (80 percent). The Global Equity Fund is invested roughly 40 percent in US
equities and 60 percent in non-U.S. equities. New contributions are also allocated in these same proportions.
In addition to his retirement assets, Bob’s net worth consists of his home (purchase price $140,000 in 1987: Bob’s current
equity is $443,000), $50,000 in a rainy-day fund (invested in a short-term money market mutual fund with Fidelity
Investments), and $24,000 in a Fidelity Growth and Income Fund for his daughter’s college tuition. He has a term life
insurance policy with a value of $580,000; this policy has no asset value but pays its face value (plus inflation) as long as
Bob continues to pay the premiums. He has no outstanding debts in addition to his mortgage, other than monthly credit card
charges.
Should Bob die while insured, the proceeds on his life insurance are tax free to his wife. Similarly, if he dies before
retirement, his retirement assets go to his wife tax free. Either one of them can convert retirement assets into annuities
without any immediate taxation: the monthly income from the annuities is then taxed as ordinary income.
Bob’s mother is 72 and in good health. She is retired and living in a co-op apartment in Manhattan. Her net worth is on the
order of $300,000. His mother-in-law, who is 70, lives with her second husband. Her husband is 87 and has sufficient assets
to pay for nursing home care, if needed, for his likely remaining lifetime. Upon her husband’s death, Bob’s mother-in-law
will receive ownership of their house in Newton, Massachusetts, as well as one-third of his estate (the remaining two-thirds
will go to his two children). Her net worth at that point is expected to be in the $300,000 – 400,000 range.

!
#$%&'($ )*+, -.%/%0(,(/' 123(/2(4 56( #*' +) .+$(73/0 83'6 1&*(%$96(('9:; <= 1'(&6(/ >+8(77 %/$ ?(//('6 @%A(*; )+* 27%99*++, B9(
Bob’s goal is to work until he is 60 or 65. He would like to save enough to pay for his daughter’s college expenses, but not
for her expenses beyond that point. He and his wife would like to travel, and do so now as much as his job and their family
responsibilities permit. Upon retirement he would like to be able to travel extensively, although he would be able to live quite
modestly otherwise. He does not foresee moving from the small town where he now lives.
+,#-./'0-
Bob has a number of questions about how he should plan for his retirement. Will the amount he is accumulating at his current
rate of savings be adequate? How much should he live comfortably? What are the risks he faces, and how be setting aside
each year? How much will he have to live on should his retirement planning take these risks into when he retires? How long
after retirement will he be able to account?
1"2.3/4-5

Bob realizes that your first model has considered his choices (his savings rate, his retirement age, and his postretirement
spending) as independent decisions whereas they are clearly inter-dependent. For example, he could retire sooner if he saved
more of his income, and he would have to retire later if he wanted to spend more in retirement. In other words, some choices
naturally make sense together and some do not. Bob would now like you to carry out analysis of such interdependent choices
or scenarios.

Bob has decided that two alternative approaches are worth considering, each one making a different trade-off between current
lifestyle and level of investment performance risk. His ‘Big Saver’ strategy is to push his tax-sheltered savings to the limits
allowed by law and shift the funds to a more aggressive 60/40 stocks versus bonds allocation, plus save an additional $15,000
after tax in a growth and income fund. His ‘Go for Upside’ strategy is to invest his entire retirement fund in stocks and save
$3,000 per year after tax. The advantage of the Go for Upside strategy is that he will not have to reduce dramatically his
expenditures during the years leading up to retirement. The specific parameters that define each of the three strategies are
summarized below:

Decision/Parameter Status-quo Big Saver Go for Upside
Retirement age 65 65 65
Target college fund $ 100 $ 100 $ 100
Annual pre-tax contribution 5% Max Max
Post–tax savings $ 0 $ 15000 $ 3000
Retirement spending percent 70% 70% 70%
Fund allocation: % stocks 50% 60% 100%
Fund allocation: % bonds 50% 40% 0%
To facilitate comparison of risk and return among the strategies, Bob has assessed his beliefs about the uncertainty range for
the critical uncertain inputs. He has defined ‘low-case’ and ‘high-case’ inputs that are his best guess of the ranges of possible
values for each of the six uncertain inputs (see table below):
Uncertainty Assessment Low Base High
Salary growth 2% 3% 5%
Inflation impact on expenses 4% 3% 2%
Income tax pre-retirement 28% 30% 32%
Income tax post-retirement 18% 20% 22%
Return on stocks 5% 10% 15%
Return on bonds 2% 4% 6%
Return on growth and income
fund
4% 6% 8%
Fund return postretirement 3% 4% 5%
Bob desires that your analysis incorporates these uncertainties in the ‘strategy analysis’. It would be nice if you can prepare a
presentation on the outcomes showing tables and charts as may be appropriate.