Simon Walker

Balancing act for funding your retirement is a tricky test

One of the most difficult – and important – calculations in finance is how much investment capital you will need for retirement.

To be able to calculate the savings needed, people need to make some assumptions about the amount of income they can safely draw from their retirement capital. This means finding the retirement income Goldilocks spot, drawing neither too much nor too little.

On the one hand, in retirement you want to have the best possible life, while on the other, you do not want the money to run out before you do.

Like Goldilocks’s porridge, chair and bed, the amount that you take and spend from your capital needs to be just right.

There is a rule of thumb in finance which says that in retirement, you can draw 4 per cent of your savings to live on each year. The 4 per cent rule tells you that for every $100,000 you have saved, you can take $4000 in income each year for 30 years.

Given its importance to retired people’s finances, this 4 per cent rule has been much studied. Although it has been criticised by some, it is largely still considered by most to be a fairly useful tool for modelling what a retired investor can expect to be able to live on.

It may be a bit rough and ready, but having a rule of thumb like that is very useful when planning your finances.

There are several things that could make the 4 per cent rule either too optimistic or too pessimistic.

Firstly, the 4 per cent drawdown rule is based on someone having a balanced portfolio (50 per cent of the portfolio in shares and property, with the other 50 per cent in bonds and cash). If you arrange the portfolio so that it is more conservative than this, your returns are likely to be lower, and so your drawings should be correspondingly lower. Such a conservative portfolio will have less volatility, but the money is more likely to run out before you do.

Conversely, if you invest more aggressively, your money might last longer but the volatility risk will be higher.

Secondly, the sequence of your returns may not be good. Returns from any portfolio will be volatile, but the timing of the volatility may be unfortunate. For example, if there is a major market fall shortly before or after retirement, it will be difficult to maintain the planned income drawdown.

It is close to retirement when the portfolio is at its highest value, so a major market fall then will see the greatest loss of money.

This is why it is often wise to start to lower your investment risk as you approach retirement.

Thirdly, some people are uncomfortable watching their capital decline.

Drawing 4 per cent will usually mean that not just investment returns are being spent, but the capital itself is being used to the extent that nothing is left after 30 years. If you want to maintain investment capital for inheritances, your drawdown rate will need to be less than 4 per cent.

Planning this decumulation phase is as tricky as it is important – and, unlike Goldilocks, there is not much room for experimentation.

 

Article from Sunday Star Times by Martin Hawes

Bull market still has legs after 6 years

This article outlines in my view the need to be cautious/careful of share markets. As you are no doubt aware markets go in cycles and when markets get too frothy they correct. With this in mind thought should be given to capital preservation.

In 2009 the stock market was filled with panic. The housing market had gone under and General Motors was on the verge of bankruptcy reorganisation. The United States was in a deep recession, and stocks had plunged 57 per cent from their high in October 2007.

Fast-forward six years, and investors are enjoying one of the longest bull markets since 1940’s. The Standard and Poor’s 500 index has more than tripled since bottoming out at 676.53 on March 9, 2009. The bull has pushed through a US debt crisis, an escalating conflict in the Middle East, renewed tensions with Russia over Ukraine and Europe’s stagnating economy.

So has this bull run its course? Most market strategists have not yet seen the signs that typically accompany a market peak. Investors are yet to become rash, or overconfident.

“Bull markets end not because they grow old. They end because some excesses build,” says Stephen Freedman, head of cross-asset strategy at UBS Wealth Management.

Why do stocks keep rising?

It’s a powerful combination of higher corporate profits and a growing economy. The main driver is company earnings. Companies slashed costs in response to the recession that began in December 2007. That helped boost profit margins when demand began to recover. As a result, earnings per share have risen consistently since the end of the recession in 2009. Companies in the S&P 500 are forecast to generate record earnings of US$119.35 ($163.40) a share this year, nearly double what they earned in 2009.

Hiring is picking up and costs are down, and that means Americans are more confident about the economy that at any time since the recession. Unemployment has fallen to 5.5 per cent from a peak of 10 per cent in 2009. A plunge in the price of oil has pushed down petrol prices and put more money in people’s pockets. Most economists forecast growth of more than 3 per cent this year. As investors become more confident about growth, they are willing to pay more for stocks.

What role has the Federal Reserve played?

The Federal Reserve has held its main lending rate close to zero since 2008. It has bought trillions of dollars in bonds to help hold down long-term interest rates. By cutting rates, policy-makers have encouraged businesses and consumers to borrow and spend. The historically low interest rates in the bond market have also made stocks look better in comparison.

How does this run compare with previous bull markets?

There have been 12 bull markets since the end of World War II, with the average run lasting 58 months, according to S&P Capital IQ. At 72 months, the current streak is the fourth longest in that period. While this run could be described as middle-aged, it is still a few years short of the longest streak, which started in 1990 and stretched 113 months into 2000.

If you invested US$10,000 at the bottom, how much would you have made?

The S&P 500 has returned 253 percent since March 9, 2009. That means an investment of $10,000 would now be worth $25,262. Investing the same amount in the Dow Jones industrial average over the same time would have turned $10,000 into $22,428.

How long can it continue

All bull markets must end. That’s simply the nature of financial markets. However, few analysts are calling the end of this one just yet.

The U.S. economy is continuing to strengthen and inflation remains tame. And while the Fed has ended its bond-buying program, other global central banks, like the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan, are still providing stimulus to their economies.

“I don’t anticipate that stocks will face any challenges in the near-term,” says Michael Arone, chief investment strategist for State Street Global Advisors. “If there were some type of a recession, or a slowdown in the U.S., that would hurt for sure … but I don’t see that on the horizon.”

Also, many of the excesses that accompany bull-market peaks haven’t surfaced, says UBS Wealth Management’s Freedman. Think of the housing boom that preceded the bust that began in 2007, or the dot-com mania of 1999 and early 2000.

“Because the recovery has been so sluggish, nobody has had time to go overboard with the type of behavior that’s come back to haunt the markets,” he says.

What kills bull markets?

Typically, it’s a recession. Four of the five bull markets since 1970 ended as investors got spooked by a recession, or the anticipation of one.

Bank of America analysts say that the most likely threat to the bull market would be rising inflation. That could cause a sell-off in bonds, sending shock waves throughout financial markets.

Another threat is a slump in earnings. That could happen if the surging dollar, already at a 12-year high against the euro, grows even stronger, making U.S. goods more expensive to customers overseas and translating into fewer dollars to corporate bottom lines.

 

Article from NZ Herald 11 March 2015 by Steve Rothwell

Time to be selfish

I appreciate this is an American magazine; however I strongly suspect the trends spoken about are quite similar.

Baby boomers are putting their retirements at risk by spending too much on their adult children. With real wages stagnant and unemployment among those age 16 to 24 running above 12 percent, large numbers of households continue to dole out cash to children no longer in school, covering rent, cell phones, cars, and vacations.

A July 2014 survey by American Consumer Credit Counseling, a Boston nonprofit, found that a higher proportion of U.S. households (1 in 3) provide financial assistance to adult children than support for elderly parents (1 in 5). “This is putting a huge wrench into retirement savings,” says Pamela Villarreal, a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas. “The more boomers put out for adult kids, the less they can put aside for themselves, which is scary as they live longer and need savings to last them into their 80s and 90s.”

More than a third of adult millennials receive regular financial support from their parents, and 1 in 5 still live at home and don’t pay rent or expenses, according to a November 2014 survey by Bank of America. It isn’t just the unemployed or the low-paid who are needy. The poll, which had 1,000 respondents between the ages of 18 and 34, found that among those earning more than $75,000 a year, 25 percent had their parents pay for groceries at some point and 21 percent got money for clothing.

If parents have extra money left over each month, they should be maxing out their contributions to 401(k) plans or paying down mortgages or other debt, not subsidizing their kids, financial advisers say. “You can’t take out a loan for retirement,” says John Sweeney, executive vice president for retirement and investing strategies at Fidelity Investments. “So the less well-off you are, the more you have to say to grown children, ‘I don’t have it to give.’ ”

Gillian Anderson, head of Anderson Wealth Management in Westport, Conn., says so many of her clients are helping their 20- and 30-something kids financially that she advises other parents who consult her to budget for the possibility that they may have to do the same. “It runs the gamut from giving regular allowances because millennials often aren’t earning enough to cover rent and food, to help with legal bills if a child is going through a divorce, to occasional payments for a coat or plane ticket,” she says.

Whatever the reason, this prolonged support is squeezing even affluent boomers. The executive director of a nonprofit in Seattle gave her daughter and son-in-law a total of $12,000 in 2014 to pay for child care, home repairs, and other bills—and plans to give at least as much this year. The 66-year-old woman earns $230,000 a year, while the couple are working professionals in their 30s with a combined annual income of about $115,000. The mother, who asked not to be identified because she didn’t want friends and work colleagues to know about her situation, says she’d like to retire, but her financial planner has warned her that the $2.5 million she’s set aside will run out by her early 80’s at her current rate of spending.

Fidelity’s Sweeney says it’s a bad idea even for affluent parents, to fund their adult kids. “Giving them tens of thousands of dollars a year for apartments, cars, and restaurant meals sends the message that you’ll keep paying for a lifestyle they can’t afford on their own—and you probably can’t or don’t want to fund forever,” he says. “Better to teach them to burn less than they earn, and save all you need for a long old age.”

 

Article from Business Week Magazine 9 – 15 March 2015 by Carol Hymowitz

AMP Adviser Awards 2014

At a gala dinner on Friday night, 20 February 2015, around 200 Advisers and employees from across the AMP business, including AMP, AMP Financial Adviser Network (AFAN), Independent Financial Advisers (IFA), Spicers and AdviceFirst, gathered to celebrate their achievements from the past year at the 2014 AMP Awards Dinner.

The AMP Awards recognise the top performing Advisers and Adviser Businesses across 20 categories. The award selection is based on achieving outstanding sales performance, customer retention and attracting new business, and the winners have demonstrated solid results in their respective categories.

Tonkin Financial Services was awarded – Independent Financial Adviser Business of the Year

2014-AMP-Awards.jpg

There were other awards and ribbons awarded on the evening for other categories too.

NZRT Transfer Update

For all doctors at ADHB and WDHB your Super which was previously in AMP Business Super has been transitioned to AMP New Zealand Retirement Trust.

You would have received a letter from AMP stating funds had been withdrawn from your AMP Business Super. No need to be alarmed about this as the funds have merely been withdrawn and transferred to the NZ Retirement Trust Plan. The NZ Retirement Trust Plan offers an online facility which allows you to check your balance, contributions and investment choices.

You should have received a welcome letter recently with login details. For those of you at CMDHB the transfer to NZRT will take place in February.

John's Portfolio

I have some direct share investments and I thought I’d provide an update on changes in my portfolio and the reasons for these.

During 2014 I bought some Google shares at US$1201 per share. They have since split into A and C shares. The reason for investing in these is that Google is now well established and has substantial cash flows and numerous business interests in growth areas of the technology world. Staying on the technology theme I invested in E Road which is a NZ Technology company which supplies software to the transport industry. I paid $3.55 a share for these which are currently sitting at $3.79. I recently sold my Santos shares (at a small loss) for $11.66 based on the drop in oil prices. I am pleased I did as they are now sitting at $7.55 a share. I used the proceeds to buy Sirtex Medical which is a company that makes a product that treats liver cancer. I took the opportunity to sell a small number of my Tower shares (for a profit) in their share buy back offer. I made a modest investment at float time in Orion Healthcare which I am sure you are all familiar with (Hospital software among other products). Lastly I added funds to my investment in the Devon Alpha Fund.

OneAnswer Portfolio Service

Some of you may have a lump sum of money that you are wondering how best to invest it. The One Answer Portfolio Service gives you a range (over 100) of investments. You receive information through regular and comprehensive reports and statements. You can also have online access to your portfolio information. Lastly it provides the convenience of having your investments in one place hence reduced paperwork.

If you are interested in exploring this please contact me and I can supply you additional information.

Global Markets

The global economy is likely to show improved growth in 2015, despite no shortage of gloomy headlines, according to Credit Suisse, with growth expectations and central banks likely to set the tone for sharemarkets.

This is even though China is slowing and Japan and Europe need significant stimulus to improve off a low base. But the investment bank says the headwind of lower energy prices will help global industrial production and goods demand lift by 3 to 5 per cent next year, led by the US, which should be able to post growth of at least 3 per cent. Combined with China reporting a growth rate in the high 6 per cent range, this should be enough to boost global gross domestic product growth to 3.4 per cent in 2015, compared with an expected 3.1 per cent in  2014.

“I’m surprised by the degree of negativity at the moment among investors and also policymakers,” says Robert Parker, senior adviser in the investment, strategy and research group, Credit Suisse. “The reason why I say I’m surprised is first of all, if you look at the United States, the economy data is actually very good. Whether you look at investment spending, consumer spending, export numbers, everything is consistent with 3 per cent-plus growth for the next 12 months in the US,”

The second plank in Parker’s positive case is that the negative perception of Europe is changing. “The reason for that is because a lot of stimulus is being thrown at the European economy at the moment. We are very confident that the European Central Bank will keep interest rates close to zero for at least two years. It is expanding its balance sheet from 2 trillion Euro ($3 trillion) to close to 3 trillion Euro probably by the second half of next year.”

Parker also expects to see “in the next month or two’ some easing in fiscal policy by Germany. “Germany is under intense pressure to ease fiscal policy. This is what’s changed, I think, in the last six months in Europe, is that policymakers have seen voters moving away from conventional centralist policies to either extreme left or extreme rights parties. That’s pushing the policymaker, both at the ECB and the ministries of finance, to adopt a much easier policy and really throw stimulus at the euro zone economy because we can’t tolerate the weakness in the economy that we’ve seen in the last six months” he says. Credit Suisse forecasts average real GDP growth of 1 per cent in the euro zone 2015.

Then there is China. “This year, China will grow at over 7 per cent but next year, China will probably grow somewhere just below 7 per cent. We’re looking at a gentle glide path downward in terms of the outlook for Chinese growth – but to a soft landing, nota hard landing,” Parker says.

As for Japan, which unexpectedly slipped into recession in the third quarter of 2014 while the poor third-quarter GDP number caused Credit Suisse to revise down its 2014 growth forecast form 0.9 per cent to 0.5 per cent, the postponement of the value-added tax hike planned for 2015, the continued aggressive monetary easing, as well as signs of the weak yen is finally beginning to boost exports, have induced the bank to lift its growth forecasts for both 2014*15 (up to 0.9 per cent) and 2015-16 (up 1.1 per cent).

Subsequent to that call, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe won a sweeping victory in the snap elections he called for December consolidating his power in the Diet and giving him a further mandate for deep reforms.

Parker says the growth outlook is being stimulated by the late-2014 fall in energy prices, which he describes as a “tax cut” for the world, although it is not good news for the budgets of producer nations such as Russia or Saudi Arabia. “It is a stimulus for some sectors that really matter, for example manufacturing, and the US household sector, which accounts for the bulk of US GDP.

“On the back of what we think is sustainable recovery in the US jobs market, there are positive feedback effects into credit growth, consumer confidence, and business confidence on the back of that,” Parker says. “Most importantly, gains in employment and wages and the resulting improvement in consumer spending are finally encouraging companies to raise investment spending.” And means the Federal Reserve can begin, at some stage in 2015, to normalise – that is, raise – interest rates. Credit Suisse expects this process to begin around midyear.

The Fed will act – cautiously – because the US unemployment rate and core inflation trend are both close to their expected long-run trend,” Parker says. The Bank of England will follow suit with tighter monetary policy, but easing will continue in Europe and Japan. “This is likely to result in both a weaker euro – and yen –  against the US dollar but, notwithstanding the concerns over ‘competitive devaluation’.”  Parker says currency weakness will boost the export earnings of Japan and Europe, particularly Germany, which has been hurt by both Chinese slowdown and its sanctions on Russia. “You cannot escape these linkages. Yes, the slowdown in China has had an impact on German exports, but not a shock impact. The point to make on German exports and particularly the capital goods producers like the car makers, is that as the euro comes down against the dollar, their profitability and profit margins are expanding very fast indeed. If we get further declines in the euro against the US dollar, which I think is inevitable, the profitability of German industry is going to be extremely positive,” Parker says.

While ECB governor Mario Draghi’s top priority is to eliminate deflation and risk, Parker says the ECB would like to see a much weaker euro. Credit Suisse is calling the euro at $US1.20 by the second quarter of 2015, against $US1.25 at present, after flirting with $US1.40 earlier in the year. “The point about that is that it’s simultaneously very good for offsetting deflation risk, and for export competitiveness,” he says.

For reasons of improved export competitiveness on currency weakness, Europe and Japan are Credit Suisse’s preferred equity markets in 2015. “Both are under-valued in terms of their fundamentals, and we expect both  to benefit from monetary policy and low commodity prices – especially for energy,” Parker says.

Article from www.afr.com James Dunn 20-26 December 2014

Portfolio Investment Entities

The introduction of the PIE regime was a response to the over-taxation of managed funds, which was a major barrier for investors, when considering the whole range of investment options. In the past, funds would pay tax at the company rate (it was then 33 cents in the dollar) and those on a lower rate (say 19.5 per cent) could not claim back the difference. In effect, investors were taxed 33 per cent regardless of what other income they had.

So, the PIE regime was born – and a good thing for investors too. The playing field was tilted away from managed-funds investors but now it has been levelled (in fact, tilted in favour of managed funds in many cases).

Managed funds may now apply to become PIEs (nearly all have) and when they have been registered as PIEs they will deduct tax from each investor’s returns and distribute the income with no more tax for the investor to pay. However, the investor has to tell the managed fund what his or her tax rate is for PIE purposes. This is called the Prescribed Investor Rate (PIR) and it is different from your ordinary tax rate. PIRs are calculated by adding together the ordinary taxable income that some has (e.g. from wages, salary, NZ Super etc.) to the income that they  derive from PIEs. This table shows you what your PIR will be at various income levels.

Note from the table that you cannot pay more than 28 per cent tax if you invest in a managed fund which is PIE. This is especially useful for high-income earners who are on the top rate of tax (33 per cent). If these same people made investments in something that was not a PIE (e.g. if they were direct investors in shares, bonds, bank deposits or property syndicates) their investment income would be added to the income they earn from their salaries and this would be taxed at 33 per cen. By investing in a managed fund is a PIE, their investment is taxed at no more than 28 per cent.

No investment should ever be made solely for tax purposes. However, once a particular type of investment is chosen, you should certainly look for the most tax-efficient means of making the investment and PIEs often fit that bill. For example, if you decide to invest in commercial property; you could choose to invest in a small property syndicate in which case income from the syndicate would be taxed at your own rate. However, if you decide to invest via a managed fund that was a PIE(e.g. Kiwi Income Property Trust o MAP NZ Office Trust) you could be taxed at your PIR which could be lower.

One area where this can be important is for those making term deposits and holding cash with their banks. Banks have established ‘cash PIEs’ – managed funds that invest in term deposits and the like and these have been able to get PIE status. These ‘cash PIEs’ are more tax efficient than ordinary term deposits and savings accounts with much the same risk – except that some of these PIEs may not carry the government guarantee. You should check before investing.

Income Protection

What is your most important asset? Your house? Your car? No, it is your ability to earn an income, in fact your financial success depends upon it. A 40 year old earning $40,000 a year (and increasing at an annual rate of seven percent per year) would earn $2.5 million by the time they retire. Although most people insure their house and car against loss very few protect themselves against an inability to work and the resulting loss of income. One can only assume the reason for this is that most people do not expect to lose their ability to work.

Statistics show that more than two out of every five people suffer illness or injury for longer than 6 months during their working life and one in every one hundred people is likely to suffer a major disability each year. Without adequate protection a prolonged absence of income could have a devastating effect on a family’s standard of living. It could result in a serious depletion of their retirement savings.

Have you ever considered what would happen if you lost your ability to earn? Who would pay your bills and continue your savings plan?

Income Protection is designed to protect a family’s income position and restore the income should the earner lose their ability to work or any length of time through illness or accident.

Self employed people accustomed to a high standard of living in particular need this form of cover. They are often in stress related occupations and in many cases have high commitments on mortgages as well as high standard of living to maintain.

Planning your Superannuation

The logical way to plan your super is in two steps:

  1. Work out how much you will need in retirement.
  2. Work out how much you need to save to get that amount.

As with any long-term plans, there are many variables and plenty of scope for things not to work out as planned. The Office of the Retirement  Commissioner has produced material to help with these calculations. This information is free, so why not use it?

How much will you need in retirement?

There’s not always an easy answer to this one. There are many unknowns, about which you need to make educated guesses, such as:

  • The age at which you will stop working (many people can and wish to continue working beyond age 65).
  • The age you will live to.
  • The lifestyle you will want. It may be cheaper to live in retirement but you may want to continue some expensive habits.
  • Your health-care needs.
  • The amount of government assistance.
  • Investment rates of return while you are in retirement.
  • The rate of inflation between now and retirement.
  • The degree to which you will be comfortable spending your capital – if you spend everything there will be no inheritance for your children.
  • Whether you will use the equity in your house to live on.

If you can calculate how much you will want each month to live, there are financial tables to work out the amount of capital required to give that amount. There is plenty of scope for those calculations to be inaccurate, but it is still an exercise worth doing. As a benchmark, it is generally thought that most people need about 70 per cent of the income they require before retirement.

How much should you save?

Once you have calculated the capital sum you need to produce a reasonable income, it is relatively easy to work out how much you must save. There are two main variables:

1. The time you have before you are likely to retire

Remember this plan may change: some people decide to retire sooner; some have retirement forced on them by ill-health or redundancy; others decide to work longer.

2. The returns you have before you are likely to retire

This is harder to predict, but over time a good diversified portfolio should earn 5 per cent after tax and fees.

If you know these two things, and the capital sum you require, it’s relatively easy to calculate the amount you must save weekly. A financial planner can make this calculation or you can use the Retirement Commissioner’s website www.sorted.org.nz. If you can’t afford to save the amount you have calculated, don’t despair. Save what you can within your budget and lifestyle. As time goes by you will probably be able to save more: your salary may rise, you may pay off the mortgage your partner/spouse may go back to work etc. Even a little saved now helps – it provides a base and will grow as the returns compound over the years.

Start early

Most people should pay off their mortgage before they start to save. However, as soon as you can, start saving and investing. Time makes all the difference:

The more time you have, the more you can tuck away. If you start at age 45, you have 240 months to make regular payments into a fund before reaching 65; if you start at age 35, you have 360 months.

The more you have, the better compound interest will work for you.

  • Age 45 years, saving $200 per month (6 per cent) at 65 years: $92,800
  • Age 35 years saving $200 per month (6 per cent) at 65 years: $201,900

The difference is obvious. Start saving as soon as you can!

 

Taken from: Financial Secrets, Martin Hawes, April 2002

KiwiSaver as a DHB employee

As you are aware Kiwisaver can be part or all of your DHB subsidy. The absolute majority of doctors who I deal with in Kiwisaver are in it on a splitting basis with superannuation.

Contribution levels

These are fixed at either 3%, 4% or 8% of your gross income. No other figure is possible. If you wish to save additional monies super offers flexibility here in that you can save any amount. Note that if you are only in Kiwisaver and wish to pick up the 6% gross DHB subsidy you need to save 8% as 6% is not an option.

Access

Standard features for access for both super and Kiwisaver include death, permanent disablement and financial hardship.

Funds can be accessed from Kiwisaver other than these in two circumstances:

  • If you haven’t purchased your first home once you have been a member for 3 years and made 3 years contributions you can withdraw both your and the employer contributions towards your deposit.
  • Once you reach the age of eligibility for NZ Super (currently 65) your funds are available. Of course the government decides on this age which needs to increase over time due to the demographics.

Government benefits

Currently when you enrol in Kiwisaver the government deposits a one off lump sum of $1,000. In addition if you contribute at least $1,042/yr the government will add a tax credit annually of $521. This means at a 3% contribution rate you need to be earning a minimum of $34,733 gross per year. If you have additional self employment income and are not set up for PAYE, you can invest the $1,042 annually and pick up the tax credit. Note The Kiwisaver tax credit year runs from 1 July to 30 June each year. In the first year of membership you will only receive a proportionate amount of tax credit based on what time of the year your $1,042 investment was made. This is not an issue in subsequent years.

Changing providers

It is easy to change providers. All you need to do is complete an application for the new scheme and the rest is taken care of.

Opt out process

Should you not wish to join Kiwisaver you need to opt out within the first 8 weeks of joining a new employer (note you cannot opt out in the first two weeks, however deductions over this time will be refunded).  Opting out needs to be exercised each time you start with a new employer. Of course if you join Kiwisaver it will follow you around (like a loyal dog) employers without the need to re join.

Contribution holiday

If you wish to stop contributing to Kiwisaver for a period of time (up to five years at a time) you can, once you have contributed for a year.  Should you wish or need to, contribution holidays can be rolled over every 5 years. The process for a contribution holiday is to complete a contribution holiday form (KS6 obtained from www.kiwisaver.govt.nz ) and send it to the IRD. Once they have replied and confirmed this, forward their confirmation to your payroll.

The future

One thing (and this would be my biggest criticism of Kiwisaver) you can be guaranteed about Kiwisaver is that it will be constantly changing. The reason for this is that the government make the rules. Since it was created in 2007 there have been numerous changes (without going into the details).  You will no doubt be aware that if Labour is the government after the September election there will be further changes (compulsion, increase in contribution rates, ability for the Reserve Bank to increase contribution rates as a monetary policy tool and finally a likely increase in the retirement age (which I agree with).

Conclusion

Kiwisaver is here for good. It can be a useful part of your retirement savings mix. The key is to understand its nuiances so it can work to your best advantage.

How does currency affect my investments

Investors who have monies invested offshore have an additional risk which is currency. Currency can magnify gains or losses on the assets themselves. Sometimes the movement of the currency ends up being more important than the performance of the asset. It is possible to eliminate currency risk by taking out a currency hedge. This is a financial instrument that guarantees that an investor can change foreign money for a certain rate in the future. The problem is that the cost of such hedges can be quite expensive and difficult to manage for private investors.

While currencies can be quite volatile over the short term the long term trends of currencies is more open to fundamental analysis. Two key drivers of a countries currency are interest rates and GDP growth. If both of these are increasing there will be a greater demand for that countries currency and conversley if these are failing the currency will soften. At present NZ’s dollar is strong against other currencies due to our solid economy and relatively high interest rates. While our dollar is likely to remain high over the next 12 months pressure is building for further declines after that.

For your information currency hedging is used across your AMP Super and Kiwisaver funds. This has the effect of smoothing returns.

How do I determine my risk profile?

Lots of doctors I meet have no or little understanding of investment which is not surprising given your focus and time is spent in obtaining your qualifications, treating patients and keeping up with your education.  I would encourage you to make it your business to learn about investments. The main aspects of determining your risk profile centre around the following:

  1. Your time horizon
  2. Your investment experience/knowledge
  3. Your job security
  4. Your comfort level with market volatility

1. Time Horizon

If you have a long time horizon which typically you do for retirement savings (assuming you start in either your 20’s 30’s or 40’s) you can choose riskier (and also higher returning) investments such as shares and property. The reason for this is that even though share and property markets experience losses from time to time they always recover and move higher over time. If you have shorter time horizons such as 1-3 years you need to opt for safer investments such as cash and bonds. These investments experience low volatility however also no (cash) and low growth (bonds).

2. Your investment experience/knowledge

It would be fair to say that if you have had experience in owning shares or managed funds for example that have suffered historical losses you are more likely to be comfortable owning these in the future. Also knowledge of investment markets can prepare you for losses or give you insight as to when you may sell or switch to cash.

3. Job security

You are pretty fortunate that you have excellent job security. This means that you can take more risk with your investments than people whose job security is not that great such as some senior management roles in listed companies.

4. Your comfort level with market volatility

Some people are naturally conservative and are risk adverse which means they should only be opting for low risk investments such as conservative, cash or bond funds. If you are more of a risk taker and prepared to accept volatility, on the premise that your longer term gains will be greater you need to be including a reasonable percentage of shares and property in your portfolios. As long as you stay invested when markets lose ground you will be rewarded as they always recover (even though it can be a fairly long wait at times).

How to be smart about your money

Buy smart with our high dollar

Regardless of where the dollar goes in the future, New Zealanders should understand their currency is an opportunity to be taken advantage of.  The dollar’s strength is a double-edged sword.  It provides cheap imported goods and makes our cost of living cheaper.  It also puts pressure on interest rates to remain low.

For investors, the high dollar creates conflict.  If, like me, you have kept a proportion of your super fund in international investments for the past decade you will implicitly understand the handbrake this has applied to your fund’s performance – above and beyond the torrid times in equity markets.  Yet, despite all this, and the understanding that New Zealand’s economy is “relatively” stronger than many around the world, it is important to benchmark us against ourselves.

Although, for the time being, the dollar remains relatively buoyant.  The change in sentiment towards the New Zealand dollar will come quickly, when it comes.  And it’s for that reason I continue to think that prudent international investments (as distinct from holding foreign currency, in preparation for your next trip) is a smart play that will lead to improved wealth in the coming decade.  The big question is how to make the investment? The broad stock market, most likely, holds little prospect.

And though many online brokers now provide access to international shares, you need to have strong information lines to be taking on US or European shares directly.  The same could be said about international bonds – with the real problem that these prosper most when interest rates are falling and so their race may already be run.

Managed funds, including your DHB super (assuming you are in a growth or even balanced fund) offer a sizeable exposure to international shares including Commodities, infrastructure and emerging markets.  Alternatively you can use the International share and International listed property securities sector funds assuming you have the risk appetite.

Health Insurance

Health Insurance is an area that is possibly overlooked at times in favour of Life and Income Protection Insurance. Health Insurances main benefit is providing funds to pay for elective surgery procedures that can (without it) result in long delays as a result of waiting in the public health system. You can choose when, where, how and by whom you get treated, in consultation with your doctor. Examples of procedures/operations can range from a Cataract Removal ($3,800 – $4,800) to a Heart Bypass ($32,000 – $45,000).

I recently had to have a Stent and was pleased to have Tower Health Insurance meet the costs of this which, all up, totaled around $17,000. This certainly made the procedure financially painless and I found Tower helpful and easy to deal with.

If you wish to discuss Health Insurance options (without obligation) please contact us.

Commercial Investment Property

Across Australia and New Zealand, investors seeking stable, long term returns in volatile markets, are considering commercial real estate. Once reserved for speculators, developers and ultra-rich, commercial property investment is becoming an increasingly mainstream choice.

At first glance, the attractions of commercial over residential property are obvious, Landlords of commercial property achieve higher yields, longer leases and have more power when it comes to dealing with troublesome tenants. But, as in all asset classes, the benefits are offset by risks. In this case, unpredictable capital growth, higher vacancy rates and complicated leasing agreements.

Investors who prefer the security of blue-chip tenants such as banks, petrol stations and fast-food chains may also find themselves in fierce negotiations with professionals trained to squeeze every last dollar from the deal. As with any form of investment, it’s crucial to approach the commercial property market with your eyes wide open. There are potential pitfalls that cannot be ignored.

Lease upside

The structure of leases is a key advantage of commercial property investing over residential. While residential leases usually run for six to 12 months, leases on commercial property run for three to five years, or longer, with built-in options for the tenant to renew. Commercial tenants spend considerable sums fitting out the premises and they’re typically keen to stay put once they’ve set up in a particular location. Fixed rent increases are incorporated into most commercial leases, so the tenant’s rent rises by the inflation rate, an agreed percentage, or a mixture of CPI plus a set percentage each year. These terms are agreed at the start of the lease.

Generally, commercial leases are underwritten by a personal director’s guarantee or a bank guarantee. If the tenant defaults on rent, the landlord has the guarantee to call upon. With a residential property, the only guarantee the landlord has is the bond, which may be eaten up in cleaning or repairing the property after the tenant has vacated. Commercial leases usually include a “make-good” clause. If the tenant does not extend the lease at the end of its term, they are obliged to reinstate the property to the state it was in on the day they took occupation. That’s important for commercial properties as it might involve recarpeting, repainting or removing the fit-out. Unlike residential leases, commercial leases are typically paid net of expenses. That means the tenant pays outgoing costs such as council rates, land tax, utility bills, insurance, repairs and maintenance, security, gardening, and sometimes property management fees too.

Gross rent is quoted before those outgoings, but the net rent is what the landlord receives and what is used to calculate the property’s yield. If the lease is quoted as $200,000 a year gross, and outgoings cost $50,000 a year, most commercial property agents will advertise the net rent as being $150,000. If council rates suddenly jump or insurance rates go through the roof because a storm has gone through the area, or land tax is reassessed and doubles in value, [landlords] don’t have to wear the cost. The tenant wears the cost. In residential investments, rents are charged on a gross basis, so the landlord is responsible for covering costs such as strata fees, water bills, insurance and council rates from the income, and that erodes the yield.

Deciding which costs are included in a commercial lease is an important part of the initial negotiations between the tenant and landlord. Many landlords appoint a professional manager to negotiate the lease on their behalf and have a specialist lawyer look over the documentation.

Major tenants will have dedicated teams that handle negotiations from their side and have experience getting the best deal for the tenant, so it’s wise to get individual advice on establishing a lease. Commercial property landlords whose leases do not include management fees can expect to pay about 2 per cent to 5 per cent of the rental income as a fee, depending on the property’s size and the number and quality of tenants.

(Smart Investor Magazine, Commercial or Residential, August 2013, p32 and 33)