Reference no: EM132041829

At the retirement planning meeting, Richard and Monica were in agreement that they were well short of the money they needed for retirement at Richard’s age (65). Richard said he wanted to manage the investments and thought that savings outside the pension given current lower tax rates for capital gains and dividends made sense.

In working out the capital needs analysis, it became apparent that there was need for an additional $17,000 of savings annually over what was previously calculated. The first reason had to do with a recent job development that resulted in a projected moderation in Richard’s raises in salary to a level 1–2 percentage points below the inflation rate and that made his job more risky. The second was the running of the total portfolio management approach, which indicated that the assumed investment rate needed to be lowered to 5 percent.

Monica thought that their tolerance for risk would have to be cut back. She said she would consider taking a full-time job if necessary. Monica thought they could downsize by selling their house and realizing an extra $100,000. She wondered what level of insurance she could afford and whether they should cut back on the amount. Richard didn’t like that idea.

Case Application Questions:

What are Richard and Monica’s alternatives in covering the shortfall in annual retirement savings? What are your recommendations?

What do you think of Monica’s offer to take a job?

Under the TPM approach, should the risky portion of their asset allocation be raised or lowered?

Should their insurance be raised or lowered?

Do you feel they should downsize their dwelling?

What are your recommendations for savings, investing, life insurance?

What kind of follow-up with the advisor would you recommend?

Construct the retirement planning portion of the financial plan using your answers to the above questions.