WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT TODAY'S MOST POPUAR ANNUITIES, They promise income ... at a price
Regarding the article in the AARP Bulletin in the January / February edition: "WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ANNUITIES, They promise income ... at a price" by Karen Hube my comment is as follows:
The biggest issue is only tangentially mentioned. The conclusion of most annuities is the surrender of your money / investment when you die. If you outlive your actuarial age, then you have nothing to lose, and would have profited from receiving more than your investment, at the expense of those who die earlier than their actuarial age which IS mentioned in the article.
But the comparison that is not mentioned is that you could conceivably, ON YOUR OWN or through a financial advisor, make investments that could mimic annuity returns. The difference is that your own investment stays with your estate when your die. If you have no heirs and don't care about family or generational estate planning then this is fine. However, if you do care about family or generational estate planning then an annuity may be WRONG!!
Now it is true that you could buy an annuity and include the purchase of a life insurance policy FOR YOUR ANNUTIY INVESTMENT (not for you but for your annuity investment) for your heirs , but this is obviously, or should be obviously expensive.
Let me provide an example. Today, you could buy 30 year US bonds - AT NO COST - directly from the government, today paying approximately 4.7% annually. In 30 years, the bond matures and you get your investment, your money back. Clearly no cost is better than some cost. And if necessary, you have the option of early redemption if necessary. Early redemption would be adjusted for any change in interest rates when / if you decide to redeem early, so you could make money or loose money on early redemption. (I have used US Treasuries in this example. A 20 year GM bond is currently quoted at 6.75%, clearly not as safe as a US Treasury).
The difference is knowing this is possible and available which is where I fault the article. Clearly, for those without financial knowledge, an annuity is buying expertise at a SIGNIFICANT price, that a financial advisor could provide. The difference is, even if the cost of the financial advisor is equal to the cost of the annuity, you retain YOUR MONEY when you die so your heirs can inherit it.
One additional pet peeve I have with annuity products is that they are legally allowed to provide somewhat MISLEADING information. Typically, they don't mention that if you are guaranteed a 4.7% return / payment, that return implicitly includes the return of your investment. So ... which is better:
4.7% US Treasury bond where you receive your investment back in 30 years, or
4.7% annuity, but when you die, you lose / surrender your investment?
If you want to take advantage of potential stock market gains, the average stock market gain has historically been far higher than any annuity. However, certain annuities do provide a floor on stock market losses, WHICH IS THE ONE FEATURE only available with annuities.
Annuities are useful for people who want a simple lifetime solution and who don't have financial expertise - a broker, or don't avail themselves of financial expertise. But there is a significant cost associated with annuities.