Log in
Economics
1
answer
0
watching
100
views

You would like to have an annual $50,000 income generated from your retirement fund one year after your 65-year-old birthday for 20years You start saving at exactly 25 years old (now) and you decided to start a retirement fund investment to reach that goal one year from now and make your last deposit on your 65-year old birthday. Assume the annual interest rate at 8% per year and the investments and withdrawals of funds are made at the end of each year. How much money you will need in this account right after your last deposit?_____

How much do u have to invest each year to reach your goal?_____

I know the first answer is around $490,905 thousand and the second in around $1,895. I just don't know how they got that.

Watch
1
answer
0
watching
100
views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Darryn D'Souza
Darryn D'SouzaLv10
28 Sep 2019

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Share

Related textbook solutions

Principles of Economics
2nd Edition, 2017
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172364
Principles of Macroeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172388
Principles of Microeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172340

Related questions

After analyzing their social securities statements, Charles and Susan are not so sure that their social security benefits will be enough to cover their estimated monthly expenses if they are planning to retire at age 66.
The Smiths are considering opening an IRA account in 2016, after researching the pros and cons of each retirement account; they decided that Roth IRA will fit with their retirement goals. Based on the current IRS regulations, the limit for annual contributions for “Married filling jointly” and Income limit of $183,000 or less is $5,500 for 2016, and $6,500 for people over 50.

Questions:

1. Calculate the total future worth of their Roth IRA account right on their 65th birthday (Normal retirement age) if Charles and Susan will deposit the maximum contribution amount allowed by IRS of $5,500 every year starting at the end of 2016 (age 40) and for the next 9 years (age 49), and then they are planning to increase their contribution to $6,500 for the next ten years (starting age 50) until they are both 65 years old. Assume the couple will not withdraw any money from their IRA during the next 25 years and the Roth IRA account will earn a) 4% and b) 6% per year.

2. The Smith’s forecasted their retirement expenses to be $24,000 starting one year after their retirement age (65 years old). Ignoring any Social Security Benefit. In other words, assuming their $24,000 annual expenses will be funded only with distributions from their Roth IRA (Future worth calculated on question 1). How long will they be able to withdraw $24,000 before exhausting all their IRA funds, assuming a Roth IRA account will earn in average account will earn a) 4% and b) 6% per year?

3. What is the maximum amount of money they can withdraw every year out of the Roth IRA account in order to deplete all the funds by their 85th birthday (use n=20 years in your calculations) Assuming a Roth IRA account will earn in average a) 4% and b)6% per year?

1-Calculate the present worth of the equipment described in question 4 given a 10% discount rate.

2- An entrepreneur has found a way to turn straw into gold, but he needs $5 million to create the necessary machinery. He wants to earn a 25% rate of return per year and recover the investment in 5 years. How much profit must the machines make every year to accomplish his goal?

3-A designer decides to add an additional generation facility to an existing power plant, which costs $4 million. Given an internal rate of return of 7% over a time span of 20 years, how much extra revenue does the new system provide the power plant each year based on annual compounding?

4-You've won a lottery with two options for receiving your prize. One option is to receive $5 million per year for 40 years with an interest rate of 3%. The other option is to receive $222 million upfront. Ignoring taxes, what will result in you receiving the most money?

5- Your friends want to start a landscaping service for 3 months next summer, but need to buy a truck to haul around your equipment. You found a used one for $5,000, but you can make $1,500 per month. At the end of the summer you have a buyer who will pay $1,000 for the beat up truck (salvage value). Over the 3 months the truck has a discount rate of 2%. Draw a cash flow diagram representing this scenario, then explain how much money this venture will either gain or lose.

Learn more about Social Security and Medicare reform (to improve financial strength of the programs) or solvency through Internet exploration. Find an article or resource related to one of these topics. Attach the article and write a brief summary (300-400 words) of what you found. Summarize the Article.

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

U.S. Social Security reform: the clock is ticking

Clocks are seen during the performance "tck tck tck" by Global Campaign for Climate Action at the Barcelona Climate Change Talks, November 4, 2009. REUTERS/Albert Gea

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Can you count on your Social Security benefits when retirement rolls around?

Most Americans worry about this - partly due to the nonsense they hear from political opponents of Social Security and ill-informed media. You will hear that the program is bankrupt, its reserves are nothing but a bunch of IOUs, or that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.

All of those claims are false, but there is one good reason for concern. Social Security faces a long-term financial imbalance that would force sharp benefit cuts in 2034 unless the government makes changes. The problem stems from falling fertility rates and labor force growth - which reduces collection of payroll taxes that fund the system - and also from the retirement of baby boomers, which increases benefit costs.

Absent reform, Social Security could continue to pay roughly 75 percent of promised benefits. The cuts would mean that the typical 65-year-old worker could expect Social Security to replace 27 percent of pre-retirement income, down from 36 percent today, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

No surprise, then, that only 37 percent of workers are “very or somewhat confident” that Social Security will be able to maintain current benefit levels in the future, according to survey research by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) - although confidence is much higher among older workers and retirees.

From a math standpoint, potential solutions to the problem are straightforward. The cuts can be avoided through increased revenue, benefit reductions or some combination of the two. But the politics are another matter.

Republicans are far from holding a unified position on the issue. For example, U.S. Representative Sam Johnson, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security, has proposed legislation containing two significant benefit cuts: gradually raising full retirement ages to 69 by 2030, and using a less generous annual cost-of-living adjustment formula known as the chained CPI.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has so far held to his campaign promise of opposing cuts. He has suggested that economic growth will solve the problem by stimulating wage growth and payroll tax collections - a position most economists dismiss as unrealistic.

REPUBLICAN ENTHUSIASM LACKING

The last major Republican reform proposal dates back to the George W. Bush administration, which proposed shifting the program to personal savings accounts - an idea that aroused Republican passion but that went down in flames.

“That was an idea that got people excited, but there hasn’t been much enthusiasm for Social Security reform among Republicans since then,” said Andrew Biggs, resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Biggs worked on Social Security reform as an associate director of the White House National Economic Council.

Meanwhile, Democrats are in no mood to work with the Trump administration on anything that forces a compromise on their core values - and they have shifted significantly to the left on Social Security reform. Representative John Larson has introduced legislation that would not only restore trust fund balance but expand benefits. That is by far the best approach, since roughly half of all households have saved less than $25,000, according to EBRI. Larson’s bill is cosponsored by more than 80 percent of the Democratic House caucus - more than any previous expansion bill.

The bill would increase benefits by 2 percent across the board, shift to a more generous annual cost-of-living adjustment that reflects spending by seniors and set a new minimum benefit at 25 percent above the poverty line. It also would cut taxes for millions of retirees by boosting significantly the threshold for taxation of benefits.

The plan raises revenue by gradually increasing the payroll tax rates that fund the program. The rate hikes would begin in 2019, and by 2042, workers and employers would pay 7.4 percent each, instead of the current 6.2 percent.

Larson, a Connecticut Democrat, also proposes changes to the payroll tax cap for very wealthy beneficiaries. Currently, payroll tax is collected only on wages up to $127,200; the plan would start collecting taxes again on wages above $400,000. That exempts more income than many earlier expansion plans, which either removed the cap entirely or resumed taxation at $250,000.

The payroll tax cap feature played an important role in boosting support for expansion legislation, according to Max Richtman, CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, a progressive advocacy group that supports the bill. “It brought many of the more conservative Democratic legislators on board,” he said.

Of course, the Larson bill is going nowhere in the Republican-controlled Congress, so Social Security reform will not happen before the 2018 midterm elections at the earliest - and perhaps much later than that. But that does not mean beneficiaries should worry about draconian cuts in 2034.

Even if reform is not achieved by 2034, Biggs thinks the problem likely would be solved at the 11th hour through tax increases - simply because benefit cuts must be enacted and phased in over long periods to give beneficiaries time to adjust.

”If they were going to do this by cutting benefits, it should have been enacted 20 years ago,“ he said. ”If you want to do it by raising taxes you want to wait as long as possible, so that you get to the point where the only solution is to put more money into the program.”

But the uncertainty on Social Security policy will continue to undermine public confidence in the program - and that is worrying. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking.

Weekly leaderboard

Home
Homework Help 3,900,000
Economics 400,000
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in