There is a nearby thread on incomes that has prompted me to throw this in...
We have our own super fund and have retired (because we needed to healthwise) on its proceeds and I could never get, and I still havn't got, a useful answer to this question
"how much do we need to retire?"
The answer from "advisers" seems predicated on handing the funds over to them and then they will pay us about 7% (bank interest) and keep the rest
The accountant's smarta#se answer was always "if you have to ask you havn't got enough"

- an answer common to the finance industry I gather and in fact the most annoying, frustrating and useless answer I can think of.
The accountant said we should keep working (I wonder if that was as much to his benefit as ours)
The tax treatment since 1 July means that the income from the fund is tax free (for over 60s) and the income from the fund's investments is also tax free and imputed tax on investments is repaid to the fund by the tax office
Given that the stockmarket is growing at at least 20%pa (yes I know we can't count on to always do that but it has done for quite a few years now), it is possible to do projections of fund growth less pension pays so it shouldn't be too hard to give e$timates I would have thought.
I didn't want to divert that other income thread. I noticed quite a few sensible posts on it so I would appreciate any opinions on this matter
If the consensus is a lot higher than we have then we'll have to learn to survive on the govt pensions with part-time work I guess
thanks
Bookmarks