Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 172

Annuities have come a long way

The practice where I work as an adviser has, for various reasons, predominantly attracted older senior clients over the years. While we do have a growing number of wealth accumulators, there has been a strong focus on retiree, seniors and ageing-related issues.

One would think then that we have been signing our clients up to annuities left, right and centre for a long time. However, until this year, this hasn’t really been the case. The recovering share market of recent years, strong franked dividend yields from ‘defensive’ market sectors and low interest rates have made annuities relatively uninteresting as a long-term investment option for most of our client base.

Until recently, that is. This year we’ve noticed a major shift in investment attitudes, and suddenly those in their advanced years are looking at annuities with increasing interest, even with current interest rates at record lows.

We’ve seen more global uncertainty in 2016 than at any time since the GFC. Brexit, falling fuel and oil prices, wars, political uncertainty, a slowing Chinese economy, and record low bond yields are contributing to a wary economic outlook and elderly investors are nervous about their share market exposure. Couple that with some innovative annuity enhancements over recent years and changes to the age pension assets test kicking in on 1 January 2017 and suddenly annuities are on the radar.

What is an annuity?

An annuity is simply a guaranteed income stream purchased from a life company with a lump sum. The payments are promised up front by quotation, so the investor knows what they’re signing up for from the outset. The ‘guarantee’ does not refer to a government guarantee that applies to bank accounts and term deposits. However, the life companies are closely regulated and their reserving requirements make their guarantees solid.

The annuity can be paid until the holder dies (a ‘lifetime’ annuity), or for a fixed number of years (a ‘term’ annuity). It can be linked to inflation, or not, and can have a residual amount paid back at the end of the term. The annuitant chooses the features that determine the income level.

By way of illustration, let’s look at an investment amount of $100,000, and how the features selected change the income that it pays. The results in the table below are based on quotations received from a leading annuity provider on 5 September 2016 for a 70-year-old male with monthly annuity payments. Note for these quotes, I have not included upfront or ongoing Adviser Service fees – these can also be built in to the quotations.

What sets annuities apart from term deposits is their tax and social security treatment. Term annuities that only pay out the interest component (100% RCV) are basically the same as term deposits, but nil RCV and lifetime annuities have distinct advantages.

In the 7 year, nil RCV, nil indexation example above, the tax and social security rules recognise that a large portion of the $15,807 payment is in fact return of capital. That return of capital is calculated simply as:

With $14,286 of the $15,807 annuity payment considered return of capital, only $1,521 is assessed as taxable income and income-tested income.

Life expectancy (taken from the Australian Life Tables 2010-2012) is the denominator when the calculation is on a lifetime annuity. So for the lifetime examples above, the return of capital amount is:

This is more than the actual income the annuity pays, so no income is assessed for tax or Centrelink purposes.

Under the Assets Test, the return of capital is deducted off the purchase price each year to determine how much counts.

Who wants annuities?

Jack and Mary are in their late 70s and in good health. They’ve sold their home and bought into a retirement village, leaving $360,000 of capital to invest. They have an existing share portfolio and are comfortably living off the dividends and their part age pension. However, the pension is set to halve as a result of Centrelink counting the capital released from the home as an asset, then halve again from 1 January 2017 with the new Assets test.

They are adamant that they do not want any further share market exposure, and term deposits are not appealing with their low rates. We showed them an annuity product that guarantees income for the life of the annuitant and has a ‘withdrawal guarantee’ that allows a guaranteed amount to be withdrawn after 15 years, if required.

Lifetime annuities of old lost their appeal as there was little or no guarantee that any capital would be repaid from it after purchase. But recent products have largely solved this problem and allows for a withdrawal amount along the way up to 15 years.

Annuities can also have generous tax, income and asset test treatments compared with term deposits, so over time Jack and Mary’s age pension may improve at a faster rate than if they had invested in term deposits, fixed interest or shares.

Suitable for older clients who dislike market volatility

Then there’s Keith and Leanne, each about 80 years old and utterly risk averse. They are attached to their age pension and, like Jack and Mary, have downsized and unlocked capital from their home that is going to eat into their pension now and from 1 January. They were looking for something with no market volatility that would also allow their pension benefits to increase over time.

They chose two 7-year annuities with nil RCV. Splitting the investment by half to give them an annuity each, they now have a known cash flow and optimised age pension. If one passes away before the 7-year term expires, the annuity continues to the survivor. If they both pass away, the estate will continue to receive the payments until the term is complete, or it can opt to get a lump sum payout.

Then we have Neville, who is single with $2 million in rolling term deposits. Shares (or managed funds) were never an option for him. While not a pensioner, Neville was equally determined to qualify for whatever government benefits he could, and his attachment was to the Commonwealth Seniors Health Care card. The interest on the term deposits was going to disqualify him from holding that card.

Neville had made provision for $500,000 worth of cash bequests and wanted to retain at least that much for his estate. In his words, he wanted an investment that provided the same or similar level of capital security as term deposits with a competitive return and tax efficiency.

Again, the lifetime annuity that provides for a withdrawal guarantee came into play, his taxable income was reduced so that he retains his CSHC card.

Annuities generally don’t make for lively dinner conversation. Those that remember the old products are surprised that, given global economic volatility and product innovation, they are more appealing now.

 

Alex Denham is a Senior Adviser with Dartnall Advisers in Berrima. Prior to becoming an adviser, she spent 20 years in senior technical roles with several financial services companies. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

5 Comments
Alex Denham
September 14, 2016

The rule change that came in on 1 January 2015 affects account-based income streams only. Non-account based annuities such as lifetime annuities and fixed term annuities with a term of greater than 5 years (unless life expectancy is less than 5 years) continue to be assessed using the deductible amount formula. Short-term annuties (less than 5 years) are deemed.

Rafal Chomik
September 12, 2016

As far as means-test treatment, I thought that since 2015, deeming rates apply when determining the amount counted in the income test, and these are unaffected by actual amount of annuity income or capital returned.

Bruce Gregor
September 08, 2016

Very useful article. The longer the term of the annuity (particularly lifetime) the more you need to be convinced the providing company will remain solvent throughout your lifetime. To my knowledge there are no government guarantees in Australia like the $250,000 bank term deposit guarantee. A drop in yields like we have now is a big risk for annuity companies.

Warren Bird
September 14, 2016

Yes, I'm always a little concerned when I read someone saying that, because insurance companies have to hold reserves and are regulated by APRA, that makes them safe. It doesn't. If, for example, the investment policy of the reserves is risky, then they might not provide much protection when it's most needed. HIH had a lot of reserves, but they were invested in very poor quality assets and that contributed to their demise.

Some insurers are rated AA as a credit risk, but some are rated lower than that. Without naming names, one of the popular annuity providers is rated BBB+. That's investment grade, but it's a credit rating level that I would always prefer to have no more than 5% of my portfolio invested in any one credit.
The point is that having annuities with several providers, with smaller amounts invested through those with lower credit ratings, is part of the risk management strategy. The odds of losing capital are really small, but what you are managing is the consequences that flow from something going wrong. (Tail risk.)

Sorry if that sounds like a lot of work, but you can't look at annuities as an easy way out of having to manage investment risk. Even if they are marketed that way.

An alternative way to get a similar outcome is to buy a few well managed corporate bond funds, with perhaps a bit of equity income thrown in as well. Reinvest the distributions, but set up a regular withdrawal at a similar % rate as the going annuity rate. You don't have the same guarantee of return, but you get the cash flow, you get diversification and you get the flexibility to withdraw some capital should you later find that you need it. You create your own annuity in a way.

Seek advice first, as always, but please ask your adviser to fully explain to you the investment risks of any strategy. Annuities will suit some people, but not others and there are other ways of getting the same result.

David
September 08, 2016

Interesting to see how life annuities are being used but it is unclear if/how the return of capital amount is recalculated each year.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Overcoming loss aversion in retirement income

Retirement income products - what's ideal?

Longevity risk solutions for retirees

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

The sorry saga of housing affordability and ownership

It is hard to think of any area of widespread public concern where the same policies have been pursued for so long, in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that they have failed to achieve their objectives.

Latest Updates

Strategy

$1 billion and counting: how consultants maximise fees

Despite cutbacks in public service staff, we are spending over a billion dollars a year with five consulting firms. There is little public scrutiny on the value for money. How do consultants decide what to charge?

Investment strategies

Two strong themes and companies that will benefit

There are reasons to believe inflation will stay under control, and although we may see a slowing in the global economy, two companies should benefit from the themes of 'Stable Compounders' and 'Structural Winners'.

Financial planning

Reducing the $5,300 upfront cost of financial advice

Many financial advisers have left the industry because it costs more to produce advice than is charged as an up-front fee. Advisers are valued by those who use them while the unadvised don’t see the need to pay.

Strategy

Many people misunderstand what life expectancy means

Life expectancy numbers are often interpreted as the likely maximum age of a person but that is incorrect. Here are three reasons why the odds are in favor of people outliving life expectancy estimates.

Investment strategies

Slowing global trade not the threat investors fear

Investors ask whether global supply chains were stretched too far and too complex, and following COVID, is globalisation dead? New research suggests the impact on investment returns will not be as great as feared.

Investment strategies

Wealth doesn’t equal wisdom for 'sophisticated' investors

'Sophisticated' investors can be offered securities without the usual disclosure requirements given to everyday investors, but far more people now qualify than was ever intended. Many are far from sophisticated.

Investment strategies

Is the golden era for active fund managers ending?

Most active fund managers are the beneficiaries of a confluence of favourable events. As future strong returns look challenging, passive is rising and new investors do their own thing, a golden age may be closing.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.