Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 11
20 years ago today was my last day working for someone else. At that time I decided to try it on my own and live off the results of managing my own investments. I'd been investing since my college days and had a nice 401k plus a decent nest egg in taxable accounts. I was 54 1/2.

The early years I had to watch my expenses but the freedom to do what I wanted when I wanted was wonderful. I took 72t withdrawals from the IRA for 5 years until I was 59 1/2 and the limits came off. Still cautious until I could take SS at 62. In those days I was single and traveled 6 or 7 weeks a year on a limited budget. I made it through the tech bubble, some other market crises and the great recession. Only during the great recession did I ever have less in liquid assets than when I retired.

I've had some major expenses in the last 5 years as my college love and I got back together. My old house was too small and we bought a larger house and totally remodeled it. Even so, I still have over 40% more in my portfolio than when I retired. Without the house it would be about 65% more. I'm now 74 1/2 and have higher annual expenses but I expect to easily make it financially to at least age 100. And leave a nice estate.

Retirement from the corporate world is one of the best things I ever did.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Retirement from the corporate world is one of the best things I ever did. "

*****************************************************************************

Some things just need to be repeated.

Howie52
Congrats to you and yours.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Congrats! Oddly enough, I was laid off about then, too, and was older. I consulted for a while and dabbled in the market.

We're still doing okay, thankfully, and I love being "retired"!

Enjoy! And Happy New Year!

Vermonter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Retirement from the corporate world is one of the best things I ever did.

Amen brother.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<I've had some major expenses in the last 5 years as my college love and I got back together. My old house was too small and we bought a larger house and totally remodeled it. Even so, I still have over 40% more in my portfolio than when I retired. Without the house it would be about 65% more. I'm now 74 1/2 >>



I retired in 2007 at age 57.

After ten years with no earned income, I calculated the affect on net worth of living with no earned income.

After ten years of no earned income, I found that my net worth had INCREASED by 50%, and that included going through the last recession. More than that now I'd suppose.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I bailed on the corporate world when I was 42 (1997) - have spent the last 23 years doing whatever I thought looked interesting and did not care what it paid. Sometimes I worked my tail off, sometimes I did nothing. All of the time, I did what I wanted at 10- 30% my corporate wages.

OH! Save a $300K loss (2009) (investment went bankrupt during great recession) and a $550K inheritance (2014), net worth has increased almost 400%. Gotta love the market when it works.

Congrats for pulling the plug early and not looking back!

windrath

ps - my dad left a letter for me to find after he died (2014). Wrote about how proud he was of me for following my heart instead of the corporate world. Meant so much for him to say that.... Lesson - follow your heart - it will all work out....
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Gentlemen,
I appreciate reading your responses, as I am also contemplating retiring early, at 53. I have one question for those who have retired early, what was your ideal withdrawal rate? Also how did you handle your medical coverage?

Thank you in advance.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Gentlemen,

You seem to be denying yourself input from some of the smartest most thoughtful people on TMF.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
With regard to health care, I'll share my approach. I am 61, and thus a few years short of Medicare. Prior to my wife's passing in 2018, I had been on her corporate coverage for 30+ years. Then, I suddenly needed health care coverage on my own.

The cheapest Bronze plan I could get would be $13,000/year just for the premiums; followed of course by deductible, co-pays, etc. My income is too high for an ACA subsidy. So I joined a health sharing organization, which you can learn about by googling "health share ministries".

I am very healthy - I have several doctor appointments a year (all of the check-up variety) and just one prescription. So this worked for me. Full disclosure - there are MANY things health share ministries do not cover, so one has to be quite healthy. For me, I consider it catastrophic coverage. I just completed my first year under health sharing. I paid a bit over $3,000 in premiums and another $1,000 or so for appointments and a number of labs. So on the whole, I believe I saved at least $10,000.

Should I develop some major health issue, I could/might - come open season - sign up for full ACA coverage.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
CheersSRX posts,

With regard to health care, I'll share my approach. I am 61, and thus a few years short of Medicare. Prior to my wife's passing in 2018, I had been on her corporate coverage for 30+ years. Then, I suddenly needed health care coverage on my own.

The cheapest Bronze plan I could get would be $13,000/year just for the premiums; followed of course by deductible, co-pays, etc. My income is too high for an ACA subsidy. So I joined a health sharing organization, which you can learn about by googling "health share ministries".

</snip>


Rather than taking a chance on "health share ministries", I spent some time learning about how the Obamacare law works. You could own $100 million in Berkshire Hathaway stock and still get a large refundable tax credit since Obamacare only looks at income, not assets.

I spent a few years rearranging my portfolio to limit interest and dividend income and am now paying the princely sum of $1.43/month for my Obamacare plan, just $17.16/year. When I was doing my retirement planning years ago, I forecast $20,000/yr for health insurance premiums in my 60's.

Obamacare Repeal? My amazing story of drastically lower premiums.
https://retireearlyhomepage.com/obamacare_2017.html

</snip>


Sure I have a crap for-profit health plan, like everyone else with private insurance, but I'm paying a premium much closer to its value.

"Free Obamacare" has been an unexpected retirement blessing, it makes many of these health share ministries look like the Devil's work.

Patients tell their stories as Washington state orders ‘sham’ health-care sharing ministries to halt
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/patients-te...

</snip>


intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<Gentlemen,
I appreciate reading your responses, as I am also contemplating retiring early, at 53. I have one question for those who have retired early, what was your ideal withdrawal rate? Also how did you handle your medical coverage?

Thank you in advance.>>



I retired at age 57 in 2007.

After ten years of living on zero earned income, I calculated my change in net worth, including damage from the stock market crash.

My net worth had INCREASED by 50% in that time.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I appreciate reading your responses, as I am also contemplating retiring early, at 53. I have one question for those who have retired early, what was your ideal withdrawal rate? Also how did you handle your medical coverage?

I took a buyout package from my company at age 50 and then worked as a temp for three years retiring at 53.

I had enough time at my employer to qualify for their early retirement program which included participation in their group health insurance program. Initially it was inexpensive but became costly at age 60. But I had coverage.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Fish7x,

I mis-typed in my earlier response. Our investments have gone up 40% - not 400%.

For medical, I enrolled in the highest deductible plan I could find. We were both healthy and I just wanted catastrophic coverage which cost $500-550/month (1997 dollars). Then, the ACA came along - awesome deal for early retirees who have assets and not much income. When we first enrolled, our monthly premium was $100/month for a bronze plan. BUT, you do have to manage your AGI carefully.

IMO, the more important aspect of retirement to consider is what are you going to do and are you going to get paid. Even though I "retired" at 42, I kept working (part-time) at things I liked to do and on my terms. My compensation was 10-20% of what I earned before. Back then though, we had no debt and lived frugally - maybe $15,000/yr - in a small Minnesota town. I did not have to withdraw anything.

So, the withdrawal rate will be dependent on what you plan to spend, so develop a budget first. Then, you can figure out how much you have to earn (either through work or investing) or withdraw to make the money last.

Good Luck -
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
So, the withdrawal rate will be dependent on what you plan to spend, so develop a budget first.

Well said and exactly correct

I 'retired' at 48. Through TriCare, full medical coverage for both of us up to 65 and Medicare was a financial non-issue.

Income to fill the gap between pension and household budget need came from the dividends of large companies, primarily US companies, and a gaggle of REITs and their preferreds.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Bruce,

Could you elaborate on TriCare? Not familiar with this.

Cheers,

SD
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Fish7x,

To add a bit to my previous post:

- If you think you will apply for medical coverage through the ACA, research the income limitations. Your income is not your 1040 AGI - it has to include tax free income. And, if you go over the limit (by even one dollar), you lose the entire premium tax credit.

- As for why knowing what you will spend is so important, assume you have $1MM that you want to last 35 yrs (53 to 88). If your spending is $40,000/yr and your investment return is 4% and inflation is 2.5%, you can withdraw 4% and almost make it to 88. But, if you spend $80,000/yr, you will run out at 68 (without factoring in social security).

- Other forms of income (social security, pensions, etc.) will impact your retirement spending and withdrawal rate, so research their impact carefully. These decisions require some thought about how long you think you/your spouse will live - the big unknown for all of us.

Good Luck.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
SD
Sorry. The weakness of assumptions is not the reader but the assumer making the assumptions.

TriCare is Federal medical insurance for those, and family members, who are active duty or who are formally retired from active duty military service. TriCare is, unarguably, the most comprehensive form of medical insurance. For both of us...$435, or thereabouts, per year premium for $zero deductible and $0 copay medical insurance.

At 65 and Medicare, Tricare Prime becomes Tricare for life, which becomes, by far, the most generous Medicare supplement available to retired military at no...that's $0, premium, cost to military retirees and their family members.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
BruceCM writes,

At 65 and Medicare, Tricare Prime becomes Tricare for life, which becomes, by far, the most generous Medicare supplement available to retired military at no...that's $0, premium, cost to military retirees and their family members.

</snip>


Sounds like Bernie's "Medicare-for-All". If it's good enough for the military, it's good enough for the taxpayers funding it.

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
If it's good enough for the military, it's good enough for the . . .


+++
+++

"Swamp denizens" of DC, who routinely go to Bethesda or have a uniformed Dr take care of their medical needs!

Take those privileges AWAY, and see how fast they come up with a real reform for {civilian} medical coverage.

AND, did you ever wonder why NONE of them ever seek treatment @ VA Facilities?


sunrayman
also a TriCare for Life beneficiary
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Bruce...

Are you actually using Tricare Fore Life at this time? I have a few years till 65. Does it work? There's been no confusion or "up-clucking" vis a vis Medicare, providers, et al?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Sounds like Bernie's "Medicare-for-All". If it's good enough for the military, it's good enough for the taxpayers funding it.

intercst


I am so sick of hearing about "medicare for all". Really. It too complicated and too expensive for the end user. To many things to deal with. Too much involvement with insurance companies and the upplements etc etc. Hopefully they do better than medicare for all. Tricare is the whole package. Guaranteed acceptance. Permanent. Costs, fees, complications all kept to a minimum!Little to no involvement or at least excessive involvement on the part of the user. Get sick -> see doctor -> bills paid -> a few weeks later pay your share, which for me I have never found it excessive. 15-20 yrs ago I was sick as chit. Lots of neuro, cardio problems, tests, tests, tests, lunatic effing doctors killing me. Caused not a ripple in my budget. Screw Medicare for all. If you're gonna do this, do it right.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<< If it's good enough for the military, it's good enough for the taxpayers funding it.

intercst>>



The military is working and often sacrificing a lot in order to receive trhat benefit.


Bernie's Medicare for all beneficiary would be --- what? BREATHING to get that valuable supplemental benefit.

That's hardly an equivalent reason for receiving a substantial benefit.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
FCorelli writes,


I am so sick of hearing about "medicare for all". Really. It too complicated and too expensive for the end user.

</snip>


You obviously don't understand Bernie's Medicare-for-All proposal. Everything's covered (except cosmetic plastic surgery) and there's no premiums, deductibles, or co-pays. Taxes pay for all of it, just like most other industrialized countries.

The price gouging alone in the current US for-profit system amounts to an $8,000 per year stealth tax on every American family.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/american-families-poll-tax...

The U.S. health care system is the most expensive in the world, and its cost far surpasses that of other high-income nations, according to a 2019 report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. America spends about $1 trillion more than Switzerland, the second-most expensive system — meaning U.S. households spend roughly $8,000 more than their Swiss counterparts.

</snip>


And the Swiss pay about 30% more than the French for the same high quality health care because they left the for-profit insurers in charge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/08/08/how-us...

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
AAAH! OK! I was just thinking he was going to keep Medicare as-is and just let everybody else in on it. If he's got a new one, then yes. We'll go with that.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The military is working and often sacrificing a lot in order to receive trhat benefit. - SP

------------------------

The generous benefits we bestow on military veterans who put their lives on the lie in god forsaken hell holes around the world is well deserved. A genuine thank you to them for defending our freedoms.

However, I draw a distinction between serving in a combat zone versus having basically an office job stateside. A file clerk at the Pentagon should not get the same generous benefit that we bestow on a bomb technician in Afghanistan. We can't afford it. The highest level of benefits should ne reserved to those who risk life and limb. If we had unlimited funds maybe it could be everybody, but we don't.

Not a popular opinion I know. So flame away.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<However, I draw a distinction between serving in a combat zone versus having basically an office job stateside. A file clerk at the Pentagon should not get the same generous benefit that we bestow on a bomb technician in Afghanistan. >>



Keep in mind that file clerks at the Pentagon WERE targets and were injured or killed on 9/11.

And when needed, there have been occasions when file clerks were handed rifles and expected to use them very suddenly.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Heck - tri-care in Dallas

Get in line Monday morning early to try and arrange an appointment at the VA.....wait in line hours.

Then get to receptionist and if all the slots for specialists are filled, you are out of luck. try next week....... and you might wait weeks for an appointment....and half the time, the doc doesn't show up for your appointment so you are back in line again. Worst docs work for the VA system.......

Now, if you only need a GP, maybe 3 day wait....unless you are so sick you go to emergency room.....

VA waiting lines/problems are legendary.......

Don't wish it on everyone else!


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"You obviously don't understand Bernie's Medicare-for-All proposal. Everything's covered (except cosmetic plastic surgery) and there's no premiums, deductibles, or co-pays. Taxes pay for all of it, just like most other industrialized countries."

Yep, up to SEVENTY PERCENT of your paycheck disappears in taxes to pay for all the free.

22% sales TAX (VAT) on everything and even more on new cars.

10% tax for 'social services' or more....on top of higher income taxes.

Most people pay 40% plus out of their paychecks and high earners 50%. High high earners pay 70% income tax/social tax....and then get to pay 22% sales tax on anything they buy!

So much for 'free'.


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"I was just thinking he was going to keep Medicare as-is and just let everybody else in on it. "

Heck, most of us pay THOUSANDS a year for Medicare ....now!....... it sure 'ain't free!). And don't forget the Medicare supplement and drug plan premiums too!

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Heck - tri-care in Dallas

Get in line Monday morning early to try and arrange an appointment at the VA.....wait in line hours.


I've never been to the Dallas VA Medical Center. I currently use the Sacramento VA Medical Center and the MyHealtheVet web site to schedule appointments. My longest delay was getting an appointment with Dermatology to treat a leg ulcer when I moved to Northern California from the LA area. It took 30 days. For most appointments the delay is only 3-7 days.

Being in the VA's Priority Group 1 might be a factor in the speed that I can get medical care. I have a Vietnam Era service-connected disability rating greater than 50%.

With regard to medical expenses, I do have to be covered by Medicare Part B as the VA doesn't satisfy the ACA preexisting conditions requirements. The VA Pharmacy does satisfy ACA requirements for drug coverage so I don't need Medicare Part D. There are no copays or other charges for either medical treatment or prescriptions.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 10
Heck - tri-care in Dallas

Get in line Monday morning early to try and arrange an appointment at the VA.....wait in line hours.
tele


See. This is so deceptive or perhaps unintentionaly misleading due to do what I'll call and earnest ignorance. The VA is not Tricare. Two differnt things. Everybody knows the VA has had problems going back to the 70's. (Mostly because the Greediest Generation "got theirs" out of the system and they were ripping off the Vietnam vets, but that's another story) The disparate quality of care seemed to vary by location.

Tricare is just like a medical insurance policy. No VA. No "gubmint" providers unless you live near a Military base and choose to see the G.I. docs. But my understanding is the active duty military establishment really likes to discourage that.

True story: Back about 2004 the dr wanted me to get a treadmill test. The full-up kind with a cardiologist and the radioactive dye. So, I'm standing at the desk waiting for the nurse to get off the phone so I could tell her: "DO NOT SCHEDULE THAT TEST...until I talk to the insurance and make sure they're cool with it. I don't want somebody jumping the gun thinking they're doing me a favor then I find out it's not covered and I get stuck with the whole thing."

The nurse says: Don't worry, it's approved.
I say: No, I want to talk to them first."
Nurse says: That was them on the phone. I just coordinated it and they approved it.

Well, I can't argue with that. I went home got online and logged in with TriCare, and there it was. Not 30 mins later. "Approved." With all the proper names and code numbers.

If you can get it better than that: A) You're lying. It might be as good as that but not any better. Or B) You're paying too much money for it out of fear and it's only marginally better.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
IF you are on Medicare in Alaska (over 65) I wish you luck on finding a doctor. Some will keep you IF you were an existing patient when you turned 65, others say to hit the road. There are a couple of charitable clinics that will take you, but I have heard real horror stories as they seem to only want to write prescriptions.
YES Medicare for all is the answer to the population problem.
jmho
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
IF you are on Medicare in Alaska (over 65) I wish you luck on finding a doctor. Some will keep you IF you were an existing patient when you turned 65, others say to hit the road.

I wonder why this is? Is it the paperwork? I know one guy who says he won't take medicare. Doesn't make sense to me. Too much paperwork? Low reimbursement?

I was told that Medicare gives insurance companies $2000 for their supplemental policies. That seems generous enough that all the insurance companies want a piece of it.

CNC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"IF you are on Medicare in Alaska (over 65) I wish you luck on finding a doctor. Some will keep you IF you were an existing patient when you turned 65, others say to hit the road."

My local doc is part of a large practice - Village Health Center - maybe 50-60 docs including specialists.....

My local doc and all the ones in the practice will not take new Medicare patients. They will only take 3 Medicare Advantage Plans. If you were a legacy patient, they will still see you on regular Medicare. For the time being......

Apparently, they get a boat load of money from Medicare for the 'advantage plans' whether you use it or not.....$8000-$10,000.....a year......and of course, they'll give you the minimum care possible for your visits/problems to maximize profits. Only some hospitals are in the plan. Good luck if you need Mayo Clinic or John Hopkins Cancer institute or similar.....it's basically a HMO based thing ...


t,
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
FC

Are you actually using Tricare Fore Life at this time?

Not very much.

TFL works great for those who choose Medicare as their primary insurer because TFL will serve as their Medigap insurance, at $0 premium. I'm not 100% sure because I've never used it as Medigap, but I've heard others at VFW meetings and MOAA meetings I've been to, say that it is $0 out of pocket for Medicare covered charges. IOW, it pays for everything Medicare allows but down not pay for.

DW and I went with Kaiser Senior Advantage (a Medicare Advantage Plan) which NORMALLY will not allow the Medicare beneficiary to also carry a Medigap policy. So we are the odd-balls who do carry a Medigap-style insurance with TFL within the Medicare Advantage plan. Fortunately, Kaiser will bill TFL for any deductibles/copays...otherwise we'd have to pay and then turn around and bill TFL. But its an awkward situation.

Are you eligible for VA? If so and you're thinking of signing up for a Medicare Advantage plan, here's an important piece of advice....DO NOT put down as supplemental insurance that you have 'VA insurance'. I did that (I have a 20% service connected disability...long story) and it totally screwed up Kasier's billing system. Took me months to get it straitened out. Turns out, VA is a social benefit, NOT INSURANCE.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
BHM

However, I draw a distinction between serving in a combat zone versus having basically an office job stateside.

Having lived in both environs, I tend to agree with that. 80% of my AD time was spent living and working as my civilian counterparts did. Problem is, if you're in uniform, you've got to be ready to go if the ball drops...and that's not an exaggeration.

Sept 1990 I was sitting in my office minding my own business at RAF Upper Heyford (England) when our readiness officer stuck her head in my door and said, basically, 'front and center'. Huh. Me? Next day, after a barrage of shots and pills, I was standing in line with my duffel, C-bag decked out in my TA-50 waiting to board a C-141. Thankfully when the Iraqi's heard we were coming, they ran the other way. Whew. But living in a GP-Medium, even the Temper-version, was not exactly my definition of a camping trip and it got old, fast.

But as BHM says, my hat tips to those Marines and army infantry who spent months and months and months out there. If TFL is a benefit they get for doing that, that's a tax-payer deal however you slice it.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thanks. I guess...? I'm eligible for VA with a 0% (that's ZERO) disability but I have never used VA since as a retiree I have Tricare so why bother the VA system which is really built for something entirely different. It would never occur to me to list "VA" on anything

I will be going with regular Medicare + a supplement when the time comes, unless something majorly changes in all this. Tricare has always worked and there's no reason to think TFL will suddenly be crap. In fact, if I'm not mistaken TFL is ALSO a Part "D" for drugs. If it's all sympatico it's a fantastic deal. I just thought I'd run it by you.


FC

Are you actually using Tricare Fore Life at this time?

Not very much.

TFL works great for those who choose Medicare as their primary insurer because TFL will serve as their Medigap insurance, at $0 premium. I'm not 100% sure because I've never used it as Medigap, but I've heard others at VFW meetings and MOAA meetings I've been to, say that it is $0 out of pocket for Medicare covered charges. IOW, it pays for everything Medicare allows but down not pay for.

DW and I went with Kaiser Senior Advantage (a Medicare Advantage Plan) which NORMALLY will not allow the Medicare beneficiary to also carry a Medigap policy. So we are the odd-balls who do carry a Medigap-style insurance with TFL within the Medicare Advantage plan. Fortunately, Kaiser will bill TFL for any deductibles/copays...otherwise we'd have to pay and then turn around and bill TFL. But its an awkward situation.

Are you eligible for VA? If so and you're thinking of signing up for a Medicare Advantage plan, here's an important piece of advice....DO NOT put down as supplemental insurance that you have 'VA insurance'. I did that (I have a 20% service connected disability...long story) and it totally screwed up Kasier's billing system. Took me months to get it straitened out. Turns out, VA is a social benefit, NOT INSURANCE.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 14
Tele posts BIG SCARY NUMBERS with no sources as to their origin. Seventy percent of your paycheck? (Snort).

Yeah it’s true the rest of the free world has healthcare as good or better than ours for a fraction of the cost. Amazing what you can do setting national prices for drugs and getting rid of the insurance lobbyists Tele has been listening to. Go to Indiana and look at the palatial office buildings.

Go to Canada and ask if they’d like to trade their health care for ours, or Spain and they’ll laugh in your face.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Here are some of the 'big numbers'

"Finland
Annual income at Tax rate (including employer unemployment payment)
€13,000 25%
€33,000 57%
€47,000 60%
€83,000 67%"

Country Top Marginal Income Tax Rate (in %) (a) Top Marginal Income Tax Threshold (in Euros) (b) Top Marginal Income Tax Threshold (expressed as a multiple of the average wage)
Belgium 60.2 € 49,638 1.0
Denmark 55.8 € 70,081 1.3
Finland 58.3 € 81,449 1.9
France 55.1 € 562,377 14.6
Germany 47.5 € 267,190 5.4
Greece 55.0 € 233,129 11.2
Ireland 52.0 € 70,045 1.5
Italy 52.8 € 83,275 2.7
Netherlands 52.2 € 70,593 1.4
Norway 46.7 € 100,145 1.6
Portugal 61.0 € 280,899 15.6
Slovenia 61.1 € 95,263 5.1
Sweden 60.1 € 67,630 1.5
Turkey 45.5 € 31,406 3.1

Then add in about 10% social tax on top of income tax.

On what you have left, everything you buy is taxed at 22%. New cars are typically taxed at 30% or more. Maybe only 14% on raw food items. Oh, and you get to buy gas that is already double or triple US prices. Diesel in Norway at one time was 12 bucks a gallon!

Yeah, such a deal....... but beside those marginal rates, most countries taxes start after the first $1000 with no deductions for kids, interest, etc......

Canada does not let you deduct mortgage interest on buying a home.


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 13
Annual income at Tax rate (including employer unemployment payment)

Do I understand correctly that you are adding the taxes that employers pay when discussing personal tax rates?

Who does that?

Besides, the conversation to me should be about what you get for the taxes you pay. If a family no longer has to pay $1000/month for health insurance premiums, so what if their taxes go up $800/month to pay for health care. All else being equal, you'll be foolish to pass up such a deal.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"Annual income at Tax rate (including employer unemployment payment)

Do I understand correctly that you are adding the taxes that employers pay when discussing personal tax rates?

Who does that"?

****************************************************************************

Why not?
If the funds were not subtracted to the federal coffers, the funds would be available for
employees directly. The tax is directly related to the employee and can be defined.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Why not?
If the funds were not subtracted to the federal coffers, the funds would be available for
employees directly. The tax is directly related to the employee and can be defined."

Yes, employers have to fork over typically 20-30% of an employees 'salary' in 'social taxes' and matching payments....which reduces the income of the employees.
That, doesn't count the overhead cost of those employees either (space, a month of vacation typically, holidays, sick time, family leave, etc) which can run another 20-30% of salary.

We had engineers come over from the UK....they found their after tax take home pay increased over 50% here compared to their home country! Plus they had a stock purchase/401K matching plan, better benefits.


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Why not?
If the funds were not subtracted to the federal coffers, the funds would be available for
employees directly.



Yes it would be "available" in an academic sense. But it's quite an assumption to say that the employer would give those monies to the employees instead of keeping for themselves.


The inclusion of employer taxes to artificially inflate the personal tax rates in these discussions is operating in bad faith imo.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The "govt taxes would be paid to the employee" line of thought is nonsense. The only way for the employee to "benefit" from those monies, is to let the govt collect them and use the monies to provide common needs.

Rationale:
In my last two jobs, the employer "paid" for health insurance. This was NOT govt mandated, it was just part of the benefits package to get me to work for them, at the wage they offered.

At both places, I inquired about getting the monthly health insurance premium paid directly to me, and I'd take care of my own health needs. At the first job, circa 1995, the premium was $297/month, they told me I could get $93. I would "lose" $200/month. (The numbers are from memory, I was appalled at the discrepancy, and the numbers made an impression!)
At the second, circa 2005-7, the premium was $450/month... and I could get $97. Yes, $97. And I would "lose" $350/month.

At both places, I still had copays and out of pocket minimums to meet.*

I determined that the ONLY way for me to (potentially) benefit from the monies, was to let the HMO skim the 2x to 4x.

IMO, it's a given that, if the govt does NOT collect the taxes, the employer will NOT pass the monies to the employee. It'll be a xmas bonus for the boss/es.

🤔
ralph

* Fortunately, I had no accidents, no major health crises. I didn't 'need' the 'benefits'.
But OTHERS did! For that reason, I prefer that my health insurance premiums be collected by the GOVERNMENT and used to provide needed healthcare in a single payer, universal health care system.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
ralph:"At both places, I inquired about getting the monthly health insurance premium paid directly to me, and I'd take care of my own health needs. At the first job, circa 1995, the premium was $297/month, they told me I could get $93."

Likely, the insurance premiums were a deductible cost from net income for the company. They gave you the after tax savings (and cost of administration for the special exception). At some companies, IF you are covered by a spouses plan, you can opt out but don't get much - but many companies have 'umbrella plan' so you could get increased life insurance or free dental or vision or other benefit. Lose it or use it....your choice.

Part of it also could be some employees wanting every one of their 'earned dollars' in their pockets and they don't worry about getting sick....they never have gotten sick before..... (until they do - but they want their MONEY and want it NOW)....

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Source?
Print the post Back To Top