A New Annuity You Probably Don't Need

Recs

8

Be A Motley Fool Millionaire!

David Gardner's top pick took an epic run of 1,334%! See what he’s recommending that you buy NEXT.

Some annuities can be extremely helpful in retirement, essentially letting you create your own pension. But one kind of annuity, the variable annuity, is often a bad idea.

Why? Well, for starters, they often sport hefty fees, sometimes topping 2% of your assets annually. On an account valued at $100,000, those fees would take $2,000 per year. They can deliver big tax blows, too, as your ultimate withdrawals are taxed at your ordinary income rate, not the usually lower capital gains tax rate. Money left in it when you die can generate a tax hit for your beneficiaries.

Another concern with annuities is that you're relying heavily on the health of the insurance company that sells them. Although state guaranty associations backstop annuities to some extent, you can still end up receiving less than you expected from your investment if your insurer goes under. That's why it's smart to pick strong companies, and sometimes even to divide your purchase among several different companies.

Developments afoot
Recently, many insurance companies have been tweaking their annuity offerings, raising fees and reducing guarantees. Well, I just learned that one of the most respected insurers out there, New York Life (which has earned top ratings from several raters), is actually rolling out a new offering of variable annuities -- a market it hasn't traditionally tapped extensively in the past.

In part, the company is cashing in on its solid reputation. The initial information is a bit vague, though; according to the company, the annuities will focus on "simplification, low cost, and transparency." So if you find yourself tempted by this new annuity, be on the lookout for more details, and be sure to learn a lot about it before signing anything.

Look inward, too, to see why you might be drawn to annuities and why companies are cranking out more of them. The recent stock market implosion surely has a lot to do with it, as does the gradual disappearance of pensions. Investors are scared and are looking for more reliable payouts. Thus, companies are seeing that there is money to be made offering annuities. New York Life actually re-introduced more attractive immediate annuities four years ago and has seen that business grow to $1.2 billion in assets under management, a tenfold increase.

Here's another idea
Meanwhile, consider this: You can save costs and get growth and income in retirement by investing directly in stocks or low-cost mutual funds. For instance, investing in solid dividend payers that increase their dividends regularly and significantly can provide you with a consistent and rising stream of income. Below are a few companies with yields of 3% or more that are highly rated in our Motley Fool CAPS community of investors -- I've modeled what your annual take would be, if you had $10,000 invested in each:

Company

CAPS Stars
(out of five)

Recent Dividend Yield

Annual Dividend
on $10,000 Invested

Waste Management (NYSE: WM)

*****

3.9%

$390

Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE: TSM)

*****

3.5%

$350

Unilever

*****

4.2%

$420

Penn West Energy (NYSE: PWE)

*****

12.4%

$1,240

NYSE Euronext (NYSE: NYX)

*****

4.3%

$430

Novartis (NYSE: NVS)

*****

3.8%

$380

Hasbro (NYSE: HAS)

****

3.0%

$300

PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP)

*****

3.1%

$310

Total

   

$3,820

Data: Motley Fool CAPS.

If that total grows by just 6% per year, in 20 years you'll be collecting a total yield of $12,250 -- on top of capital appreciation -- just from a $70,000 investment.

What to do
Of course, as we've seen in the past year, even good dividend stocks can lose value over the short run. The guarantees that some variable annuities provide have helped shelter their owners from much of the bear market's damage recently, and that's a big part of why they've become more attractive.

But with stocks down so much from 2007 levels, you're arguably less likely to see extensive losses from here. If you think stocks are more likely to go up from here than down, then paying up for those guarantees doesn't make much sense.

Should you get out of stocks now before it's too late? John Rosevear has the answers you want right here.

“Make Big Money With Options” Motley Fool CFO Ollen Douglass recently made over $100,000 buying options on 7 well known stocks. Now we’re committed to turning his small fortune into a massive one! And we want you to join us! Enter your email address to hear more:

Longtime Fool contributor Selena Maranjian owns shares of Novartis and PepsiCo. NYSE Euronext is a Motley Fool Rule Breakers pick. PepsiCo and Unilever are Motley Fool Income Investor recommendations. The Fool owns shares of Hasbro, which is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendation. Try any of our investing newsletters free for 30 days. The Motley Fool is Fools writing for Fools.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 24, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Wilson08 wrote:

    Dividend income is a great strategy for one's discretionary retirement income but they should not be relied on for essential income. Why? As we have all seen, dividends can be cut. If someone needs a certain amount of income, subjecting it to potential loss is foolish.

    The truth is, annuites - both fixed and variable - are the most appropriate fit to cover essential retirement income needs if one's social security and pensions do not already cover that figure. Bond and dividend income should be structured to cover the discretionary income. That is, unless you think there will NEVER be another bear market.

  • Report this Comment On August 24, 2009, at 12:54 PM, 42theflush wrote:

    Is the annual dividend quoted accurate? Does it not account for stock price fluctuation?

  • Report this Comment On August 24, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Juliusr wrote:

    http://tinyurl.com/ng29ej

    Here's some more information on the pros and cons of annuities. I look forward to reading more about the New York Life Annuities in the coming weeks.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2009, at 11:54 AM, bloatedElf wrote:

    I don't have a problem with fees as long as I'm getting something for them. We pay real estate agents 6%!!! 15% or more in tips to waiters. 6% or more in sales tax... On and on. I'm more than happy to pay my advisor 2% for the work he does - as long as I'm getting it back in returns.

    Keep in mind that posted returns are NET OF ALL FEES. I would much rather give a fund manager 5% in fees if my return were 10% than a manager 0.2% if my return were 8%.

    Vanguard's mediocre performance is overshadowed by their boasts of low costs, so it's give me a bad taste...

    So, in this article I see 8 stocks - an $80,000 investment rather than $70,000. That means you get an income of about 4.75%. Will you do better in an annuity? Maybe, maybe not.

    If the stocks go up at 6% a year, that's great - probably better than most annuities.

    But what if the stocks go down? (Hey, it could happen...) Now what happens to your income? Would an annuity be better then? Maybe, maybe not.

    You want guarantees? You'll have to pay for them. Sorry, it's a capitalist country.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2009, at 4:23 PM, healthcore wrote:

    We assume the author is using the most recent stock prices to determine annual gains from dividends. For example, a 3.8% dividend from Novartis could be obtained by investing $10,000 @ $45.00/share...an approximate recent price.

  • Report this Comment On September 01, 2009, at 9:56 AM, jimytime wrote:

    This article is very misleading. For instance, with a variable annuity, one's assets are not invested in the general account of an insurance company. They are invested in a separate account in the annuity owner's name. Therefore, if your insurance company goes under, a variable annuity is actually the only type of annuity that will give you back your entire contract value. This is a big mistake and should be corrected. In my opinion, variable annuities may make sense as part of a balanced portfolio.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 969950, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 12/2/2009 9:17:14 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
Fool Search: Be GM's Next CEO!

By The Motley Fool

Fool Search: Be GM's Next CEO!

Related Tickers

12/2/2009 4:00 PM
PWE $17.70 Down -0.16 -0.90%
Penn West Energy T… CAPS Rating: *****
NVS $55.77 Down -0.39 -0.69%
Novartis AG (ADR) CAPS Rating: ****
NYX $25.04 Down -0.24 -0.95%
NYSE Euronext CAPS Rating: *****
WM $33.20 Down +0.00 +0.00%
Waste Management,… CAPS Rating: *****
PEP $63.65 Up +0.23 +0.36%
PepsiCo, Inc. CAPS Rating: *****
HAS $30.51 Up +0.46 +1.53%
Hasbro, Inc. CAPS Rating: *****
TSM $10.86 Up +0.35 +3.33%
Taiwan Semiconduct… CAPS Rating: *****

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Private equity: Private Equity is investment funds arranged privately without the need for a publically traded stock or bond issue.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!