GIC's and Safety | GIC discussions | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
GIC's and Safety
September 15, 2014
12:07 am
Jack Manning
Member
Banned
Forum Posts: 379
Member Since:
August 5, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I googled 3.00% GIC's and something interesting came up with the first one shown on the entire page and Google search.

This came up, Investing in GIC's - Safe Investing Could Be Risky and I clicked on it with the website address http://www.investorsgroup.com/.....gher-Rates. The workable website address is http://www.investorsgroup.com/.....Mgod3RUA1A.

They assume a marginal 43.41% income tax rate on 3.56% GIC's over 4 years leaving 2.00% net after tax each year. If most people understood the Canadian income tax system, they would know most people are not paying 43.41% in annual income taxes.

A $50,000 working or employment income earner in Canada residing in Ontario pays about $9,500 a year in annual income taxes. This works out to 19% on all of his or her income.

It maybe a little higher or little lower in Canada depending on your province but is 20% to 21% at the most. C.P.P and E.I. are extra on top of this by about 5% but are reduced by 1% of this from non-refundable tax credits. So really 4% is the extra C.P.P, E.I. paid annually.

Also, investment income which includes dividends, interest, royalties, foreign dividends, RRSP income, annuity income, pension income, C.P.P, OAS, capital gains are not taxed with this extra 4% C.P.P, E.I.

Also, there is certain tax credits for RRIF income and tax savings for RRIF, pension income splitting that will reduce income taxes of a couple. This is in the case of retirees, seniors 65 years and older.

As you can see there are many factors that will result in the actual income tax of Canadians and their families but a 43.41% marginal income tax rate is not a problem for most Canadian taxpayers.

If this Canadian taxpayer contributes to RRSP's and TFSA's this will reduce present income taxes at their marginal income tax rate of 25% to 33% in the example above and protect against future income taxes payable since all TFSA's income, gains is income tax free.

As for inflation, they are selecting only 2 food and 2 beverages as examples of big inflation increases and food inflation increasing 20% in a year which is not the norm. Food and related food items is about 6% to 7% of most Canadian's budgets and Statistics Canada's 1 full year period of C.P.I inflation which includes food and energy is 2.10% ending July-31-2014.

Many in the business world, advisers, investors, mutual fund companies, ETF companies, REIT companies etc. use this number and are going by what they state when comparing rates of return and inflation.

Currently, 2.85%, 3.00% GIC's in RRSP's and TFSA's is keeping ahead of 2.10% C.P.I. inflation.. Even in RRSP's and TFSA's with a mix of 50% GIC's and 50% government zero coupon bonds, government bonds at 3.75% would give a 3.30% to 3.38% overall conservative annual interest investment rate.

In 2010, 2011, less extent in 2012 GIC, government bond rates where higher and would of averaged 3.80% to 4.00% with a 50%/50% mix of GIC's, government bonds, zeros in RRSP's, TFSA's.

I do agree that property taxes, utilities, gas, heating costs, insurance is going up more than 2.10% annually but it is not all of a family's annual budget either. It is a good portion of it though.

I think that they are making it look worse then it really is and their fees as a mutual fund company mostly but not exclusively are going to take a big chunk annually out of annual rates of returns maybe from 1.5% to 2.00% which must be factored in the conservative investments that will be discussed with clients.

I think the bigger problem today is the lack of the ability of people to save or save much or enough because of current economic circumstances and probably bad financial decisions either by not being educated, informed, experienced enough or at all or them not really caring. It could be also that currently younger Canadians in their 30's, 40's are not thinking much about the future.

For those that actually save, invest, I think what is more important then getting an extra 1% or 2% per year more on one's savings, investments is 4 particular financial items, first building a cash reserve in a higher interest savings account, term deposits of say 30 days, 60 days etc., cashable GIC's etc. This should probably be 6 months to 1 year of living expenses at the minimum.

It depends on your peace of mind factor, some want 18 months to 2 years of living expenses. Just having this peace of mind and access to money when it could be needed should be everyone's main financial goal.

Second, making sure a well thought out plan of debt reduction is achievable in say 5, 10, 15 years etc. depending on each person's financial and lifestyle circumstances. Be careful of refinancing and piling up debt on your primary residence plus make sure high interest debt like credit card debt, furniture financing etc. does not become part of your life.

Third, getting the proper amount of term life insurance if needed for dependents like children, spouse etc. Many say at least 10 to 12 times combined annual incomes is a good start but this could be daunting for many. It may make more sense at trying to start at 6 or 7 times of combined annual incomes instead of getting no term life insurance at all. This is very important especially for new, younger families with children, spouse.

Finally, maximizing RRSP's and TFSA's as much as possible to keep savings, investments protected from current and future income taxes and possibly applying those annual RRSP income tax refunds or other annual savings from other financial resources to build also non-registered investments that will be taxed lower than RRSP, RRIF income and registered annuity income. It is also the fastest way to compound money either by using compound interest from GIC's, bonds or other investments generating capital gains, dividends etc.

RESP's could a good idea for funding future education costs for children and other younger beneficiaries which would likely result in no or small amount income taxes. This would provide good income tax savings and compound interest or compound growth for decades. However, RESP's should not be done at the expense of RRSP's and TFSA's.

This is just a checklist and really it depends on what someone or a family chooses to do and in whatever order they choose to do anything. It could be combined choices or not and it could be done at different times or at the same time.

Every person should use their money and save, invest their money the way they feel is best for them and I am in no way advising, suggesting what they should do with their own money. It is just my opinions and that is it.

September 15, 2014
6:43 am
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 9245
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

My personal experience with some Investors Group people was very negative, and thus I personally would not want to trust them. I would assume their advice to be biased in a way that I couldn't accept.
Just my opinion.

September 15, 2014
7:38 am
Brimleychen
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 258
Member Since:
September 5, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Jack Manning said
Investing in GIC's - Safe Investing Could Be Risky.....
.

sf-yellFor those GIC (1-5 years) under CDIC insured are safe as long as CDIC honors promises within 100K limit. But any market linked so-called GIC are not safe and are sure to lose money. In the other countries, they are called structured products. Don't know why we allow them to use GIC name (GIC implies fixed term deposits in Canada). For the safety of your investment, please read this

  • http://www.greatponzi.com/guid....._bank.html
  • Never trust those salesman report trying to scare you, and convince you to invest in stock market

    David Trahair's books on this

  • http://www.trahair.com/images/....._cover.pdf
  • September 15, 2014
    10:12 am
    james1900
    Member
    Members
    Forum Posts: 181
    Member Since:
    June 24, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    If GIC returns are higher than inflation, that's us being lucky in Canada. In many countries, GIC is sure losing to CPI.

    September 15, 2014
    8:30 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Loonie and Brimleychen, I heard that Investors Group and many of these mutual fund companies sell DSC mutual funds that are deferred sales charge funds.

    Basically, they can have 5% to 6% fees if cashed in or redeemed before 5, 6 years or more and these DSC fees decline by 0.50% per year that passes and money that stays in the fund. This is is on top of the annual management fees of 1.50% to 2.00% charged by their funds.

    We never would put more than the maximum $100,000 CDIC deposit insurance which includes principal and interest. The whole point of putting money in GIC's is safety, principal preservation and interest income or compound interest, even now at 2.85% or 3.00% rates that are low historically.

    About provincial and other deposit insurance, things have to get really bad for CDIC and others to get into trouble so having money in riskier investments like REIT's, stocks or equity mutual funds, equity ETF's etc. would take more of a hit to their principal or capital value.

    James1900, I think most GIC investors make the mistake that they put all or most of their money in shorter terms like 1-2 years which will not keep up with inflation. This is true especially in non-registered accounts where you can go backwards after taxes and inflation.

    This is more truer with GIC rates that are high historically or are even average GIC rates as rates eventually fall like in the 19080's, 1990's. Today, it could make sense to have 1 to 2 year GIC's if GIC rates go up by 1% or more in the next 2, 3 years.

    September 15, 2014
    8:43 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    James1900, historically, 3-5 year GIC' should get 2%+inflation and government bonds, government zero coupon bonds should get 3%+inflation. Using today's 2.10% C.P.I inflation, GIC's should be at 4.10% and government bonds should get 5.10%.

    GIC's of 1-2 years should not get 2%+inflation but about 1.5%+inflation, so a 3.60% rate. We are not to get that these days but striving to get 3.00% in protected accounts, RRSP's, TFSA's etc. is not that bad.

    We all know this is not happening because of the upside down economic world we live in today. This is why in my post above I stated that maximizing RRSP's, TFSA's are the best way to keep up with inflation and be protected against income taxes.

    RESP's are also good too for these 2 reasons I gave about RRSP's, TFSA's but should be used only in addition if it fits one's family or circumstances and not at the expense of contributing less to RRSP's, TFSA's.

    September 17, 2014
    6:10 pm
    Norman1
    Member
    Members
    Forum Posts: 6768
    Member Since:
    April 6, 2013
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Brimleychen said

    sf-yellFor those GIC (1-5 years) under CDIC insured are safe as long as CDIC honors promises within 100K limit. But any market linked so-called GIC are not safe and are sure to lose money. In the other countries, they are called structured products. Don't know why we allow them to use GIC name (GIC implies fixed term deposits in Canada). For the safety of your investment, please read this

  • http://www.greatponzi.com/guid....._bank.html
  • Never trust those salesman report trying to scare you, and convince you to invest in stock market

    David Trahair's books on this

  • http://www.trahair.com/images/....._cover.pdf
  • That depends on whom one purchases the market-linked investment from. The principal of a market-linked GIC from a CDIC-issuer can be CDIC-insured.

    The GreatPonzi.com article has quite a few errors and incomplete facts. For example, the article suggests that CDIC deposits are backed up only by an insurance fund of 0.39% of deposits. That's not true. There's another $19 billion or so (another 3% of deposits) of authorised borrowing that CDIC can draw upon.

    Statements about the proposed federal government's bail-in proposal are also not correct. The CDIC-insured portion of deposits is still protected. What Carney is refusing to rule out is whether or not the non-CDIC-insured portion of individual deposits will participate in a bail-in.

    Elsewhere on the site, the writer says that there's nothing backing up deposits and that the money for the deposit never existed! That's just rubbish:

    Even something as simple as a savings account at a bank is supported by nothing more than promises. Due to modern fractional reserve banking and leverage, the bank does not actually have the money listed as your account balance. Your account balance is the bank's liability (promise) to you. If a large number of depositors simultaneously demand their money back, the bank may be unable to pay: the money doesn't exist, and it never did exist.

    September 17, 2014
    9:19 pm
    Loonie
    Member
    Members
    Forum Posts: 9245
    Member Since:
    October 21, 2013
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    I have always understood that banks had the right to demand X days notice if you wished to make a large withdrawal because they might not have the money available on the spot. The banking industry is in the business of borrowing and then loaning out again, so money is always in flux. I am not sure how many days notice is required, but I think maximum of a couple of weeks.

    September 17, 2014
    9:27 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Loonie, if you are talking about large cash withdrawals then I can see this being a problem. I think we discussed something similar about the new anti laundering law that was put in place after Septemer-11-2001.

    Anything over $10,000 cash is going to cause a problem taking that money out of the bank. As for bank drafts and certified checks, at brokerage accounts we never had a problem with that. We usually only give about 1 days notice so they can prepare a bank draft or check and we can deposit our money at another financial institution with no problem.

    At banks, trust companies, credit unions, we never had to wait. If an investment matured on say September-18-2014, we can go to the bank and get a bank draft or certified check with no problems in amounts of $50,000, $100,000 or greater.

    September 17, 2014
    9:40 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Norman1, I agree with your comments. The CDIC has authority or power to ask the Canadian government to back up CDIC deposits that are within $100,000 principal and interest maximum coverage for accounts that are eligible, if the 19 billion dollars will not suffice.

    Market linked GIC's or other names where they call them are CDIC, DICO insured within the $100,000 maximum deposit coverage but it is only the principal or capital value and not any little interest or gain that they promise you over 3, 5 years.

    Also, if you only make 10% over 5 years, 2% annually with these type of investments compared to the highest GIC rates of 3.00% currently in RRSP's or TFSA's, you would not kept up with inflation and income taxes.

    A 5 year 3.00% TFSA GIC or RRSP GIC would be of earned 15.927% which is 3.1854% versus 10.95% or 2.19% C.P.I. inflation. This is currently but even if inflation jumped to 2.89%, then one would still be ahead but not by much.

    Brimleychen's part of losing money in this regard is true but it seems he meant losing principal which is not true.

    September 17, 2014
    9:53 pm
    Norman1
    Member
    Members
    Forum Posts: 6768
    Member Since:
    April 6, 2013
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Loonie said

    I have always understood that banks had the right to demand X days notice if you wished to make a large withdrawal because they might not have the money available on the spot. The banking industry is in the business of borrowing and then loaning out again, so money is always in flux. I am not sure how many days notice is required, but I think maximum of a couple of weeks.

    I think that depends on the account and the agreement for the account. Notice is not just for large withdrawals either. For example, this is from page 4 of the Bank of Montreal Agreements, Bank Plans and Fees for Everyday Banking effective September 1, 2014:

    • There is a limit to the amount of money that you are able to withdraw at a branch other than your branch of account.
    • We may require you to give us at least seven (7) days notice before you make a withdrawal, except from Primary Chequing accounts.

    September 17, 2014
    9:54 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Also, going alone with GIC investing is much more difficult to keep up and even beat inflation and income taxes over the long run with 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 years etc.

    A mixture of longer term government bonds and government zero coupon bonds will provide a much higher annual interest rate. Ideally, 30% GIC's and 70% government bonds and government zeros would provide currently 3.60% to 3.70% safe, consistent annual interest rates of interest.

    As interest rates on GIC's, government bonds, government zeros should rise over the next few years, a 4% to 4.25% annual rate of interest and 4.50% to 4.75% annual interest rate would be easily achieved. This is over a 5 year period or so if we really see 1% to 1.50% point increase in rates and staying there.

    So even a 3.00% C.P.I. inflation rate plus income taxes would not match 4.00% to 4.25% to 4.50% to 4.75% combined GIC's and government bonds, government zeros annual rate of interest rate in protected accounts RRSP's, TFSA's, RESP's.

    September 17, 2014
    10:00 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    If you start adding some corporate bonds, corporate zero coupon bonds, REIT's of say 25% to 30% that are mostly income and compound interest, growth investment vehicles, you would probably earn a combined 5.50% to 6% annually.

    You have to keep in mind that there is more potential risk to loss of principal or capital and a possible cut to REIT distributions or payouts.

    September 17, 2014
    10:01 pm
    Norman1
    Member
    Members
    Forum Posts: 6768
    Member Since:
    April 6, 2013
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Jack Manning said

    Norman1, I agree with your comments. The CDIC has authority or power to ask the Canadian government to back up CDIC deposits that are within $100,000 principal and interest maximum coverage for accounts that are eligible, if the 19 billion dollars will not suffice.
    ....

    CDIC can politely request more if their $19 billion of borrowing authority is not enough. But, there's no legal obligation for the federal government to give them more.

    A CDIC-insured deposit does not have the same formal backing as a Canada Savings Bond or a Government of Canada bond.

    September 17, 2014
    10:09 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Norman1, during the 2008-2009 financial crisis, FDIC which is the U.S. deposit insurance system for U.S federal banks, increased their deposit insurance coverage amounts from $100,000 to $250,000.

    Also, FDIC was ready to act to ask the U.S. government and U.S. treasury to beef up the FDIC if it really needed to. The U.S. government and U.S. treasury were also ready to help the FDIC if needed. FDIC did not need much help so they did not need to do it.

    As for legal obligation, the costs to our economic, financial system and confidence in this system of not insuring depositors money in Canadian banks, trust companies etc. within the maximum $100,000 limit would far outweigh them not doing it.

    September 17, 2014
    10:22 pm
    Jack Manning
    Member
    Banned
    Forum Posts: 379
    Member Since:
    August 5, 2014
    sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

    Actually , I already mentioned in another post that CDIC is short on deposit insurance coverage due to fact that no C.P.I. inflation was added over the last 10 years.

    The last time in 2005 CDIC deposit insurance coverage it was increased from $60,000 to $100,000. It was not changed for almost 20 years prior.

    So, really anyone that has $140,000 in a CDIC deposit insured Canadian bank, trust company account say in a GIC is being shortchanged today by $40,000 if that bank, trust company fails.

    I know that this per different RRSP, TFSA, RESP, RRIF accounts and different named joint accounts but this makes this $40,000 amount that should be CDIC insured today even much more worse. For example, $40,000*6=$240,000 in total with 6 different, eligible CDIC insured accounts.

    You add different financial institutions on top this and it is much more too.

    Please write your comments in the forum.