Spousal RRSPs Still Useful

More than once I've heard the advice that there is no longer any point in having a spousal RRSP because of the new pension income splitting rules. However, this is only partially true. Spousals RRSPs still make sense in some circumstances.

The origin of spousal RRSPs was a way to allow a higher income spouse to contribute to the lower income spouse's retirement savings. Basically, the lower income spouse opens a spousal RRSP, and the higher income spouse puts money in it. The amount contributed counts against the higher income spouse's RRSP contribution room and gives the higher income spouse the tax deduction.

The advantage of doing all this is to balance the incomes of the two spouses in retirement to reduce the amount of income taxes paid. However, recent tax changes allow spouses new opportunities to split pension income. In particular, anyone over the age of 65 can allocate up to 50% of a RRIF withdrawal as income for his or her spouse.

Note the restrictions here. Income splitting does not apply to RRSP withdrawals and can only be done after age 65. If you have reason to delay converting your RRSP into a RRIF past age 65, you won't be able to use income splitting on any withdrawals from the RRSP. Also, if you retire before age 65, you won't be able to split any withdrawals whether they come from your RRSP or your RRIF.

So, it can still make sense to set up and use spousal RRSPs to maintain maximum flexibility for minimizing taxes as you adapt to life changes and income tax rule changes.

Comments

  1. geneMay 31, 2010 at 11:36 AM

    You've touched on the important advantages of a spousal RSP. I hadn't really paid attention regarding income splitting for retirees on account of the eligible age being so much greater than my own. The restrictions are great enough that spousal RSPs are still a good alternative.

    I guess it wouldn't make much difference for someone like the guy I was talking to last night. He joked that he was on the Freedom 85 program. Still, seems like it's a good idea to utilize the spousal RSP as long as one is in a stable relationship. Who knows when the pension splitting privileges could be revoked?

    Shifting tax policy makes it hard to pick one path and stick with it, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael JamesMay 31, 2010 at 12:08 PM

    @Gene: "Freedom 85", that's a good one. I'm not sure how much the stability of the relationship matters given that assets will likely be divided anyway in a break-up. I guess this will depend on the length of the relationship, whether there are children, and other factors.

    Shifting tax policies definitely present a challenge. Ever since the TFSA came into being I've suspected that various social benefits that currently ignore TFSA withdrawals will change over time to take into account TFSA "income".

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Short Takes: InvestorLine’s HISAs, 24-Hour Trading, and more

I recently moved some cash into BMO InvestorLine’s high-interest savings accounts (HISAs) that are structured as mutual funds.  Their designations are BMT104, BMT109, and BMT114, and they purportedly pay 4.35% annual interest (which they can change whenever they like).  However, the way they report the monthly interest payments is so baffling that I wasn’t able to sort it out in my first 15 minutes of trying.  A further complication is the following text in the HISA description: “The Bank may pay, monthly or quarterly, compensation to your Dealer at an annual rate of up to 0.25% of the daily closing balance in the BMO HISA.”  I couldn’t find any evidence of such a charge, but I haven’t been invested for a full quarter, and I can’t yet say that such a charge isn’t buried somehow in the confusing reporting.  I have more digging to do before I can recommend these HISAs. Here are some short takes and some weekend reading: Preet Banerjee explains the dangers of Robi...
Read more

My Asset Allocation

I’ve resisted discussing my asset allocation for some time, but now is finally the time to describe it and the reasons behind it. I’m not holding it out as a model portfolio; I believe it’s suitable for me and not necessarily anyone else. With that warning, enjoy the discussion and feel free to ask questions or take some pot-shots. The main reason why I haven’t discussed my asset allocation in detail before now is that I don’t want readers to treat it like a model portfolio and follow it blindly. Everyone’s situation is different. The need for variation in asset allocation from one investor to the next usually isn’t huge, but there is no one-size-fits-all portfolio. A secondary reason for keeping my asset allocation to myself is that I can’t be sure I’ll never change it. For example, I recently made the minor change of switching from an ETF of small-cap stocks to an ETF of small-cap value stocks . I don’t have any plans to change my current allocation, but I may think differe...
Read more

Updated Currency Exchange Method at BMO InvestorLine

There is now a more recent update of the method I use for exchanging currency at BMO OnvestorLine . I recently changed the procedure I use to convert large sums between Canadian and U.S. dollars at BMO InvestorLine. The method I use saves a lot of money compared to using the InvestorLine foreign exchange system. The latest change I made eliminated an annoying interest charge that I had to ask to be reversed. Most people don’t realize how expensive it can be to exchange currency. The extra charge banks and brokerages add gets hidden in the exchange rate. To see this extra charge, start by taking a sum in Canadian dollars, say C$10,000, and finding out how many U.S. dollars you can get. Then see what this U.S. amount would get going back to Canadian dollars. Many people might guess they’d get their original C$10,000 back, but they’d be wrong. In a recent test I did at BMO InvestorLine, I’d get back C$9754, for a loss of C$246 in two currency exchanges. That’s $123 per excha...
Read more

Archive

Show more