I spend a lot of time talking to retirees about their spending plans. Many of them proudly tell me that they\u2019re spending far less than the 3%-4% initial withdrawal amounts that are often bandied about in the context of safe spending rates. They tell me they\u2019ve been good savers, they\u2019re frugal, they don\u2019t need more. Underspending seems to be part of their identities.<\/p>\n
Those are all laudable things. But they make me think of the interplay between underspending and the potential for leftover amounts at the end of life<\/a>. The fact that underspending tends to lead to big residual balances jumps out when you look at\u202f our retirement income research<\/a>. <\/p>\n Even the retirees who spend in line with our \u201cbase case,\u201d which in 2025 meant taking 3.9% initially and inflation-adjusting withdrawals each year thereafter, will tend to have significant remaining balances after 30 years of withdrawals. For example, for people starting retirement with $1 million, withdrawing $39,000 initially (3.9% of the balance), and inflation-adjusting that dollar amount for the next 30 years, the median ending balance was roughly $2 million for balanced portfolios and even higher for more equity-heavy portfolios.<\/p>\n Of course, leaving a sizable residual balance isn\u2019t a terrible outcome. Those funds are usually inherited by children, grandchildren, charities, or other loved ones who can put the money to good use. And many retirees are quite reasonably worried about encountering big long-term care expenses later in life; for people without long-term care insurance or a segregated fund for long-term care, underspending may be the rational thing to do and may certainly provide peace of mind.<\/p>\n But as Mike Piper points out in his wonderful book\u202f\u201cMore Than Enough,\u201d \u202fgiving smaller gifts to loved ones earlier in their lives may be a better strategy than leaving assets after death.<\/p>\n The average age of someone inheriting money is 51<\/a>, and more than one-fourth of the people who inherit assets are over age 61. At that life stage, those inheritances can certainly be used to improve retirement security for the heir. <\/p>\n But by the time we hit our 50s and 60s, our life\u2019s trajectory is often well-established.\u202f The median inheritance of $69,000 reported in the 2022 Survey of Consumer Finances<\/a> \u202fis just a drop in the bucket for what someone needs to pay for retirement. Meanwhile, a smaller gift earlier on, for a home down payment or help paying off student loans, might have made a bigger difference by helping a young loved one gain their financial footing. <\/p>\n And it goes without saying that seeing your money put to good use in your own lifetime beats having it pass after your death. That\u2019s what my parents did in 1994 when they helped us with a down payment. That early gift from them meant much more to me and my husband than did the inheritance we received from them at the end of their lives, even though the latter was a significantly larger sum.<\/p>\n I know that transitioning from saving to spending in retirement is psychologically difficult. For the best savers, frugality is part of their identities; giving themselves \u201c permission to spend<\/a> \u201d is an uphill battle. And the \u201cright\u201d withdrawal rate is far from settled science, in that you\u2019re trying to figure out how much to extract under uncertain market conditions and an unknowable time horizon. It\u2019s normal to worry that you might run out of money.<\/p>\n But the more I know about in-retirement spending, the more I think that most people should embrace\u202f flexible withdrawal strategies<\/a> \u202fthat ebb and flow with a portfolio\u2019s balance, the better to withdraw more of their portfolios during their own lifetimes rather than leave behind big balances after death. <\/p>\n Most such approaches encourage belt-tightening after portfolio losses and allow for \u201craises\u201d after good market years. As financial planner and researcher Jonathan Guyton pointed out to me, that\u2019s a rare strategy that both makes sense from an investment and financial planning standpoint\u202fand\u202flines up with what feels right psychologically.<\/p>\n So let\u2019s stop lauding underspending in retirement; leaving a big bequest isn\u2019t usually the best outcome. If you don\u2019t need the money, you don\u2019t need the money. But look around: Someone else in your life probably does. And it takes less than you might think to make a difference for them.<\/p>\n ______<\/p>\n This article was provided to The Associated Press by Morningstar. For more retirement content, go to https:\/\/www.morningstar.com\/retirement<\/a>.<\/p>\n Christine Benz<\/a> is director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar and co-host of The Long View podcast<\/a>.<\/p>\n Related Links<\/p>\n 4 Simple Ways to Boost Your Safe Withdrawal Rate<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.morningstar.com\/retirement\/4-simple-ways-boost-your-safe-withdrawal-rate<\/a><\/p>\n Could Required Minimum Distributions Cause You to Overspend?<\/p>\n