Dow+150.25up+1.52%
10,058.64
Nasdaq+24.82up+1.17%
2,150.87
S&P+13.78up+1.30%
1,070.52

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video player requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player
More video on MSN Money . . .
Liz Pulliam Weston // Liz Pulliam Weston

The Basics

Money in your 60s: 12 steps to take

This is your last chance to get retirement-ready. Here's the game plan to make sure your numbers add up before you call it quits at work.

By Liz Pulliam Weston
MSN Money

Traditionally, this decade in your life would be all about retirement.

And traditionally, you'd do it sooner rather than later. In recent years, half of all retirees left the work force by age 62.

Turmoil in the stock markets and declining home equity have changed the equation. Only 13% of current workers now feel very confident they'll have enough money for a comfortable retirement, according to a recent survey by the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Those already in retirement are worried, too: Just 20% believe they'll have enough money, down from 41% in 2007.

Today's 60-somethings face other challenges. Compared with their parents, they are much less likely to have guaranteed retirement checks through defined-benefit plans, which means their own savings are critical to funding retirement. Yet the median amount saved in 401k's, IRAs and other retirement accounts in this age group was just $100,000 in 2007, according to the latest Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances.

They're also more likely to be carrying debt. Three-quarters of people in their 60s owed money, with a median debt of $50,000. Forty-five percent carried balances on credit cards, and the median amount owed was $4,000, more than any other age group.

Clearly, today's near-retirees have the wind in their face. Here's your game plan for getting your finances back on track.

You need Flash player 9 or above to view this content

1. Zero in on a retirement date

To know if you can comfortably retire, you'll need to have a target retirement date, because how much money you'll need and how much you'll get (from Social Security and other options) depends on this. But you need to stay flexible, in case the day you'd like to quit working -- or phase into part-time work -- turns out to be too early.

Working even a year or two extra can boost your nest egg and increase your retirement income enormously. But there's also no point in hanging around longer than you have to. (See "The slow-motion retirement.")

2. Figure out where you're going to live

Will you stay put in a paid-off home, or will you still have a mortgage? Will you move to a cheaper area or downsize to a smaller place? Or will your move be lateral, to an equally expensive (if lower-maintenance) condo or retiree village?

Where you spend your retirement will have a huge effect on how much income you'll need. If your retirement plan doesn't pencil out one way, you may need to consider other alternatives. Although more than 80% of retirees "age in place" -- living in the same house in which they retired -- moving to a cheaper area or downsizing to a smaller house can free up home equity for investments or income. (See "Rescue your retirement in 1 move.")

Thinking about tapping your equity through a reverse mortgage? These mortgages, which give you a lump sum, a line of credit or a stream of monthly checks, don't have to be paid back until you die, sell the house or move out permanently. (See "A mortgage that pays you? Think twice.") But the amount you get is inversely proportionate to your age: The younger you are, the less you get. That's why the typical age for getting a reverse mortgage is about 75 and why real-estate expert Tom Kelly doesn't typically recommend them when you're in your 60s unless you have no other choice.

"I believe people in their 60s . . . simply don't qualify for enough cash under the present (reverse mortgage) programs," said Kelly, the author of "The New Reverse Mortgage Formula."

Then again, a reverse mortgage may be the best of bad options if you still have equity, can no longer work and your retirement income isn't enough to pay the bills.

"There's a needs-based group. Some folks have no other option to pay for meals and meds (or) a new roof," Kelly said. "This group doesn't really care how much it costs to get the (reverse mortgage); they simply need it now."

Continued: Consider long-term-care insurance

 1 | 2 | 3 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 58
Thursday, June 25, 2009 12:51:44 PM
My concern is "too big to fail" thinking:  What isn't too big to fail and receive a bailout?  Chicago, California, NYC, Boeing, United, the New York Times, the National Parks, Hollywood, LaGuardia, and much much more. 
Monday, June 29, 2009 5:54:41 AM

When I read articles like this, I always wonder what will happen to the millions of folks who have worked all their lives in low-paid jobs, with no company pensions. How are they supposed to save or invest when there is often not enough income to provide the basic everyday necessities?

 

If people who have had good incomes are facing difficult retirements,  how much will the lower-paid seniors be living on? And will that be enough for survival? I notice that MSN Money seems to ignore this issue.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:15:13 PM
chickadee2, you are right.  Real life story,,, divorced, 4 kids, child support, car breaking down, working 2 jobs, etc. I went to investment counselor at Large internet brokerage where I worked, a free service, explained my situation, and the rep said.... "good luck!"  So, chickadee2, to those like me, who don't want a hand out, who have dental and medical problems that can't be fixed, in spite of health care due to copay... i say... what i think all the time... "wish us luck"  ...
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 7:35:10 AM
These type of articles (and there is a growing number of them) always seem to ignore the really sticky realities (and there is a growing number of them) that so many people face. There seems to be an assumption that those near retirement live in a $400,000 home and you simply take the equity out and move into a smaller home. I live in a low income rural state. According to the Chamber of Commerce, I should be thankful for quality of life in lieu of a decent wage. I hear that I should continue at my job for a couple years beyond what I had planned to make up the difference for what the economy has done to my plans. What about me and many others who have had our jobs yanked out from under us long before we planned but at an age where another job falls way short of what we were making? I guess readership would drop if the only reasonable answer for such circumstances is simply, "Good Luck".
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 10:37:02 AM
Good Article.  I learned some new ideas that might work for me.  However your numbers for retirment investment are not reflecting reality.  1.  Before retirement yield should be around 5% and after Retirement should be 2%.    For those still working into retirement, many pensions are available to be drawn at age 65 regardless if you are working or not.  It may allow some to convert that same portion of  their regular income into 401k accounts and reduce taxes then use the tax reduction obtained to add to CDs, Roth IRAs, IRAs etc.   You can do the same thing by staring your Social security at full retirment age and increasing your 401k to its maximum below the $20,500 per year.  A warning; if your exceed $20,500 per year section 415b kicks in and you pay big time. 
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 4:28:32 PM
Good Article,  however, it does not deal with people who live in the real world.  I am a 61 year old woman, have a mortgage and a car payment, took a 20% cut in pay to keep my job.  My job has no retirement package, or benefits, but it is a job.  Now that gas has gone up I have an additional expense that I did not have prior to my cut in pay, as living in California, I travel to my job due to housing issues.  I like the person who stated when you go to a financial advisor, they just say good luck.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 7:56:00 PM
You have an excellent point. All these financial articles and guru's give this financial advise for paying customers but a lot of them are the reason a lot of us are in this mess. Yes, I'm a senior '62' and worked hard all my life and lost everything about 10 yrs ago. Company booted us out, squander the retirement fund, paid off all the exec's & mgmt, wiped out our medical, etc.  You get the picture.  One thing is for sure is if there was no gov'mt safety net, there would be a lot of us seniors destitute and the private industry could care less because it is always them that got could care less if you get.  They say the good and honest get the boot while the thieves get the loot.  It it weren't for our gov'mt we'd be a third world country.  But big business never wants any gov'mt regulation or intervention.
Friday, July 31, 2009 11:23:52 AM

In a few years none of this advice  will matter!  The economy will tank, everyone will lose everything and everyone will have to work to survive! 

 

Bleak time ahead.  For everyone.

Friday, July 31, 2009 11:29:16 AM
wHAT ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN YOUR A SINGLE MOTHER (WIDOWED) WITH 4 GROWN CHILDREN, WORKING FOR A COMPANY WITH NO PENSION ARE 66 YRS OLD AND SHOULD  RETIRED BUT NOT ENOUGH INCOME FROM SOCIAL SECURITY TO MAKE IT, RENT OVER 700, GROCERIES, MEDICATIONS, ELECTRIC, INSURANCE ETC.  WHAT IS SOMEONE TO DO, SIT AT THEIR DESKS AND WAIT FOR THE STRETCHER TO TAKE YOU OUT?  YOU WORKED TWO JOBS FOR MANY YEARS TO SUPPORT YOUR FAMILY AND HAVE SAVED NOTHING FOR YOURSELF SO NOW WHAT????
Friday, July 31, 2009 7:23:10 PM

Sometime in the mid 80's Wall Street types figured that it would be a great thing to get people on board 401ks.  The concept of retiring in the 50s, early 60s was sold to the public until even during the late 90s some people thought that retiring in their late 30s, 40s was the thing to do.  Social Security was looked upon with disdain as people dreamed of a retirement awash in wealth.

Then the economy took a nose dive wrecking 401ks left and right.  Pensions vanished or were cut way back.  The economy at this point is broken as more jobs are lost and manufacturing disappears 

Retirement is for the wealthy;  it's been for the wealthy and will always be for them.  The rest of us working stiffs don't retire, and that's the whole reality that this economic downturn has brought up front as a reality check.

However, some Wall Street financial "experts" still try to sell that retirement concept by urging people to pour their money in Wall Street.

What happens if the economy really tanks in the near future?  Then what?  The mortality rate will drop, and people will start dying between 55 and 65, like in the past, just like it should be;  unless you're one of the wealthy few.

Watch what "financial experts" sell you.  It may not be achievable.  Your money that you saved for 25 years might "vanish" in thin air when you reach 60, leaving you high and dry while some wealthy person siphoned your money his way to pave his retirement path.

1 - 10 of 58
To add a comment, pleasesign in