Go to main Forum page »
IRR (internal rate of return) was the common term for the percentage rate of return on an investment until the early 1990s, when CAGR (compound annual growth rate) gained popularity. Today, CAGR is typically used for simple annualized returns of regular cash flows, while IRR is reserved for more complex cases involving variable cash flows and irregular compounding periods. CAGR can be considered a simplified subset of IRR. IRR is typically backward-looking (based on present value), whereas CAGR is typically forward-looking (based on future value). These distinctions are observations of usage more than strict definitions.
To Dr. Quinn’s chagrin, I’ve always viewed Social Security and Medicare deductions as pure taxes I’d never see again. It appears I was wrong. Pessimists enjoy pleasant surprises more often than optimists.
Some argue that comparing self-investing to Social Security is apples-to-oranges because government benefits are “risk-free annuities.” I disagree. Politicians have repeatedly reduced or delayed benefits, and more changes seem almost certain. Such a comparison may be closer to apples-to-apples than many want to admit.
I calculated the IRRs required for the Social Security taxes I paid to grow into the benefits my wife and I are currently promised, across four scenarios defined by age of death and whether a 3% COLA is applied (a close average over the past decade). My speculation is that my IRR is unusually high due to my limited participation in the system—most of my income was “unearned” (investment income, per the IRS) and therefore not subject to payroll taxes.
I haven’t seen this calculation performed elsewhere, so I thought it might be interesting. I’ve attached tables with my complete data set starting in 1975, when I was 16. They’re boring, but included for completeness. The SSA earnings report lists annual earnings, but only a total for taxes paid, so I estimated annual Social Security taxes (the investment outflows) using the current rate of 12.4%. This slightly overstates taxes in the earliest years, but the cumulative total closely matches my official SSA record.
All IRR figures are annualized. I’m 66, 15 months older than my wife.
Real (inflation adjusted) break-even points using a 3% IRR:
Isn’t it remarkable how little impact money received decades in the future has on the overall rate of return?
Planned Social Security Receipts (Blue Traces)
(Graph is high-resolution and should be viewed full screen. You can download it.)
Impressive.
SS is not an investment, it’s insurance. What I can’t understand is why anyone would care about the IRR for any purpose.
The idea anyone could do better investing the taxes and come out ahead considering all the adverse life event possibilities along the way plus the disability, spousal and survivor coverage is a fantasy.
I sincerely hope you never get a penny in return on your Medicare premiums. That is something you want to avoid, trust me.
I do this for largely for entertainment you whippersnapper. : )
You’re right, SS is insurance, but it’s weird insurance. Unlike a contract with a private company, the benefits are a moving target. Every payment I get, of which I’m sure I’ll receive some at this point, I’ll consider icing on the cake I worked for because I don’t trust the icing mfg.
That’s one of the greatest comments ever about Medicare. Part B for my wife and I just went up 10% to $202.90 each, Part G just went up 17% to $270.70 each (NW FL). At $5,683.20 annually I consider that a gift. May your wish come true that we don’t use it beyond checkups and my favorite; colonoscopies!
You’re lucky again. Our total for the year is nearly $24,000. My Plan G is $311. Our Part D went from $18.00 to $78.00 a month each.
Be sure to book an appointment every fall with a SHIP counselor to evaluate your Medicare plans! So far, this federal program, which is administered at the state level, is still funded.
This just cleared moderation (required with two or more links), but didn’t show on the homepage because it immediately aged out of view since it was submitted four days ago. A similar thing happened on the final Part III of my real vs. imaginary returns series. I need to figure out how to throttle my love for links!
This reply is a shameless “bump” to get it seen. I won’t do it again. : )
I almost never look at the home page; I use the main forum page to see where I left off.
As discussed on another thread recently, a post with a single link passes the filter. In the case of an initial post like this, putting all but the first in additional comments would work. This site really needs volunteer moderators!