고정 수입 인출 이자율: 2% 대 4% 고려 사항

### 은퇴 계획에서 인출 비율 이해하기
* 💰 트리니티 연구에서 도출된 **4%의 인출률**은 일반적으로 은퇴 계획, 특히 전통적인 은퇴 연령인 65세에 은퇴하는 사람들의 은퇴 계획 가이드라인으로 사용됩니다.
* 🕒 그러나 FIRE 운동이 부상하면서 조기 은퇴를 원하는 개인은 더 긴 은퇴 기간 동안 포트폴리오를 유지하기 위해 **2%와 같이 낮은 인출 비율**을 고려해야 할 수도 있습니다.
* 📉 은퇴 지출은 고정된 것이 아니라 **라이프스타일 선택과 기타 소득원**에 따라 변동될 수 있으며, **매년 인출 비율이 달라질 수 있다는 점**을 인식하는 것이 중요합니다.
* 🔄 예를 들어, 어떤 해에는 **인출 비율이 3%**인 반면, 어떤 해에는 **5.5%로 상승**했다가 사회 보장 혜택이 시작되면 **2%로 떨어질 수도 있습니다.**
* 📝 젊은 사람들은 **4% 법칙**을 사용하여 은퇴 저축 목표와 지표를 설정하는 '냅킨 재무 계획'을 시작점으로 삼을 수 있습니다.
* 🤝 재무 설계사와 협력하면 개인의 상황과 목표에 따라 맞춤형 전략을 제공할 수 있으므로 **복잡한 은퇴 계획**을 세우는 데 도움이 될 수 있습니다.
* 📊 몬테카를로 시뮬레이션과 같은 도구를 사용하여 재무 계획을 정기적으로 업데이트하면 **삶의 변화를 고려**하고 은퇴 소득에 대한 맞춤형 접근 방식을 보장하는 데 도움이 됩니다.
* 🌟 궁극적으로 각자의 재정 상황이 저마다 다르다는 점을 이해하는 것이 **은퇴 후의 즐거움과 안정감**을 극대화하는 데 매우 중요합니다.

은퇴자는 재무 계획의 유연성과 장수를 위해 인출 비율을 낮추는 것을 고려해야 합니다.

I've often heard 4% used for a fixed-income withdrawal rate. Would it ever be appropriate to use a smaller rate, say 2%, to have increasing income each year in retirement? Can you speak to this at all? But I mean, I think when you say fixed

income withdrawal rate, really it's a safe withdrawal rate based on the Trinity study, and and everybody—and I'll let Bo kind of add where the rules vary—but the Trinity study was assuming a normal retirement age of 65, you know, and and that's where the 4% rule kind of came from. Now, look,

things have gotten a little different because there's trends in personal finance where people are saying, 'Hey, I don't want to work until I'm 65.' But so how does all that—I mean, what would you add to what Tyler's saying, and how does

time impact that? Yeah, so one of the things we've done a lot of episodes on is the FIRE movement, or as we like to call it, the FINE movement for folks who want to exit the workforce earlier than traditional retirement age. And what we said was the 4% rule is a great back-of-

the-napkin solution for folks that are going to have a normal retirement. If you're going to retire at age 65 and you're going to live until 85 or 95, 4% likely works. But if you're someone who is going to leave the workforce early, then

you may want to think about using a lower withdrawal rate because the portfolio is going to have to provide for you for a longer period of time. Now, here's what happens: So, one, yes, could I use a lower withdrawal rate than 4% to be able to account for fluctuations in my

Spending for sure, and I think there were even some inflation assumptions inside the original Trinity study when they said the 4% withdrawal rate. But here's what we find in practice, because we obviously do this as our day job with a number of retired individuals.

Most folks, when it comes to their retirement living expenses, it's not a flat percentage. It's not like, okay, it's January 1st, what's my percentage? Okay, how much can I pull out? Okay, I'm going to do that, and then get to December 31st. We try

to build it to where it's based more on, okay, what's the lifestyle that you want to live in retirement? Then what are the other income sources? And you're going to find that that withdrawal rate varies through time. Some years it might be 3%;

some years it might be 5.5%, and some years it might be 4%. Then Social Security starts, and then your withdrawal rate drops down to 2% or 2.5%. So there are a number of ways, when you get to retirement, where

it's actually much more dynamic than I think we think it is academically. But for planning purposes, when you're trying to figure out your number, you're trying to forecast what should I be saving towards? If you think you want to have a higher lifestyle, or if you think that

you want to have a longer retirement or financial independence period, I don't think there's anything wrong with using a lower than 4% withdrawal rate to do that. Well, here's the reality: I think when you're younger—I'm talking my 30-year-olds, my 40-somethings—it's nothing

Wrong with having what I call 'napkin financial planning' rules, and that's what the safe withdrawal rate, or the 4% rule, does for you. Let you kind of see what the target is so you can start having some metrics to measure yourself by when you get within 5 years

Maybe even 5 years of actually landing the plane. Um, it's just you need more because it gets into everything B said. This is the part where I remember I tell you guys, look, you don't have to go looking for it; it's going to find you

Naturally, this is one of those complexities where the personal/impersonal finance... you don't want—you don't—you've only got one retirement; you don't want to try to figure this all out all by yourself. Go talk to somebody who's done this hundreds, if not even

thousands of times, so that you can know where your blind spots are, know how to handle this. And that's one of the main things we're doing is, you know, we're running the Monte Carlo simulations every year, updating it for what life goals are coming your way, um, because it

sounds cool in practice to say, 'Hey, I'll just make sure I have this,' and in most scenarios it works, but every now and then you need to have something that customizes this for your life because, um, you know, we all look like humans from a

far off, but then when you get really close, your eyes... we all have a lot of differences. You know, we... there's a lot of unique things about every one of us that makes us special. So make sure you're maximizing this time you get on

How To Give Yourself a Raise in Retirement!

Bring confidence to your wealth building with simplified strategies from The Money Guy. Learn how to apply financial tactics that go beyond common sense and help you reach your money goals faster. Make your assets do the heavy lifting so you can quit worrying and start living a more fulfilled life.

Subscribe today to stay up to date with our latest episodes, livestreams, and highlight videos: https://www.youtube.com/c/MoneyGuyShow?sub_confirmation=1

Are you ready to go beyond common sense when it comes to your money? Check out all the free resources The Money Guy Show provides: https://moneyguy.com/resources/



The Money Guy Show

퇴직 소득에 대한 일반적인 4% 인출 비율에 대해 논의합니다.

65세 은퇴를 가정한 트리니티 연구에서 4% 법칙의 기원에 대해 설명합니다.

조기 퇴직이 출금률에 미치는 영향에 대해서는 의문이 제기되고 있습니다.

4% 규칙은 전통적인 65세 은퇴에는 적합하지만 조기 은퇴에는 충분하지 않을 수 있습니다.

시장 변동과 긴 은퇴 기간을 고려하여 인출 비율(예: 2%)을 낮게 설정하는 것이 좋습니다.

퇴직금 지출은 고정된 비율이 아니라 매년 달라집니다.

은퇴 계획은 라이프스타일, 기타 소득원, 인출 비율의 변동성을 고려해야 합니다.

인출 비율은 변동될 수 있으며(3%, 5.5%, 4%), 사회보장 혜택에 따라 감소할 수 있습니다.

은퇴 소득 계획은 학계에서 제시하는 모델보다 더 역동적입니다.

특히 은퇴 기간이 길거나 라이프스타일 목표가 높은 경우에는 더 낮은 인출 비율을 사용하는 것이 계획에 적합할 수 있습니다.

4% 법칙은 젊은 층('냅킨 재무 계획')에게 유용한 가이드라인입니다.

4% 법칙은 은퇴 후 5년 이내에 목표를 설정하고 진행 상황을 측정하는 데 도움이 됩니다.

복잡한 은퇴 계획에는 개인 맞춤형 은퇴 계획을 위한 전문가의 조언이 필요합니다.

맞춤형 은퇴 계획 및 전문가 조언

은퇴 계획은 복잡하기 때문에 전문가의 도움을 받는 것이 중요합니다.

전문가들은 몬테카를로 시뮬레이션을 활용하여 개인의 삶의 목표에 맞게 계획을 조정합니다.

일반적인 규칙만으로는 충분하지 않을 수 있으며 개인별 차이를 고려한 맞춤형 계획이 필요합니다.

개인의 필요에 맞는 은퇴 계획을 극대화하는 데 중점을 둡니다.