One of the questions I hear most often is, “Do I have enough to retire?”

The answer is almost never as simple as looking at the size of your portfolio. 

The real question is whether your investments, savings strategy, tax planning, and retirement income plan all work together to support the lifestyle you want.

In this case, Jasmine and Terry have built a $740,000 all-equity portfolio and hope to retire within the next eight years. 

They also have a disabled child, which adds another layer of planning around taxes, government benefits, investing, insurance, and estate planning.

In my latest article for the National Post I answer the following questions:

• Is a $740,000 all-equity portfolio enough?
• Is it smart to plan for lower spending during “slow go years”?
• Is it smart to keep a “cash bucket”?
• Should they contribute to RRSP or TFSA or another account?
• Should they keep contributing to their TFSAs after they retire?
• Should they open an RDSP for their disabled child?
• How much life insurance do they need?

CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE ARTICLE BY MARY TERESA BITTI:

Is a $740,000 all-equity portfolio enough for Jasmine and Terry to retire early?

Jasmine*, 47, and Terry, 53, want to retire early – within the next eight years or sooner, if possible. They have two children. Their youngest has a disability with a shortened life expectancy and they want to spend as much time together as a family as they can.

Ideally, they’d like to retire at the same time, but Jasmine is prepared to work a few more years than Terry if that means they can achieve their target monthly income of $7,500 after tax for the first 10 to 15 years of retirement. They expect their cash flow needs to decrease to $6,500 a month when they shift from their “go go years” to their “slow go years”. Their current monthly expenses are about $4,000.

Jasmine earns $90,000 a year before tax and Terry earns $65,000. They also receive the Canada Child Benefit ($10,020 annually), and the Child Disability Tax Credit ($7,660 annually). They have not invested in a registered disability savings plan because of the uncertainty of their child’s life expectancy, but they wonder if this is a missed opportunity. 

The couple have built an all-equity portfolio worth $740,000. This includes $375,000 in Tax Free Savings Accounts, $282,000 in Registered Retirement Savings Plans, and $83,000 in Locked-In Retirement Accounts. They also have about $12,000 in a Registered Education Savings Plan invested in a dividend growth mutual fund for their oldest child and $20,000 in cash for emergencies.  

Terry and Jasmine plan to apply for the Quebec Pension Plan and Old Age Security at age 65. “Is this the right thing to do? Does it make more sense for one or both of us to start QPP at 60? Or should we defer either benefit until age 70?” asked Terry. “When we’re in our 70s, we’re hoping our government pensions will cover our cash flow needs. Is this feasible?” 

Jasmine and Terry own a home valued at $650,000. They have no mortgage and no plans to sell, at least for the next 10 years or so. They each have $100,000 term life insurance policies. 

When both Jasmine and Terry are retired, they plan to create what they are calling a “three-year cash bucket”. This would be invested in guaranteed investment certificates or other “safe” investments to cover a three-year cycle of cash flow needs, with the rest of their portfolio fully invested in an equity index fund. 

The idea is that they would draw from the “cash-bucket” when markets are down, which would allow them to stay invested and avoid losses. “Is this a good strategy,” asked Terry. “Is investing so heavily in equities too risky?”

He would also like to know if he and Jasmine should continue to maximize annual contributions to their RRSPs until they retire. Jasmine contributes $30,000 a year; and Terry contributes $20,000 a year. “We’re not high earners. Are we over-invested in RRSPs? Would it make more sense to open a spousal RRSP? Or a non-registered account instead?”

The couple plan to continue to maximize TFSA contributions each year throughout their lives. They don’t want to withdraw any money from the TFSAs, viewing them as an inheritance for their children. Is this possible? How old will they be when their RRSPs are depleted? 

Most importantly, are they on the right track to retire early, and if so, how early? 

INCOME 

Employment income: Combined income before taxes $155,000

Investment income (dividends): $0

Pension: Anticipate to start QPP / OAS when we both turn 65.

CCB / Child disability tax credit = $835 monthly + $1915 quarterly.

ASSETS

Primary residence approximate value: $650,000 

Rental property approximate value: $0

Investment holdings

Cash: $20k 

TFSAs:

Jasmine: $171,000

Terry: $204,000

RRSPs:

Jasmine: $132,000 + $30,000 to be contributed within the next couple of months.

Terry: $100,000 +  $20,000 to be contributed within the next couple of months.

GICs: $0

LIRA: $44,000 (self directed) 

     $39,000 (work contribution)

RESPs: $11,789

Mutual Funds: $0

Stocks: $0

Rental property: $0

Life insurance:

TERM = $100,000 each

Total monthly expenses: $4,037 

Mortgage or rent payments: $0

Utilities: $560

Groceries: $1100

Transportation costs: $410

Childcare: $30

Insurance premiums: $210

Home repairs: $100

Credit card payments: $0

Property tax: $327

Loans: $0

Dining out/travel/entertainment: $1000 

Other: $300

FINANCIAL PLAN

Are they on the right track to retire early, and if so, how early? 

Their retirement goal is to retire in 8 years or less on $110,000/year before tax ($90,000/year after tax) and reduce that to $94,000/year before tax ($78,000/year after tax) 15 years into retirement. They are 53 and 47 now and hope to retire at ages 61 and 55. 

To achieve this and retire in 8 years, they would need $2.15 million. With their existing investments plus adding $50,000/year to their RRSPs and $14,000/year to their TFSAs, they are on track to have $2.05 million. They are 4% short of their goal, which is close enough that they are on track, but without a margin of safety.

They should plan to work 8 more years. To have a 10-15% margin of safety, Jasmine could work 3 additional years.

Their goal of spending $7,500/month when they retire is $3,500/month more than they spend now. That’s $40,000/year for additional expenses like travel, which is very generous.

They expect their cash flow needs to decrease to $6,500 a month when they shift from their “go go years” to their “slow go years”.

Our experience from working with thousands of clients is that “slow-go years” is usually about not having saved enough – as it is for Jasmine and Terry. Retirees with money and health tend to spend as much on travel in their 80s as in their 60s, and may do more luxury travel.

It is usually better not to plan that you must reduce your spending at a certain age, whether you want to or not at that time.

Terry and Jasmine plan to apply for the Quebec Pension Plan and Old Age Security at age 65. “Is this the right thing to do? 

Does it make more sense for one or both of us to start QPP at 60? Or should we defer either benefit until age 70?” asked Terry. “When we’re in our 70s, we’re hoping our government pensions will cover our cash flow needs. Is this feasible?” 

Deferring CPP from age 60 to 65 gives them an implied return of 10.4%/year on investments they would have to withdraw to provide the same income. Deferring to age 70 gives them an implied return of 6.8%/year. Since their investments are all equity investments, they should provide more than 6.8%, but may or may not beat 10.4%. It is probably best for both of them to start QPP and OAS at age 65.

When both Jasmine and Terry are retired, they plan to create what they are calling a “three-year cash bucket”. This would be invested in guaranteed investment certificates or other “safe” investments to cover a three-year cycle of cash flow needs, with the rest of their portfolio fully invested in an equity index fund. 

The idea is that they would draw from the “cash-bucket” when markets are down, which would allow them to stay invested and avoid losses. “Is this a good strategy,” asked Terry. “Is investing so heavily in equities too risky?”

I studied holding various amounts of cash for a 30-year retirement during the last 150. I found that holding cash has never helped any time in the last 150 years. There has never been a case where someone ran out of money during retirement with 100% equities that would not have also run out with a cash holding of any size. Cash holdings over 30 years have always had lower returns than stocks, which has been a more significant factor than using the cash through market declines.

The benefits of holding cash are 100% psychological. If they psychologically help you stay invested when your investments go down, then there might be a benefit. For investors that buy and hold through market ups and downs, holding no cash is an easy way with a 100% success rate in history to have more money during your life.

They could have a credit line available for any large, unexpected expense or just sell some investments at that time. Having a GIC is a bad choice for them for liquidity, since it is locked in for at least a year. They could not access if their investments are down.

Since they have been all equity investors, they must have been able to hold on through market declines. If so, then staying 100% equities gives them a more reliable 30-year retirement income rising by inflation than having fixed income. I studied the “4% Rule” over the last 150 years, which is a general rule of thumb for how much you can safely withdraw from your investments. My study showed that having 70-100% equities provided a reliable cash flow for a 30-year retirement rising by inflation 96-97% of the time in history without managing it. If you manage the withdrawal rate, then it has been 100% reliable. Adding fixed income made the retirement less reliable.

Should they continue to maximize their annual contributions to their RRSPs until they retire?

Jasmine contributes $30,000 a year; and Terry contributes $20,000 a year. “We’re not high earners. Are we over-invested in RRSPs? Would it make more sense to open a spousal RRSP? Or a non-registered account instead?”

Jasmine should contribute at least $35,000 and Terry $10,000 to their RRSPs each year, or just enough to reduce their taxable income to $54,000 each year. They will retire in the lowest 26% tax bracket in Quebec which is on taxable income up to $54,000/year. Both their incomes today are in the 36% marginal tax bracket. They get a 36% tax refund on their contributions today, but will only have to pay 26% tax when they withdraw years from now.

This totals $45,000/year, but contributing a total of $50,000/year like they have been doing is still worthwhile for them. The extra $5,000 could go to whoever has room. They also get more Canada Child Benefit of 5.7% of their RRSP contributions, which makes them worthwhile.

They can save tax during retirement if their taxable incomes are about the same. To achieve this, it is best to try to have RRSPs about the same size. Jasmine probably has a larger RRSP than Terry now. If so, then Jasmine should contribute her RRSP contributions to a spousal RRSP in Terry’s name until their RRSPs are about the same size.

The couple plan to continue to maximize TFSA contributions each year throughout their lives. They don’t want to withdraw any money from the TFSAs, viewing them as an inheritance for their children. Is this possible? How old will they be when their RRSPs are depleted? 

This is a good idea. They have the cash flow now while they are working and it would be worthwhile right through their retirement as well, if they can. They can save tax if they use their TFSAs any time they have larger expenses that would put their taxable income above the lowest tax bracket (which is $54,000 today).

They have not invested in a registered disability savings plan because of the uncertainty of their child’s life expectancy, but they wonder if this is a missed opportunity. 

Many families that would benefit significantly from using RDSPs are not using them. This includes Jasmine and Terry, as long as their disabled child lives at least 10 years. For now, they could contribute $1,000/year and get a grant of $1,000/year. The year the child turns 17, they should start filing a tax return even if there is no income. The year the child turns 19, the grants start being based on the child’s income, which means they can contribute $1,500/year and get $3,500/year in grants and $1,000/year in a bond. That is $4,500/year free money by contributing only $1,500/year. Once the child passes away, they will lose the grants and bonds in the last 10 years, but all the contributions and grants and the growth in the RDSP would be part of the estate and could go to the family.

They each have $100,000 term life insurance policies. 

To replace the income lost if something happens to one of them before they retire, they need about $400,000 life insurance on Terry and $600,000 on Jasmine. Their $100,000 policies would leave the survivor short, so they would have to work longer. To protect their incomes, they could get a $500,000 joint-first-to die 10-year term policy. They can probably cancel any life insurance once they retire, since they would have enough for the survivor to maintain their lifestyle just from their investments.

Ed

The post National Post article: Is a $740,000 all-equity portfolio enough for Jasmine and Terry to retire early? appeared first on Ed Rempel.

Are There Really 8 Smith Manoeuvre Strategies?

In my previous article, we covered the fundamentals of the Smith Manoeuvre and how the strategy works at a high level. I also mentioned that the Smith Manoeuvre is not limited to just one approach—there are several different ways it can be implemented depending on your goals, financial situation, and comfort with risk.

In this article, we’ll explore some of the most common variations of the Smith Manoeuvre. We’ll look at how the strategy can be enhanced, when certain approaches may be more appropriate, and why not every version is suitable for everyone. The goal is to provide a practical overview so you can better understand the available options and determine what may fit into your own long‑term financial plan.

Many people think of the Smith Manoeuvre as a single strategy, but in reality, it is a flexible framework. Over time, eight common approaches have evolved—ranging from very simple methods suited for beginners to more advanced strategies intended only for experienced investors with a higher tolerance for risk.

The good news is that you don’t need to understand or use all of them. Most people only ever use one or two approaches, chosen carefully based on their personal circumstances. Below is a simplified overview of the main options, explained in plain language.

1. The “Plain Jane” Smith Manoeuvre

This is the original and most straightforward version.

As you make your regular mortgage payments, the principal portion becomes available through a linked credit line. You borrow that amount and invest it. This is done gradually—monthly or bi‑weekly—starting from zero.

Best for:

• Beginners
• People who want a slow, disciplined approach
• Long‑term investors

2. The “Singleton Shuffle” (or Flintstone Flip)

This strategy works if you already have non‑registered investments (non Leverage or TFSA).

You temporarily sell those investments, use the cash to pay down your mortgage, and then immediately re‑borrow the same amount from your credit line to reinvest. You end up in the same position—but now the interest on that portion of your loan is tax‑deductible.

Best for:

• People with existing non‑registered investments
• Those starting the Smith Manoeuvre later

3. The Top‑Up

If you already have equity available in your home, you don’t have to start slowly.

You can borrow a lump sum from your credit line and invest it right away. Interest can usually be capitalized, meaning it doesn’t increase your monthly expenses.

Best for:

• Homeowners with significant equity
• People comfortable starting bigger

4. The “Debt Miracle”

This strategy focuses on simplifying debt.

If you have other non‑deductible debts like car loans or credit cards, you can refinance them into your mortgage. This often lowers interest costs and increases the principal portion of each payment, which can then be invested through the Smith Manoeuvre.

Best for:

• People with multiple high‑interest debts
• Those struggling to invest at all

5. Smith Manoeuvre with Dividends

Instead of focusing purely on growth, some people invest in dividend‑paying investments.

They use dividends to pay down the mortgage faster and then re‑borrow to invest again. While this feels productive, dividends are taxable every year and reduce overall efficiency.

Best for:

• People who prioritize simplicity and cash flow
• Those less focused on maximizing returns

6. Smith/Snyder (Retirement Income Focused)

This version comes into play later in life.

Instead of selling investments all at once in retirement, income is generated gradually—either through selling small amounts or using investments that provide monthly payouts. Many of these payments include “return of capital,” which needs careful tracking for tax purposes.

Best for:

• Retirees who already use the Smith Manoeuvre
• Those who need ongoing income

7. Rempel Maximum

This is an aggressive strategy designed to maximize long‑term wealth.

Rather than investing slowly, a large lump sum is borrowed to invest upfront. The interest costs match what you would have been investing monthly, so cash flow stays the same—but the risk is much higher.

Best for:

• Very aggressive investors
• People with strong risk tolerance and experience

8. Triple Top‑Up

This is the most advanced and aggressive version.

It combines home equity borrowing with additional investment loans, significantly increasing leverage. While the potential upside is large, so is the risk and complexity.

Best for:

• Sophisticated investors only
• Those whose primary goal is maximum growth

Final Thought

The Smith Manoeuvre is not a single recipe—it’s a framework that can be adapted in many ways. Most people do not need complex versions to benefit. In practice, we focus on choosing the simplest, most appropriate approach based on a client’s goals, comfort level, and long‑term plan.

The key is not complexity—it’s discipline, time, and proper planning.

How Can I Learn More and Find Out If the Smith Manoeuvre Is Right for Me?

The Smith Manoeuvre is not a one‑size‑fits‑all strategy. Whether it makes sense for you depends on a number of factors, including your long‑term goals, risk tolerance, cash‑flow stability, and overall retirement plan. If you believe this strategy may be worth exploring, the next step is to discuss it with a qualified financial planner who understands both the planning and tax implications.

We offer a complimentary 30‑minute consultation to help determine whether the Smith Manoeuvre is appropriate for your situation and whether we are the right fit to work together.

Because proper implementation is critical, choosing the right mortgage structure is also essential. A readvanceable mortgage is a key requirement, and not all options are created equal. We provide access to a free mortgage referral service to help you evaluate the available options and understand the pros and cons of each product currently offered in Canada.

If your mortgage is not up for renewal and you’re considering starting sooner, we can also help you assess whether breaking your mortgage early makes financial sense. In some cases, paying a penalty to restructure earlier can be worthwhile—but this should always be evaluated carefully based on your specific numbers.

As with any long‑term financial strategy, education, planning, and proper execution are what determine success. Taking the time to understand whether the Smith Manoeuvre fits into your overall retirement plan is the most important first step.

–Sabiha

The post Beyond the Basics: The Different Smith Manoeuvre Strategies appeared first on Ed Rempel.

Most people go through life and at some point wake up and realize they should be doing something smarter with their money. 

When you reach that inflection point, what should you do and what are the few fundamental basics that you need to know?

Many retirement plans are designed to feel safe, instead of giving you freedom. 

Safety usually comes at the cost of long-term growth and may mean you never retire with the lifestyle you want.

This is an overview of my philosophy, explains how a financial plan becomes the GPS for your life, how to determine the return you actually need for retirement, and why equities often need to play a larger role than most people expect. 

Learn how to think about risk, long-term investing, and when more advanced strategies may be appropriate.

You will learn:

• When you get serious about your money, what is the first thing you should do?
• Why is your financial plan the GPS for your life?
• Why does thinking long-term completely change your life?
• How is an interactive financial plan fundamentally different?
• Why are most advisors’ recommendations like driving with brakes but no gas pedal?
• Why do most people need a significant allocation to equities (stock markets)?
• What do equity investors need to know?
• Why can borrowing to invest be a relatively obvious way to grow wealth for many people?
• What do people who borrow to invest need to know?
• How important is tax planning and when should you do it?
• Why is financial freedom such an amazing time in your life?

When you get serious about your money, what is the first thing you should do?

You want to take your kids for a Disney vacation and drive to Florida. You bought tickets for 2 days from now. You only have 2 weeks for vacation and don’t want to spend 6 days driving back-and-forth.

When you go on this kind of long driving trip, what is the first thing you do when you get into your car? You put your destination into your GPS.

What would happen if you just drive without your GPS? Without your GPS:

–          How would you know whether you are taking the optimal route?

–          How will you know whether you will get the on time?

–          How will you know how fast to drive?

–          How will you know how much time you can spend in rest stops and overnight?

Your financial life is similar. The first thing you need is your financial plan so that you know:

–          What specifically are your life goals?

–          How much money will you need and by when to achieve them?

–          Retirement is the biggest goal. What is the retirement lifestyle you want and when?

–          How will you know whether you can realistically achieve it by the age you want?

–          How will you know the rate of return you will need your investments to make?

–          How will you know how much you need to save every year?

–          How will you know how comfortable you can live now and still have the future you want?

–          How will you know what more aggressive strategies you should consider?

–          How will you know exactly what you need to do to have the life you want?

–          How can you be confident in your future?

Your financial plan shows you clearly what your future is likely to be and gives you confidence that you will achieve it.

Why is your financial plan the GPS for your life?

Your financial plan is the GPS for your life. You decide on your specific life goals. Make them the life you want to live, but also make them realistically achievable. Figure out exactly what you have to do to live that life.

A proper financial plan should be your financial plan – not for a generic human. There is no right or wrong plan. It is your life.

Your financial plan should be in-depth, including the exact lifestyle you want to live (line by line of your expenses) and when you want to retire. It’s not enough to say you should retire on 80% of your income today, or some other percentage of your income that average people might want. Is that the lifestyle you want to retire on?

Your financial plan changes your thinking to long-term.

Why does thinking long-term completely change your life?

When you think long-term, your life is completely different. You do completely different things. You stop making decisions aimlessly. You stop making decisions one-by-one.

Your financial plan changes your thinking to long-term. You understand how decisions today affect your future. You make decisions today based on the effect they will have on your life decades from now. Your decisions are all coordinated towards your life goals. You are confident that your decisions are the right ones. You are not going to regret them in the future.

How is an interactive financial plan fundamentally different?

An “interactive financial plan” is when you use flexible software to look at a variety of possible options for your life until you find the one that is the life you want to live and that you can achieve.

You see precisely the long-term consequences of decisions today. Your interactive financial plan can show you many possible life options including what you would have to do to achieve them.

For example, you could retire earlier or work longer, work part-time for some years, decide to retire more comfortably with more travel and entertainment, you could downsize your home, you could buy a vacation property, you could invest for more growth, add a growth strategy like the Smith Manoeuvre, or you could add an investment loan.

These are all possible future lives. Which one do you want to live?

Why are most advisors’ recommendations like driving with brakes but no gas pedal?

I have seen the full finances of thousands of Canadians and then helped them set their retirement goals. The majority of them have been investing so conservatively that they have essentially no chance to achieve their retirement goal.

One of the main reasons most retired Canadians are not living the life they really wanted is that they invested too conservatively.

Investment advisors are required to look at your risk tolerance to make sure you do not invest too aggressively. But hardly any do a proper financial plan, so they don’t know how much growth you need to achieve your life goals.

One critical result from your financial plan is that you see the rate of return you need to achieve the future life you want. You still need to be able to tolerate the short-term market fluctuations and bear markets, but your financial plan can help you make sure you don’t invest too conservatively.

Think of your risk tolerance questionnaire as a tool to make sure you don’t invest too aggressively. It’s the brakes. And your financial plan is a tool to make sure you don’t invest too conservatively. It’s the gas pedal.

Since nearly all investment advisors will do a risk tolerance questionnaire, but not a proper financial plan, it is like driving with brakes and no gas pedal.

Picture driving to Disney World in Florida to take your kids and you want to arrive 2 days from now. You get advice similar to typical investment advisors – that your speed tolerance says you are uncomfortable driving more than 50 kms/hr. So you drive very slowly. At that speed, there is no chance you will be in Disney World 2 days from now!

This is part of why most retired Canadians are not living the life they wanted. They had to adjust their lifestyle down to the lower income they get.

Why do most people need a significant allocation to equities (stock markets)?

One big lesson from what I have seen creating more than a thousand comprehensive financial plans for Canadians is that almost nobody can retire with the lifestyle they want if they invest conservatively – like in a balanced portfolio.

A conservative, balanced, or “60/40” portfolio is often considered prudent and the default portfolio by investment advisors, but you can’t really make a financial plan work with it.

For example, if you are 35 and want to retire in 30 years at age 65, and you earn $100,000/year and want to retire on $75,000/year (assuming maximum government pensions and 3% inflation), here are 2 choices to achieve your goal:

You make only 5%/year while the cost of living rises by 3%/year. That is simply not enough growth!

With a balanced portfolio, you would need to invest $50,000 of it! That’s nuts! You make $100,000/year, but bring home only $74.000/year. There is no chance you are going to invest $50,000 of that $74,000.

However, if you can learn to become comfortable with the volatility and declines of an equity portfolio, you should be able to get at least 8%/year long-term. In that case, you only need to invest $19,000/year, which is only slightly more than maximizing your RRSP room. That is not simple, but definitely doable.

Remember: There is a high risk to your retirement plan from owning fixed income investments.

Bottom line: Nearly everyone needs a significant allocation to equities (stock markets) to be able to achieve the future you want.

What do equity investors need to know?

Most people know that equities fluctuate more than fixed income, but few understand that equities are more reliable long-term. The long-term return (20 years or more) for stocks after inflation has been more predictable than for bonds or fixed income.

That may be surprising but was shown statistically by Prof. Jeremy Siegel in his classic book “Stocks for the Long Run”.

I found a similar result looking at calendar returns of the S&P500 since 1930 (essentially the modern stock market) where the worst 25-year return was 8%/year. That’s a good return for being a worst-case scenario!

The stock market has consistently provided solid growth long-term. After 25 years, the stock market has ranged between being 7 and 17 times higher.

I found in my study that stocks have been more reliable than bonds (fixed income) over a 30-year retirement while withdrawing regularly from them. Using the “4% Rule” of thumb by withdrawing 4% of your starting portfolio in year 1 of retirement and then increasing it by inflation, a portfolio of 70-100% equities successfully provided the income for 30 years 97% of the time, while a 100% bond portfolio (most conservative portfolio) provided it only 47% of the time.

Stocks provided a reliable retirement, while fixed income failed more than half the time to provide for a 30-year retirement!

Of course, stocks fall a lot sometimes. They generally fall 30% or more a couple times per decade and 40% or more on average every few decades. The largest declines tend to be roughly 50%.

However, the stock market has recovered from 100% of declines – with 88% of declines being recovered in 1 or 2 years.

The secret to effective stock market investing is to stay invested long term. You need a higher risk tolerance – but risk tolerance specifically means: “The ability to do nothing when your investments go down.” You probably have the ability to do nothing!

The reason fixed income is less reliable is that it often makes less than inflation – and sometimes for decades at a time! In periods of high inflation, such as the 1970s and 1980s, bonds suffer a large permanent loss after inflation.

The issue is that you need an income that rises by inflation every year – not a fixed income.

In short, fixed income is reliable short-term, but risky long-term. Stocks are risky short-term, but reliable long-term.

I don’t know where the stock market will be next year, but I am confident that 25 years from now it will be between 7 and 17 times what it is today.

The mindset you need to invest effectively in equities:

–          Successful investing is goal-oriented.

–          Any market decline of 20% or more is a great buying opportunity.

The 3 principles of successful investing:

–          Faith, patience and discipline.

–          Faith that equities will provide a solid long-term return.

–          Patience to stay invested.

–          Discipline to stick with your financial plan.

Why can borrowing to invest be a relatively obvious way to grow wealth for many people?

If you are comfortable investing 100% in stocks and will stay invested for the long-term, then borrowing to invest often seems like a relatively obvious way to make a lot more money. It’s called investing with “other people’s money”.

You borrow at lower interest rates, perhaps 4-5%, and the interest is tax-deductible every year. You invest it in the stock market that long-term have averaged 10-11% with the worst 25-year return of 8%. The stock market gains are capital gains, which are taxed at lower tax rates and only when you sell, which could be years from now.

The interest payments are a flat number, while your stock market investments grow exponentially over time.

For example, a common strategy of borrowing to invest is the Smith Manoeuvre. You borrow against your home equity bit-by-bit as you pay down your mortgage. You replace your mortgage with a tax-deductible credit line over time. The credit line also pays its own interest. Your total debt stays the same.

This process converts your mortgage to a tax-deductible credit line over time without using your cash flow. Your net gain after tax from this process as you pay off your mortgage over 25 years with typical stock market returns is roughly the value of your home today.

What do people who borrow to invest need to know?

Borrowing to invest is not for everyone. You have to know that you will be able to stay invested for the long-term especially when your investments are down. You have to be able to make the interest payments even if your life has major problems. You can use your investments to help with the payments, if necessary, but it’s best not to rely on that for a long time.

However, borrowing to invest is probably the most powerful wealth-building tool. Nearly all wealthy people borrowed to invest in the stock market (many companies) or their own company.

The wealthiest people are usually the ones with the most debt. But it’s good debt, not bad debt. It was borrowed to invest in higher growth investments, not borrowed to spend on consumer items.

How important is tax planning and when should you do it?

There are all kinds of ways to save tax by arranging your finances in the optimal way. It can make a huge difference in your life, especially when you do it consistently year-after-year.

For example, planning based on tax brackets can give you the largest tax refunds when you make contributions and cost you the least tax when you withdraw it. Stock market investments are taxed more favourably and often years later than fixed income investments. Borrowing to invest in tax-efficient investments can give you large tax refunds in most years.

However, the advice is: “Never let the tax tail wag the investment dog.”

In other words, don’t do things just for the tax savings. Make solid decisions for how to plan your finances and choose high quality investments – and after that consider how to plan to save tax with it. Don’t start with saving tax and base your finances on that.

Why is financial freedom such an amazing time in your life?

Planning your finances and your retirement can be complicated and takes some effort. Many people feel intimidated by it. Is it worth it?

One of the most satisfying parts of my career has been seeing long-term clients retire comfortably with more than enough money to confidently live the life they want no matter how long they live.

A long-term client told me: “With Ed’s knowledge and vision, he has shown how his plan can generate the additional income per year throughout our retirement years. And THAT, in short, is the difference between penny pinching “golden years” or the freedom to finance all the plans we had already made, but for which we didn’t really know if the money would be there or not.“

When you are financially free and have both money and health, life can be truly awesome!

Ed

The post How to Build a Retirement Plan That Actually Works (and Grows Your Wealth) appeared first on Ed Rempel.

If you’re Gen Z in Canada, economic pessimism doesn’t feel like a dramatic overreaction.

It feels entirely earned.

Rent in Toronto and Vancouver borders on the absurd. Homeownership has taken on the status of a myth. Student loans linger for years, and every few months, another headline asks whether markets, capitalism, or the economy itself still work for anyone under the age of 30.

Against that backdrop, being financially optimistic can sound naïve—or worse, completely out of touch.

But here is a claim worth sitting with: Pessimism isn’t a neutral emotional state when it comes to money. It becomes an active financial strategy, whether you intend it to or not.

The Quiet Choice Most People Don’t Notice They’re Making

Every financial decision you make carries an underlying assumption about the future:

• Investing assumes companies will continue to create value.
• Saving assumes your future self is worth protecting.
• Learning a new skill assumes that economic opportunity will exist tomorrow.

Choosing not to invest—or “waiting until things make more sense”—is also a decision. In practice, it usually means holding cash, staying on the sidelines, and willingly forfeiting the single greatest advantage Canadian Gen Z actually possesses: time.

This isn’t a moral critique. It’s a mechanical reality.

What Long-Term Participation Has Historically Delivered

Chart: Growth of $100 Invested in the S&P 500 (1928–2026)

“Every crisis felt permanent in the moment. None of them stopped long-term compounding.”

This chart isn’t an argument that markets are fair, smooth, or guaranteed. They aren’t. It is an argument, however, that long-term participation has historically outperformed pessimism disguised as caution.

The upward trajectory of global markets has absorbed:

• Two World Wars and the Great Depression
• Stagflation crises and hyperinflation
• The Dot-Com crash and the 2008 Financial Collapse
• A global pandemic

For young Canadian investors, this matters even if you are primarily allocating toward broad equity funds that track global indexes. Our retirement systems, the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), and our domestic capital markets are all hardwired into this exact same long-term growth engine.

“But That Doesn’t Help Me Buy a House”

That frustration is entirely valid.

Canada is facing a structural housing affordability crisis. Pointing to a stock market chart doesn’t lower your monthly rent or magically manufacture a down payment. People don’t live in statistical averages; they live in cities clogged by zoning constraints, immigration backlogs, and severe asset inflation.

Still, there is a vital distinction worth protecting:

• Affordability is a distribution problem.
• Long-term growth is a capacity problem.

They interact, but they are not the same. When we collapse them into one giant problem, we arrive at dangerous conclusions—like assuming that because housing is broken, building a portfolio through equity funds is pointless.

Global Progress Still Matters for Your Local Future

Chart: Global Extreme Poverty Rate (1990–2025)

“Not perfect. Not finished. But directionally clear.”

Over the last few decades, more than a billion people globally have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty. While that progress has stalled at times (such as during COVID-19) and remains deeply uneven, it has not reversed.

Why should a Gen Z investor in Canada care about global poverty metrics?

Because history suggests that housing reform, climate investment, healthcare stability, and wealth redistribution are far easier to achieve in growing systems than in stagnant ones. Shrinking, disengaged economies don’t suddenly become fairer or more just. They become zero-sum games where the powerful hoard what’s left.

The Risk That Pessimism Doesn’t Advertise

The biggest financial mistake young investors make isn’t bad individual asset selection or timing the market.

It is delaying participation because the system feels broken.

It cloaks itself in reasonable-sounding phrases:

• “I’m just holding cash because the markets feel fake right now.”
• “I’m waiting for a total market reset before I get in.”
• “Long-term investing won’t matter for our generation anyway.”

But here is the uncomfortable truth: The markets do not pause while you wait to feel convinced.

Why Time Horizons Matter More for Gen Z Than Any Generation Before

Chart: Global Life Expectancy (1900–2025)

“Longer lives quietly make compounding unavoidable.”

Gen Z is projected to live longer lives than any cohort in human history. That longevity changes the entire financial calculus:

• Retirement will last longer, requiring a larger nest egg.
• The compounding penalty of opting out early grows exponentially.
• Small, microscopic planning decisions made at 22 compounds into massive leverage by age 62.

You don’t need absolute certainty to act intelligently. You just need exposure over time.

Reframing Optimism for the Realist

Let’s be clear about what financial optimism isn’t. It does not mean:

• “Everything will magically work out.”
• “Just ignore systemic inequality.”
• “Just buy equities and chill.”

A much more useful, battle-tested definition is this: Optimism is staying exposed to positive-sum outcomes without pretending that certainty exists.

In practice, for a young Canadian focused on long-term wealth planning, that looks incredibly boring:

1. Automating contributions into broad, low-cost global equity funds.
2. Maximizing tax-sheltered asset allocation early through structural tools like the Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA) and the First Home Savings Account (FHSA).
3. Aggressively building career skills alongside your financial capital.
4. Treating daily financial news as background noise.

That isn’t blind faith. It’s probability management.

The Glass is Cracked—But Don’t Walk Away

The economic glass is cracked. Some people got to start pouring into it much earlier than you. Canadian housing policy has undeniably failed younger cohorts.

All of this is true.

But treating the glass as completely empty solves absolutely nothing. Opting out entirely guarantees only one thing: that you won’t participate in the upside, while those with capital and a longer perspective quietly do.

Optimism isn’t a personality trait, and it isn’t confidence in a perfect world. It is a strategic decision to act without guarantees—because history shows that disengagement carries a devastating compound interest of its own.

The future doesn’t reward certainty. It rewards participation.

–Sabiha

The post The Financial Future Isn’t Broken—But It Is Optional appeared first on Ed Rempel.

If you have been following my blog, you must have read about the Smith Manoeuvre strategy and its incredible uses and benefits. For those who are trying to build wealth in Canada, it is one of the most powerful financial manoeuvres available—essentially allowing you to legally convert your non-deductible mortgage interest into a tax-deductible investment loan. If you are new here, I highly suggest you go back and start from our foundational articles on the Smith Manoeuvre so you can fully understand the mechanics before diving into today’s discussion. 

Here is the link https://edrempel.com/smith-manoeuvre/

Back in 2023, I wrote an article breaking down the best re-advanceable mortgages available for you in Canada. Today, we are revisiting this topic. The reason for this update is that the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) implemented tighter rules surrounding Combined Loan Products (CLPs) and Home Equity Lines of Credit (HELOCs). Because different banks are implementing these rules differently, our previous ratings have completely shifted.

To help me break this down from ground zero, I brought in our secret weapon. Meet Sabiha Mukadam, our in-house mortgage expert. I am widely known as Canada’s Smith Manoeuvre expert. We are the Smith Manoeuvre mortgage experts because we have been working for 15 years with all these mortgages monthly with clients after the Smith Manoeuvre is implemented. We see how they work in practice. Sabiha is the one doing all this for the last 6 years. Sabiha doesn’t just help our clients structure these daily; she actually worked inside three of the Big Five banks managing mortgage underwriting.

Together, we are going to give you the new 2026 listing and talk about the unique nuances of the Top 4 and the worst one. Which readvanceable mortgage is best for you for the Smith Manoeuvre?

Why the Rankings Have Shifted

Before the OSFI tightening, the efficiency of a re-advanceable mortgage primarily came from speed and simplicity. Under the old rules, every single time you made a mortgage payment, the principal portion paid down would automatically re-advance into your HELOC on a $1-for-$1 basis up to an 80% Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio. You could immediately borrow that money to invest.

However, OSFI’s regulations clamped down on re-advanceable products. Now, any portion of a HELOC that exceeds a 65% LTV can no longer automatically re-advance. Instead, principal payments must permanently pay down the overall loan balance until the total borrowing limit drops to or below 65% LTV. Because major banks have integrated these strict rules into their internal underwriting models differently, a product that used to be a seamless “set-it-and-forget-it” choice might now require tedious manual intervention.

The main change with the new OFSI rule is that the principal does not advance on 1-to-1 basis. The range is from 80% to 75%. Each Financial institution is implementing a different formula to calculate this. This means that when you pay down a dollar of principal you only get .80 to .75 cents to borrow back.

Here is the updated table in Two Parts

Part One – Structure & Cost

Part Two – Features & Flexibility

The Top 4 Re-advanceable Mortgages and the Worst One Compared

Here is the direct breakdown of how the major players stack up under the current regulatory landscape, featuring Sabiha’s inside insights on their real-world application:

Deep Dive: The Operational Realities of the Top 4 and the Worst Lenders

While product brochures make these accounts sound identical, Sabiha and I know that the day-to-day administrative quirks can make or break your investment velocity. Here is exactly what you need to know about the field:

1. The Scotia STEP (Total Equity Plan)

We have listed this as the number one on our list because this offers the most flexible structure even with the new OSFI rules implementations. Even with the restrictions, we have straightforward workarounds to run the Smith Manoeuvre efficiently.

• The Pros:
  • Elite Tracking & Segments: You can split your borrowing into up to 3 separate mortgage segments and 3 lines of credit. This creates a clean, bulletproof audit trail for the CRA to separate personal debt from tax-deductible investment debt.
  • No-Refinance Restructuring: You can add, remove, or switch up your internal mortgage and HELOC segments without having to break the entire mortgage or go through a costly legal refinancing process.
  • Rate Shifting & Consolidated Limits: Easily lock variable HELOC portions into fixed or variable term mortgages without paying hefty legal or refinance fees. Borrowing limits scale under one umbrella, meaning you only pay legal and appraisal fees once at the very beginning.
• The Cons & Operational Challenges:
  • The 30-Day Re-advance Lag: When you make your monthly mortgage payment, the principal portion is not freed up instantly. It typically takes up to 30 days for the system to process the payment and advance that equity into your HELOC, slowing down your investing velocity.
  • No Automated Transfers: You cannot automate the cash pull from your HELOC to your chequing or investment account. You must manually log into Scotiabank online banking every single month to transfer the newly advanced funds.
  • The OSFI 65% LTV Taper: Under federal rules, the revolving HELOC portion cannot exceed 65% LTV. If you start above this, Scotiabank automatically amortizes and scales down your global limit over time until you drop below the 65% threshold.
  • The Credit Limit Gate: There is a minimum threshold of $10,000 in available credit required on the LOC before you can actively deploy it.
  • Higher Switching Costs: Because it is registered as a collateral charge, it is expensive to move to another lender at renewal. You will have to pay legal and discharge fees if you want to chase a better rate elsewhere.

2. The BMO Homeowner ReadiLine®

This used to be our top contender and remains solid at number two for a simplified Smith Manoeuvre. However, the new OSFI rules and BMO’s implementation style make it a little more clunky.

• The Pros:
  • Single-Pair Simplicity: Unlike other banks that force you to manage a web of multiple sub-accounts, BMO pairs one mortgage with one HELOC. For investors who want a straightforward strategy without managing 5 different tranches, this architecture is very clean.
  • Direct Investing Integration: BMO’s ecosystem plays nicely with third-party investment firms. You can often provide your brokerage with a void cheque tied directly to the HELOC portion and set up automated monthly investing contributions—a feature many major banks block.
  • Top-Tier Prepayment Privileges: BMO offers generous annual prepayment options (up to 15% to 20% depending on the specific product). This allows you to inject lump-sum cash, rapidly pay down your principal, and immediately see that room open up in your HELOC to scale your portfolio.
• The Cons & Operational Challenges:
  • The Restructuring Refinance Trap: A massive drawback to BMO’s rigid architecture is that you cannot easily change or restructure your segments. If you want to lock a portion of your variable HELOC debt into a fixed term later on, it triggers a full, formal refinance. This means you must go through a new appraisal, a hard credit check, and full income re-qualification.
  • The CRA Tracking Nightmare: When that forced refinance occurs, BMO’s system generates entirely new account numbers. This breaks your continuous audit trail and forces you to rebuild your tracking history for the CRA from scratch.
  • The Manual Interest Capitalization Trap: While you can automate the wealth-building pull out to your brokerage, you cannot automatically capitalize the interest inside BMO. When the monthly HELOC interest is charged, it hits your linked chequing account. You must manually log in and transfer funds from the HELOC to cover that exact interest amount to keep your cash flow neutral.
  • The post-OSFI 65% LTV Taper & Lock-In: BMO complies with the 65% LTV restriction on the revolving HELOC portion, permanently scaling back your limit over time if you start at 80% LTV. It is also registered as a collateral charge, triggering steep legal and discharge fees to leave.

3. The RBC Homeline Plan®

For homes under a million dollars and for overall ease of transactions and services, RBC is hands down the winner.

• The Pros:
  • Unmatched Multi-Segment Support: You can split your Homeline Plan into a massive number of sub-accounts (up to 15+ individual segments), which is excellent for tracking multiple distinct portfolios.
  • Seamless Fixed-Term Splitting: RBC allows you to split off a portion of your variable HELOC balance into a fixed-rate closed mortgage segment with minimal friction.
• The Cons & Operational Challenges:
  • The “Million-Dollar” Sliding Scale Rule: This catches high-net-worth investors off guard. If your home is worth over $1,000,000, RBC does not lend a flat 80% LTV like Scotiabank or BMO. They lend 80% on the first million but drop their ratio to 50% or 60% on anything above that. On a $3,000,000 home, RBC traps roughly $600,000 in equity that other banks would happily let you borrow to invest.
  • No Micro-Automation: Re-advancing room does not adjust fluidly on a daily or micro-basis, often lagging until clean payment cycles clear. Furthermore, you cannot set up a native automated monthly “sweep” to pull money out to a third-party investing account.
  • OSFI Tapering & Collateral Lock-In: Enforces the 65% LTV limit on the revolving portion and amortizes the excess over time. High switching costs apply at renewal due to the collateral charge registration.

4. TD Home Equity FlexLine

TD has been firmly held at number four previously as well due to its distinct structural challenges. We still actively work with it, but you have to be highly aware of all the operational workarounds.

• The Pros:
  • Unmatched Fixed-Segment Capacity: TD is an absolute powerhouse for structuring diverse debt, allowing you to split your borrowing into up to 99 different term portions (fixed or variable closed segments). This provides unparalleled tracking under one roof.
  • Easy Internal Restructuring: You can easily move funds from the revolving HELOC portion into a fixed-rate term portion online or over the phone. Doing this internal optimization does not require breaking your mortgage or triggering a full, costly legal refinancing.
  • TD Direct Investing Synergy: Moving funds from your HELOC to your investment accounts within the same banking ecosystem is exceptionally smooth if you use their native platform.
• The Cons & Operational Challenges:
  • The OSFI Prepayment Trap: Under the current OSFI rules, if your combined borrowing limit is above 65% LTV, making a lump-sum prepayment behaves very differently than it used to. While the prepayment technically frees up equity, that room does not re-advance into your usable HELOC. Instead, the system automatically redirects that newly created space to permanently reduce your global credit limit until the revolving capacity drops to the mandatory 65% LTV threshold.
  • Strict “Single Line of Credit” Restriction: Unlike lenders like Scotiabank (which allow you to split your HELOC into up to 3 distinct lines of credit), TD strictly allows only one revolving credit line segment. You cannot isolate different investing strategies into separate tracking lines; all variable investment debt is lumped into a single bucket.
  • The Rigid “Block” Auto-Readvancing System: For regular monthly payments, TD’s backend architecture requires the paid-down principal to accumulate into larger, discrete “blocks” of equity before it triggers and opens up new space in your revolving HELOC, temporarily stalling your investing velocity.
  • No Automated “Sweep” Transfers & Lock-In: Lacks automated monthly sweep capabilities to third-party accounts, and features the same expensive collateral charge exit fees common to the Big Five.

10. (Worst). Manulife One

As you can see from our breakdown, Manulife One lands last on the list. While heavily hyped by commission-earning brokers as the ultimate Smith Manoeuvre vehicle, ground-zero implementation reveals major structural flaws and severe administrative traps.

• The Pros (When Strictly Isolated):
  • Daily Interest Savings: Any investment income or cash parked in the account instantly offsets your outstanding balance, reducing interest costs on a daily basis.
  • Ultimate Prepayment Freedom: Unlike traditional fixed or variable mortgages, you can inject unlimited cash into the pool at any time without facing prepayment penalties.
• The Cons & Operational Challenges:
  • The 65% LTV Hard Cap Trap: Unlike competitors that let you borrow up to 80% LTV by mixing a mortgage term with a HELOC, Manulife One strictly enforces a hard ceiling of 65% LTV for the entire account. If you have less than 35% equity, you cannot use this product. This traps 15% of your home’s potential borrowing power from day one, severely starving your initial investing velocity.
  • CRA Tax-Pollution Nightmare: If you use the main account for your daily personal banking (paycheques, groceries, lifestyle expenses), your personal cash completely mixes with your investment debt. It becomes an accounting disaster to prove to the CRA exactly which dollar of interest is tax-deductible.
  • Rigid Account “Slicing”: To avoid tax pollution, you must manually “slice” the account into separate sub-accounts. Managing interest capitalization (borrowing from the line to pay its own interest) across these slices is a high-maintenance process. One misplaced transfer can completely taint your audit trail.
  • Premium Account Fees: The product functions as a full chequing account and carries a hefty monthly fee. If you decide to keep your tax trail perfectly clean by not using it for personal banking, you are stuck paying a monthly premium just to treat it like a basic line of credit.

Summary Note

Selecting the right mortgage is no longer just about hunting for the lowest interest rate. Post-OSFI, a 0.05% rate difference can easily be neutralized by the friction of poor account architecture, sliding scale equity restrictions, or lost investing velocity.

If you are looking to deploy or optimize your Smith Manoeuvre strategy under these new rules, feel free to reach out to our team. Sabiha and I can look at your specific equity position and find the exact banking match for your wealth goals.

Ed

The post Re-evaluating Canada’s Best Re-Advanceable Mortgages: The New Top 4 Post-OSFI Rankings appeared first on Ed Rempel.

For many Canadians, homeownership is so much more than just a financial investment. It’s where our children grow up, where we host Sunday dinners, and where we build our lives. Because our homes mean so much to us, our natural instinct is to protect them. We work hard, make sacrifices, and commit to paying off our mortgages as quickly as possible—often directing every spare dollar toward that milestone.

But it’s worth asking a gentle, yet important question:

What if aggressively paying down your mortgage isn’t the only way to secure your family’s future?

For decades, the traditional path has unintentionally left many hardworking Canadians “house rich, cash poor.” They sit on a beautiful, valuable asset, but enter their golden years with anxiety because they lack the liquid investments needed to truly enjoy retirement.

Fortunately, there is a thoughtful strategy that challenges this trade-off. It’s called the Smith Manoeuvre, and it’s designed to help you build a secure tomorrow without sacrificing the joy of today.

The Story Behind the Strategy

This innovative approach wasn’t born in a corporate boardroom; it came from a desire to give Canadian families a financial leg up. The strategy was pioneered by Fraser Smith, a financial planner from Vancouver Island, British Columbia.

Fraser noticed a glaring inequality: while American homeowners could deduct mortgage interest from their taxes, Canadians could not. Recognizing how deeply this impacted the average family’s ability to save for the future, Fraser dedicated his career to leveling the playing field.

He developed a legal, structured way to help Canadians systematically convert expensive, non-deductible mortgage debt into tax-deductible, wealth-building equity. He eventually shared his findings with the world in his groundbreaking book, “The Smith Manoeuvre: How to Use the Equity in Your Home to Build Wealth.” Today, his legacy continues to give families across the country a sense of financial control and hope.

The Heart of the Strategy: Recycle, Don’t Restrict

One of the heaviest burdens families face today is the feeling that they aren’t saving enough. Between grocery bills, kids’ activities, and everyday life, finding “extra” cash flow to invest can feel nearly impossible.

The beauty of the Smith Manoeuvre is that it doesn’t ask you to find extra money. It doesn’t ask you to skip family vacations or cut out your morning coffee. Instead, it does something incredibly clever: it recycles the money you are already paying toward your mortgage.

Instead of waiting 25 years to finally start building a retirement nest egg, you begin investing from day one, seamlessly weaving wealth creation into your existing lifestyle.

How It Works: A Simple Journey

Let’s look at how this works in practice, using a straightforward example:

The Starting Point

• Home Value: $500,000
• Current Mortgage: $400,000
• The Tool: A re-advanceable mortgage with a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC)
• Interest Rate: 6% | Tax Rate: 40%

The Monthly Rhythm

1. You make your regular mortgage payment: Your life and monthly budget remain exactly the same.
2. Your equity grows: With every payment, the principal portion reduces your debt and automatically increases your available credit line (HELOC).
3. You invest in your future: You draw that newly available credit and invest it into a non-registered investment account.
4. The cycle repeats: Month after month, a quiet transformation takes place.

Over time, your inefficient, non-deductible mortgage debt shrinks, while your tax-deductible, wealth-building investment loan grows. You are safely converting “bad debt” into “good debt.”

Protecting Your Cash Flow

A common worry is, “Won’t paying the interest on the loan hurt my monthly budget?” The elegance of this strategy lies in capitalizing the interest.

If your monthly HELOC interest is $65, you pay it, and then immediately re-borrow that $65 from the credit line to cover it. The net impact on your daily cash flow is exactly zero. Your strategy runs quietly in the background while you focus on living your life.

Real Stories, Real Peace of Mind

Behind the math are real people who have used this strategy to reshape their futures.

1. The Busy Mid-Career Family (The Gift of Time)

• The Profile: Parents in their early 40s. Dual income, but life is expensive and surplus cash is tight.
• The Worry: They felt guilty that their mortgage was shrinking but their retirement savings were stagnant.
• The Journey: They implemented the Smith Manoeuvre. Over 15 years, without changing their lifestyle, they built a robust six-figure investment portfolio alongside their home equity.
• The Wholesome Impact: Today, they have options. They can afford to ease into retirement three to five years early, spending precious time with future grandchildren rather than feeling locked to a desk.

2. The High-Income Professional (Relieving the Burden)

• The Profile: In their late 30s, working long hours, and facing a heavy tax burden.
• The Journey: Used the strategy to generate tax deductions, reinvesting their annual tax refunds directly back into the mortgage to accelerate the safety of a debt-free home.
• The Wholesome Impact: By building a parallel wealth engine, they bought themselves optionality—the freedom to reduce working hours or pivot careers without compromising their family’s security.

3. The Late Starter (Restoring Hope)

• The Profile: In their early 50s, holding a mortgage, and feeling a sense of panic about a late start to retirement savings.
• The Journey: Adopted a mindful, scaled version of the Smith Manoeuvre.
• The Wholesome Impact: While they might not retire decades early, they successfully closed the retirement gap. The true victory? Replacing financial anxiety with confidence and a sense of control over their golden years.

Is This Path Right for Your Family?

While the math is beautiful, the Smith Manoeuvre is ultimately an emotional and behavioral strategy.

The Bigger Picture: Your Home as an Active Partner

The true magic of the Smith Manoeuvre isn’t just the tax deduction. It’s the gift of time and compounding.

Instead of waiting decades to let compound interest work its magic, you invite your home to become an active partner in your financial wellness today. Your home goes from being a passive asset that simply absorbs your income, to a living engine that quietly builds a prosperous, stress-free future for the people you love most.

Final Thoughts

Building wealth doesn’t have to mean compromising your current happiness. With patience, structure, and the right professional guidance, you can protect your home, nourish your family’s lifestyle today, and step boldly into a secure tomorrow.

-Sabiha

The post Unlocking Peace of Mind with the Smith Manoeuvre: Turning Your Home into a Wealth-Building Engine—Without Sacrificing Today appeared first on Ed Rempel.

Most Canadians expect to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement. 

But many end up paying more tax than they expect. 

How do tax brackets change after age 65 and why can common assumptions about RRSPs and retirement income lead to higher lifetime taxes?

Here are practical strategies to reduce tax over time, including how to use RRSPs, TFSAs, income timing and how to plan for a tax-efficient retirement.

This might be a real eye opener for some people because I think a lot of people that do some basic tax planning are doing it all wrong.

In my latest video, podcast episode, and blog post I’m going to give you tax planning made easy using tax brackets. Some basics of tax brackets, and briefly how tax planning is done, so you can get the concept. 

Then we’re going to talk about why tax brackets for seniors are way different than you think – and how this completely changes tax planning. And how to plan for low tax through your retirement.

You’ll learn:

• Tax planning made easy using tax brackets. 
• Why are tax brackets for seniors way different? 
• What are the three main clawbacks on seniors? 
• What are the actual effective tax brackets for seniors?
• How is tax planning very different with the actual effective tax brackets?
• Which is better for you – TFSA or RRSP?
• How can you plan for your retirement income to be taxed at only 22% or less? 
• How does your financial plan become the GPS for your life? 

Tax planning made easy using tax brackets.

– Much of tax planning is based on marginal tax brackets. These are the tax on the next dollar of taxable income – which is different from the average tax rate you pay on all your income.

– Tax planning is about being able to plan for or control your taxable income. You can plan ahead to see what it will be or often you can control it based on decisions you make about your income or tax deductions.

– For example, if you have a corporation, you can decide how much salary or dividend to withdraw from your corporation. If you are contributing to RRSP or TFSA, you can decide how much to contribute to which and how much to deduct on your tax return.

– Your taxable income can be very different from your cash income – especially if you are self-employed, have a corporation, or are retired. For example, you pay no tax on cash you withdraw from your TFSA and only pay tax on any capital gains triggered when you withdraw from non-registered investments.

– Here are the basic tax brackets before age 65:

– Let’s look at some tax planning ideas based on tax brackets.

– When you have options on income, try to keep your income from being taxed at higher tax brackets. When you have options on deductions, try to get the largest refund by trying to keep your deductions from giving you refunds based on lower tax brackets.

– Example 1: Business owner can decide how much to withdraw from his company. Try to make it $54,000 to have all of it taxed at 19% or less. Or make it $117,000 to avoid paying 43% tax or more.

– Example 2: If you are deciding between contributing $10,000 to RRSP or TFSA and you have a salary of $65,000, contribute $3,500 to TFSA and $6,500 to RRSP to get a 39% refund on all of your RRSP contribution and avoid getting only a 23% refund.

– Note that actual effective tax brackets for parents can be dramatically different because of the clawback on the Canada Child Benefit. I have a video with details.

– Focus on the tax brackets that are a large tax increase from the previous bracket and the brackets that cover a larger range of income. Here are the main brackets to focus on:

Why are tax brackets for seniors way different? 

– Seniors have many government benefits clawed back based on their taxable income. These are exactly the same as a tax. It is the government taking money from you based on your taxable income.

– The 3 main clawbacks are the GIS clawback of 50% on low-income seniors, the age credit reduced by 15% for middle income seniors, and the OAS clawed back by 15% for higher income seniors.

– Note how tax brackets change when you include the clawbacks. These are for a single person and are different for married:

What are the actual effective tax brackets for seniors?

– Tax brackets after age 65 are way different than before.

– The GIS clawback is massive, the age credit clawback is small, and the OAS clawback is relatively large.

– People with a very low income below $22,500 are in a 50% tax bracket! One of the highest.

– Most seniors with incomes up to $152,000 will be in a higher tax bracket if they retire with the same income they had before they retire.

How is tax planning very different with the actual effective tax brackets?

– You save for retirement with one set up tax brackets, but then you have a different set after you turn 65 with higher tax brackets.

– For example, people with very low incomes may contribute to an RRSP and get a 19% tax refund, but then pay 50% tax in lost GIS income after they retire. In that case, the RRSP was a bad idea for them.

– Most incomes up to $152,000 are taxed at higher brackets after age 65. If you expect to retire close to the income you have before age 65, then you need a closer look at your current taxable bracket and the tax bracket you expect to be in after you retire to make smart decisions, such as about your RRSP contributions. For example, people making $110,000 and retiring at the same income would get a 34% tax refund when they contribute but pay 44% tax when they withdraw years later.

Which is better for you – TFSA or RRSP?

– You can invest the same in both and you are not taxed on either for investments while you hold them inside the RRSP or TFSA. The difference is your marginal tax bracket when you contribute vs. when you withdraw. If you will withdraw at a lower tax bracket, then RRSP is probably the best strategy for you. If not, then TFSA is probably better.

– For example, many people get a 40% refund when they contribute and then withdraw decades later paying only 20% tax. Then RRSP is a good thing for you and better than TFSA.

– Most Canadians can plan to pay only 22% or less on their retirement income. If your taxable income before you retire is over $54,000, then you are in a higher marginal tax bracket.

– The general rule of thumb is that people with taxable incomes over $58,500 should usually contribute to RRSP and those with lower incomes should usually contribute to TFSA.

– There are many exceptions to this, though. For example, very low-income seniors with little or no retirement savings should contribute to TFSA, instead of RRSP, since they may lose 50% GIS income on RRSP withdrawals after they retire. People who expect to retire with the same income as before they retire should probably focus on TFSA, as well.

– The only way to know what your tax bracket is now and what it will be after you retire with the lifestyle you want is with a Financial Plan. It figures it out for you and shows you how to plan for the life you want.

How can you plan for your retirement income to be taxed at only 22% or less?

– The important point is not what your taxable income is, but what you can plan it to be. This can be very different from your cash income – which is your lifestyle.

– For example, you can pay 22% or less on all your income if you retire with a taxable income below $54,000.

– Here are 3 examples of how to structure your retirement income to all be taxed at 22% or less:

– How do you get non-registered investments? Most people only contribute to RRSP and TFSA, since it is a challenge just to maximize your contribution room for both. However, some people are big savers and save much more than the limits. The extra savings that are not RRSP or TFSA are all non-registered.

– Many people also use strategies of borrowing to invest, such as the Smith Manoeuvre. If you maximize the Smith Manoeuvre, you can typically have non-registered investments as large as your RRSP and TFSA. This is true even though you contributed your cash flow to RRSP and TFSA, since the Smith Manoeuvre generally does not require your cash flow.

– The Smith Manoeuvre also gives you a tax deduction, which might be your only tax deduction after you retire.

– This example assumes that you use “self-made dividends” for your retirement cash flow from your non-registered investments. “Self-made dividends” just mean you sell a bit of your investments each month to give you the exact amount of cash flow you want. You pay tax only on any capital gains you triggered. This allows you to continue to invest for growth through your retirement and focus on triggering as little taxable income as possible. Focusing on deferred capital gains that are triggered when you eventually sell over time is the most tax-efficient way to structure your retirement income.

– Self-made dividends are better than ordinary dividends in every way.

– Many people think you need to invest for income after you retire. You don’t. You need cash flow, not income.

– Many dividend investors think they are paying the lowest tax, but they almost always pay more than with self-made dividends. I have a video with details: Dividend Investing Perfected with Self-Made Dividends .

How does your financial plan become the GPS for your life? 

– To eventually be financially free living the lifestyle you want and an optimal lower taxable income, you need a Financial Plan.

– Rough estimates in your head can easily be far wrong and may lead you to make wrong decisions from not knowing your future tax bracket.

– You have many options for how to live your life now and after you retire, plus many possible decisions on how to structure your finances. Therefore, you need an “Interactive Financial Plan” where you look at a wide variety of options while deciding on how you actually want to live. You need to be able to see very quickly what effect various life decisions will have on your future life and your tax.

– Your Financial Plan is the GPS for your life. The first thing you do when you start a trip is put your destination into your GPS so you know exactly the best way to go. Life is the same. The first thing you should do is get your Financial Plan so you know exactly how to achieve the life you want.

– Make it your goal – not something you think people typically end up with.

– Life feels completely different when you are financially independent. You are free to make whatever life choices you want.

– Live life intentionally. Real freedom is financial freedom.

Ed

The post Retirement Tax Shock: Why Many Canadians Pay More Tax Than Expected appeared first on Ed Rempel.

Let’s make money make sense.

Let’s be honest for a second… Nobody really cares about banking—until that first real paycheck hits.

Whether it’s from a part-time job, tutoring, lifeguarding, or just money coming in more regularly, suddenly you’ve got cash. But just as quickly as it arrives, it’s gone. Between your phone bill, Spotify, Uber rides, and grabbing food with friends, it adds up fast.

At some point, you catch yourself thinking: “Wait… where did all my money go?”

That’s where banking comes in. Not to make life complicated, but to give you a system so your money doesn’t just disappear on you.

So… What Does a Bank Actually Do?

The easiest way to think about a bank? It’s basically a tech company that protects your money and helps you move it around. Everyday activities happen seamlessly through your bank:

• Getting paid via direct deposit
• Tapping your card at a store
• Sending money to friends
• Paying your monthly subscriptions

You’re probably using a bank multiple times a day without even thinking about it.

But Here’s the Thing—Banks Are Businesses

And that’s completely normal. They make money in a few main ways:

1. Lending out your money: When you put $100 in the bank, it doesn’t just sit there. The bank lends it to someone else—like for a car or a house—and charges them interest.
2. Charging fees: This includes account fees, ATM fees, or penalties if you don’t meet certain account requirements.
3. Credit card interest: When people don’t pay their full monthly balance, the bank charges interest on what’s left over.

The Takeaway: This doesn’t mean banks are “bad.” It just means you want to use them smartly. Choosing a no-fee student account, using the right ATMs, and paying your cards on time can save you a surprising amount of money. The goal isn’t to avoid banks—the goal is to make them work for you.

The Only 2 Accounts You Actually Need

Here’s some good news, especially if you’re under 18 or in school: most banks offer free youth or student accounts. Right now, you shouldn’t be paying monthly fees.

You don’t need a complicated setup. Just start with these two accounts:

1. Your Chequing Account

Think of this as your “life account.” This is your everyday money where your paycheck goes, your spending happens, and your bills get paid. It is directly connected to your debit card and your phone.

• Real-Life Example: You get paid $500. Over the next few days, you spend $80 on food, $20 on subscriptions, $60 going out, and $40 on random spending. This all comes directly out of your chequing account.

2. Your Savings Account

This is your “don’t-touch-this unless you mean to” money. This is where you store funds for future goals, emergencies, or big purchases.

• Real-Life Example: You’re saving up for a laptop or a trip. Alternatively, something unexpected happens—like a phone repair. If you have savings, it’s manageable; if you don’t, it’s stressful.

The Honestly Critical Tip

If all your money sits in one account, you will spend it. No one plans to, but it happens. Separating your money into chequing and savings creates a vital mental barrier that keeps your savings safe from everyday impulses.

Your Banking App = Your Financial Dashboard

Let’s be real—your bank isn’t a brick-and-mortar building anymore. It’s an app on your phone, and you’ll use it all the time to handle your daily life:

• Checking your balance before buying something
• Sending quick e-transfers to friends
• Paying bills and moving money into savings
• Tracking where your money actually went

Real-Life Moments You’ll Recognize

• The “Can I afford this?” moment: You’re about to order food, check your balance, and immediately change your mind.
• Splitting everything: Dinner, Ubers, rent, concert tickets—all handled in seconds.
• The monthly reality check: Scrolling through your transactions and realizing, “Why did I spend that much on takeout?” That moment right there is how your habits improve.
• Catching something weird: You see a charge you don’t recognize, freeze your card instantly in the app, and handle the problem before it gets worse.

Why App Quality Matters: A good app sends real-time notifications and lets you control your cards instantly. A bad one forces you to call customer service or visit a physical branch. Always check app reviews before choosing a bank.

Debit vs. Credit Cards (Quick Reality Check)

At first, you’ll mostly use a debit card. Around age 18 or 19, you’ll start seeing credit cards everywhere. Here is the actual difference between the two:

The Truth About Credit Cards

They aren’t inherently bad; they’re just easy to misuse.

• Used properly: They build your credit score, which helps you later in life when renting an apartment or applying for a car loan.
• Used poorly: Interest stacks up quickly, and debt becomes incredibly stressful.

The Simple Rule: Only spend money on a credit card that you already have in your chequing account and pay the balance off fully every single month.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Let’s save you some money right out of the gate by avoiding these traps:

1. Paying unnecessary fees: Stick strictly to student/youth accounts that offer $0 monthly fees.
2. Using random ATMs: Out-of-network ATM withdrawals can cost way more than you think.
3. The subscription trap: Forgetting to cancel free trials before they turn into recurring monthly charges.
4. Overspending socially: Falling into the “it’s just one night out” mindset too many times a week.
5. Not checking your account: This is the biggest mistake. If you don’t look at your money, you lose track of it automatically.

Your Simple Action Plan

You don’t need a complicated spreadsheet to start. Just follow these three steps:

Step 1: Open one chequing account and one savings account with a no-fee bank.

Step 2: Download the banking app and set up your login.

Step 3: Every time you get paid, move money into your savings account right away. A great baseline rule to try is 50% save / 50% spend, but use whatever ratio works best for your current goals.

Final Thought

Banking isn’t about being completely perfect with your money. It’s about having a system that keeps you aware and in control. If you separate your money, check your account regularly, avoid useless fees, and build simple habits, you’re already miles ahead of most people your age. And honestly? That makes life a whole lot less stressful.

As your income grows, your financial decisions matter more.

Not because life should feel restrictive,

but because small habits compound quickly.

Good banking won’t make you rich.

But bad banking can quietly hold you back without you noticing.

–Sabiha

The post How Banking Actually Works (And How to Set Up Your First Accounts) appeared first on Ed Rempel.

The longevity movement is transforming how we think about aging—not as an inevitable decline, but as a challenge we can overcome with science, technology, and smart choices.

Many experts believe we’re on the cusp of dramatically extending healthy lifespans.

I’m on a longevity and healthspan journey.

I’m not an expert in longevity, but I’m continuously learning, and it’s all exciting. I’m simply passing along some of what I’ve learned.

I am, however, an expert in retirement planning. Living healthier for longer can have a huge impact on your retirement.

What kind of life do you want if you remain healthy for decades longer?

In my latest video, podcast episode, and blog post, you’ll learn:

• Why science suggests we could add healthy decades to our lives within the next 10–20 years.
• How Peter Diamandis and the $101 million XPRIZE Healthspan are accelerating breakthroughs.
• The 9 key hallmarks of aging, with clear explanations and promising solutions.
• A close-up look at Lake Nona, Florida—a purpose-built longevity hub—and what it could mean for all of us.
• What we can do today to stay healthier for longer.
• An optimistic vision for a future of vibrant, extended healthspan.

Why We’re Likely to Live Much Longer Soon

Medical progress has already been extending life expectancy by about three months every year. But now, exponential technologies are converging: artificial intelligence for analyzing vast biological data, CRISPR for precise gene editing, advanced gene therapies, epigenetic reprogramming, senolytics to clear harmful cells, and more.

Futurists like Ray Kurzweil and Peter Diamandis talk about reaching ‘Longevity Escape Velocity’—the point where scientific advances add more than one year of healthy life for every year that passes. For those who maintain good health and have access to emerging tools, this could arrive by the late 2030s. It’s not about immortality, but about expanding our prime years for family, travel, work, and purpose. 

The XPRIZE Healthspan

Peter Diamandis, through XPRIZE, is fueling this with the $101 Million XPRIZE Healthspan—the largest prize in XPRIZE history. Launched as a 7-year global competition (running to 2030), it challenges teams worldwide to develop safe, accessible therapeutics that can restore muscle function, cognitive performance, and immune response by the equivalent of at least 10 years (with a stretch goal of 20 years) in people aged 50-80.

In other words, it’s a massive prize to any group or company that finds a way to reverse aging.

Teams must prove results in rigorous clinical trials within a year of treatment. This prize isn’t just about extending lifespan—it’s about extending healthspan, the years we live actively and independently. It incentivizes real-world innovation and collaboration across biotech, pharma, and academia.

More than 600 competing teams from 58 countries registered for the global competition. From those 600+, 100 teams have advanced as semi-finalists (Top 100 Qualified Teams). Of these, the Top 40 teams were selected as Milestone 1 award winners (each receiving funding to advance) for the main Healthspan prize, plus 8 are finalists for the related $10M FSHD Bonus Prize.

These teams are actively developing and testing therapeutics aimed at restoring muscle, cognitive, and immune function. The competition remains active through 2030, with a further milestone in mid-2026 narrowing it down further.

The high number of entrants shows tremendous global interest and momentum in the longevity field.

The 9 Hallmarks of Aging

What actually is aging? You have the same genome that you did when you were 20. Why do you look different?

Understanding aging starts with the foundational 9 hallmarks, identified in landmark research and frequently highlighted by Peter Diamandis. These interconnected processes drive aging, but many are modifiable today through lifestyle and poised for high-tech interventions tomorrow. Here’s each one with a detailed explanation and what Diamandis and the field see as promising paths forward:

1. Genomic Instability: Over time, our DNA accumulates damage from radiation, toxins, errors in replication, and oxidative stress, leading to mutations and cellular dysfunction. Solutions: Minimize exposure to toxins and excess sugar; leverage CRISPR-based gene editing and DNA repair therapies in the future. Lifestyle basics like antioxidant-rich diets help today.
2. Telomere Attrition: Telomeres are protective caps on chromosomes that shorten with each cell division, eventually limiting replication (the Hayflick limit). Solutions: Proven lifestyle factors include exercise, meditation, a healthy diet, and stress reduction, which can help preserve or lengthen telomeres. Emerging telomerase activation therapies are in development.
3. Epigenetic Alterations: These are changes in how genes are expressed (turned on/off) without altering the DNA sequence itself—driven by environment, diet, and aging. As you age, your body turns off some genes and turns on others. Solutions: Healthy habits like quality sleep and nutrition influence epigenetics positively. Exciting epigenetic reprogramming techniques (partial cellular reprogramming) aim to reset cells to a more youthful state.
4. Loss of Proteostasis: Cells struggle to properly fold, maintain, and clear proteins, leading to toxic clumps associated with diseases like Alzheimer’s. Solutions: Intermittent fasting and nutrient-dense diets activate cellular cleanup (autophagy). Exercise supports this process; future drugs targeting proteostasis networks are advancing.
5. Dysfunctional Mitochondria (Mitochondrial Dysfunction): Mitochondria are tiny structures inside almost every cell in your body. Their main job is to produce energy. They take the food you eat and the oxygen you breathe and convert them into a usable form of energy called ATP (adenosine triphosphate). This energy powers everything you do: walking, thinking, digesting, repairing tissues, exercising, and even sleeping. As we age, our cellular powerhouses become less efficient, producing more harmful reactive oxygen species (ROS) and less energy. Solutions: Whole-food diets, regular exercise, and hormesis practices (like sauna or cold exposure). NAD+ boosters (e.g., NMN or NR) are popular and show promise in supporting mitochondrial health.
6. Cellular Senescence: Cells enter a “zombie” state where they stop dividing but secrete inflammatory signals, contributing to chronic inflammation and tissue damage. Solutions: Senolytic compounds (like dasatinib + quercetin or fisetin) that clear these cells; consistent exercise; emerging senolytic drugs and even vaccines targeting senescent cells.
7. Stem Cell Exhaustion: As we age, our reserves of stem cells, needed for tissue repair and regeneration, decline in number and function. Solutions: Stem cell therapies (using a patient’s own or donor cells) are already in clinical use for some conditions. Research into rejuvenating the stem cell niche is accelerating.
8. Altered Intercellular Communication: Signaling between cells becomes dysregulated, leading to chronic inflammation (“inflammaging”) and poor coordination across tissues. Solutions: Anti-inflammatory lifestyle choices like omega-3-rich foods, exercise, and good sleep. Broader approaches target systemic inflammation and the SASP (senescence-associated secretory phenotype).
9. Deregulated Nutrient Sensing: As we age, pathways like mTOR, insulin/IGF-1, and AMPK that sense nutrients get out of balance, shifting the body from repair to growth mode inappropriately. Solutions: Caloric restriction or intermittent fasting powerfully influences these pathways. Supplements like metformin or NAD+ precursors help regulate them; targeted drugs are in trials.

These 9 hallmarks don’t act in isolation—they reinforce each other. The good news? Lifestyle powerfully modulates most of them right now, buying us time until advanced therapies arrive.

A Glimpse into Lake Nona – A Longevity Hub

One of the most exciting real-world examples is Lake Nona in Orlando, Florida. This master-planned community was deliberately designed as a hub for health, wellness, innovation, and longevity. It brings together researchers, clinicians, biotech companies, and residents in close proximity to spark rapid collaboration and translation of ideas into practice.

Key players include the University of Central Florida’s Academic Health Sciences campus with its medical school focused on biomedical research, the UCF Lake Nona Cancer Center, and UCF Lake Nona Hospital; the Orlando VA Medical Center; Nemours Children’s Health; major players like Johnson & Johnson; and numerous biotech firms.

There are a few clinics open to the public with specialized longevity services and treatments.

In a video on my Instgram post, I walk by some of them. It starts with the Wave Hotel, one of the most technologically advanced hotels in the world. Nearby and beside each other are a few specialized clinics.

Upgrade Labs (founded by Dave Asprey) offers state-of-the-art biohacking: AI-driven strength training, cryotherapy, red light therapy, PEMF, neurofeedback for cognitive vitality, recovery tech, and more. This ecosystem means experts in hospitals, drug development, research labs, and specialized clinics work side-by-side. Discoveries move faster from bench to bedside, accelerating benefits for everyone through shared knowledge, clinical trials, and real-world application. Upgrade Labs is also in Oakville Ontario.

Fountain Life, winner of the Longevity Clinic of the Year for 2025 has its global headquarters here. I am one of their patients in their APEX year-round program. They provide AI-powered, full-body precision diagnostics that detect diseases like cancer, heart issues, and neurodegeneration years or decades early – empowering proactive interventions. It is owned by Peter Diamandis.

Serotonin Anti-Aging Center is a physician-led longevity and wellness clinic specializing in hormone optimization, peptide therapy, and anti-aging treatments. It offers bioidentical hormone replacement (including testosterone), NAD+ infusions, medical weight loss, IV nutrient therapy, red light therapy, hyperbaric oxygen, aesthetics, and personalized coaching — all designed to boost energy, vitality, and healthy aging.

Lake Nona Performance Club (LNPC) is the largest gym I have seen. It is 13,000 sq. ft. with 10,000 members with all the latest equipment. It has a cold plunge, rock climbing and many classes. The attached spa has the usual spa services, plus the Peak Living clinic, with the Amortal Experience red light bed and the AESCAPE robot massage.

Note: I am not a doctor. I am not specifically endorsing any treatment, supplement or clinic. This is purely educational to give you an idea of some of what is available. I don’t know for sure of actual benefits from these treatments, but I tried a bunch of them.

What can we do today to be healthy longer?

·        Do what you can to avoid the “4 horsemen of chronic disease” – heart disease, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases (e.g., Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and dementia), and metabolic dysfunction such as type 2 diabetes. 

·        Advanced screening & testing today can detect most of these diseases early. Private clinics do this preventative medicine, such as the basics with Medcan in Canada and the most advanced with Fountain Life in the US.

·        Core lifestyle habits are still the key: sleep, exercise, diet & mindset. Focus on all 4. I personally use a sleep mask and wearable to track my sleep, have a personal trainer for weights and interval treadmill training together with protein to build muscle, and have a high protein diet with intermittent fasting. I get a lot of professional advice on all these.

·        Supplements and meds targeted based on your test results. I am on 14 supplements recommended by my Fountain Life doctor from a specific, high-quality supplier.

·        Have a “longevity mindset”. Optimists live longer than pessimists (even if they are wrong). People with a life purpose live longer.

·        Most important: Don’t die from something stupid! This includes high-risk activities, but also diseases that we already know how to test for early detection.

Optimistic Vision of Our Future

The longevity movement gives us profound hope: more vibrant years with loved ones, pursuing passions, and contributing meaningfully. By focusing on evidence-based habits today—nutrition, movement, sleep, stress management, and advanced screenings—we can bridge to tomorrow’s breakthroughs.

Science is making aging more optional than inevitable. The future looks brighter and longer than ever.

What steps are you taking? Share in the comments.

Ed

The post The Longevity Revolution: Why We’re on the Brink of Living Decades Longer appeared first on Ed Rempel.

What if living to 100 becomes normal?

With advances in medicine, technology, AI, and longevity research, there is a real possibility that many people today could live much longer than previous generations.

That raises some important financial questions:

• Will your retirement savings last long enough?
• How much more would you need to save?
• Will CPP, OAS, and pensions be sustainable?
• Will working longer become the new normal?
• How should your investment strategy change?

In my latest article for BusinessByMoney, I explore how longer life expectancies could reshape retirement planning and what it means for your financial future.

The goal is not just to live longer. It’s to stay healthy, active, and financially secure for longer.

CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE ARTICLE BY IVELINA NUMEROVA:

Living to 100 and Beyond: Ed Rempel on the Financial Reality of Longer Lives

The idea of living past 100 once felt distant. Today, more and more people are hitting the century mark. For Canadians planning their financial future, that raises a serious question. Will their retirement savings last long enough?

Toronto-based certified financial planner Ed Rempel says this topic needs more attention. In a recent blog post, he discusses how longer, healthier lives could change retirement planning and why many current strategies don’t work as they should.

Rempel suggests the goal is not just to live longer, but to live well for longer, emphasizing the concept of “healthspan” over “lifespan.”

“The important issue is not just how long we live,” he writes. “It is how long we are healthy.”

Public perception has not yet caught up. Many people still associate age 100 with illness and decline. That mindset helps explain why only a small percentage of people say they want to live that long. When good health is part of the picture, attitudes change dramatically.

Longer lives are not a future concept. They are already here. Over the past century, life expectancy has steadily increased, driven by better nutrition, medical advancements, and improved living conditions.

Increased life expectancy is expected to accelerate in the coming decades, with living well past age 100 probably becoming common. The longevity movement has ignited because of AI which has led to a massive tsunami of billions of dollars in research. The movement has existed for decades, but now is advancing exponentially faster. We are likely to start living a decade or 2 longer in 10-20 years with all the medical advances.

Rempel says this trend has largely improved people’s quality of life. Older adults are staying active and engaged for longer. Many people in their 70s and 80s today are healthier than their counterparts of the same age in previous generations.

He also sees greater benefits. A longer, healthier population can contribute to more years in the workforce, supporting family structures across generations, and helping address declining birth rates in developed countries.

Rempel also adds a personal perspective, noting that mindset matters.

“Optimism is realism,” he says. “And optimists live longer.”

Rempel uses a simple example. A 30-year-old earning $100,000 plans to retire at 60 and live until 80. Now, extend that retirement to age 100. That adds 20 extra years without employment income.

The cost of that change is high. Investors would need to save much more during their working years if they have more conservative portfolios. For many, the required savings may not be realistic. Equity investors would probably need to save only modestly more.

Rempel is direct about the challenge: “How much more would you have to save?” he asks.

For many people, working longer may become the more realistic path. Extending a career by several years can help offset the added cost of a longer retirement, though the number of extra working years depends heavily on how investments are structured.

Longer life expectancies also put strain on retirement systems.

Programs like CPP and Old Age Security were not created for decades-long retirements. Rempel suggests that contribution rates may rise, benefits may change, and retirement ages may increase over time.

He is particularly cautious about the long-term sustainability of Old Age Security. With fewer workers supporting each retiree and longer payout periods, the system faces growing pressure.

Employer pensions are also changing. Many companies have already moved away from defined benefit plans toward defined contribution plans, shifting more responsibility to individuals.

The traditional model of retiring at 60 or 65 and living comfortably for a couple of decades may no longer hold. A longer life changes the math.

Rempel believes investment strategy will be a primary factor. Portfolios with long-term growth potential may offer more flexibility, while more conservative methods could limit options later in life.

At the same time, the idea of retirement itself may evolve. More people may choose, or need, to stay active in the workforce longer, whether full-time or in a reduced capacity.

Beyond the numbers, Rempel encourages people to think about purpose. Living longer brings opportunities, but also requires a reason to make the most of those extra years.

“What’s your why?” he asks.

A longer life could mean more time with family, more years of meaningful work, or simply more time to enjoy life. For Rempel, the outlook is positive. The possibility of staying healthy and active for decades beyond traditional expectations is something he welcomes.

Still, one message runs through his analysis: planning for that future cannot wait.

Ed

The post BusinessByMoney article – Living to 100 and Beyond: The Financial Reality of Longer Lives appeared first on Ed Rempel.