Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Summary: The article explores the Fear of Running Out (FORO), a psychological phenomenon that stems from anxiety about resource scarcity, particularly in retirement. FORO is especially common among seniors who fear depleting their financial, physical, or emotional resources as they age. Unlike FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), FORO focuses on the depletion of existing assets, often leading to cautious decision-making, delayed spending, or self-sabotaging behaviours like excessive frugality or social withdrawal. While some instances of FORO are valid—such as retirees who underestimated their living expenses—others are more psychological, with financially secure individuals still feeling paralyzed by fear and unable to enjoy their retirement fully. There are practical solutions, but they require more than just emotional support. We also need to address the lack of formal retirement planning and literacy. Most retirees have insufficient knowledge about tax-efficient asset drawdowns, and the limited guidance from financial institutions exacerbates these fears. We’ve all heard of FOMO (fear of missing out)—that nagging anxiety when everyone else seems to be at a fabulous party while you’re at home scrolling through social media, eating last night’s leftovers straight from the container. As we age, the fears we carry evolve—and for some, they get a little louder, quirkier, and much more challenging to ignore. A unique set of acronyms has emerged for older adults to describe these creeping anxieties. Allow me to introduce you to the unholy trinity of aging fears: FOGO (Fear of Getting Old): This one typically kicks in around our mid-to-late 50s when the realization hits and panic sets in: "Wait... I’m not young anymore?" Have I saved enough? Have I experienced enough? Am I running out of time? Cue the classic symptoms: splurging on bright red sports cars, embarking on bucket-list trips to exotic locales, or dating someone who knows what "Netflix and chill" really means, not cozying up with a movie. And yes, sometimes while still married. It’s all part of the "midlife crisis" package—a desperate attempt to outrun Father Time. But let’s be honest: The comb-over isn’t fooling anyone. FOBO (Fear of Being Old): This stage sneaks in during your 70s, as your "best before" date blinks ominously on life’s metaphorical packaging. Many enter into a state of "defensive denial," refusing to acknowledge their age or any limitations, insisting they are still as capable as ever, even when struggling with specific tasks. In this stage, people can demonstrate "overcompensation - Desperately trying to prove they’re still youthful. Many will refuse to use mobility aids or decline assistance from family or caregivers out of pride. Others will shut down anyone who dares to suggest they are old. “Me? Old? Please. I just got a brand-new hip last year!” FORO (Fear of Running Out): Now we get to the show's real star. FORO enters the spotlight as you thoughtfully consider retirement and suddenly takes over the plot. It’s the fear of running out—of money, energy, time, or maybe even snacks at movie night. This one’s a relentless buzz in the background of every decision, from how you spend your savings to whether you should buy name-brand peanut butter or settle for the generic jar. If left unchecked, FORO can steal the joy out of today by worrying too much about tomorrow. We have all heard the stories of people passing away with millions of dollars in the bank, yet they lived in squalor, afraid to spend their money. Now, FORO can manifest in all kinds of ways. Some are almost funny in hindsight. Remember the pandemic toilet paper wars of 2020? Or that panic at a party when you’re convinced you don’t have enough food for your guests, only to find yourself drowning in leftovers? But for seniors in retirement, FORO often takes on a much more serious tone—like running out of money, energy, or health as the years go by. These thoughts can be terrifying for the aged. And sometimes, this fear is warranted. Imagine a retiree who underestimated their living expenses, burned through savings too quickly, and now faces the stark reality of financial insecurity. That’s a legitimate case of FORO that demands attention, planning, and maybe a shift in lifestyle. But other times, FORO is more like a shadow in the dark—unsettling at first glance but harmless once illuminated. For example, some seniors with reasonable pensions, savings, and even supplemental income streams might still be too paralyzed by the fear of running out to take that dream vacation or help their grandchildren with school. In this situation, it is doubtful that there will ever be enough. This type of FORO can cause harm through neglect. This unfounded FORO can keep people from genuinely thriving during their golden years. There are well-documented cases of individuals who have perished from thirst in the desert while carrying full bottles of water. They were too frightened of running out of water to save their lives by drinking it. Most of us shake our heads and think we would never do that, but FORO represents a compelling fear that can lead to self-sabotaging behaviours. If FORO could result in death in the aforementioned desert scenario, how might it influence decisions regarding our significant assets, such as our homes? Unfortunately, many retirees pinch pennies and go without while living in homes with considerable equity, refusing to access it for fear of running out (FORO). So, how do we know when FORO is a valid warning signal and when it’s just a psychological hurdle? And, more importantly, how can we tackle this fear to ensure it doesn’t stand in the way of living a joyful, fulfilled retirement? Read on; we’ll dive deeper into the concept of FORO—why it exists, how it can sneak into our decision-making, and, most importantly, actionable strategies to manage it. Remember, your golden years shouldn’t be ruled by fear—they should be a time to shine. The Fear of Running Out (FORO) is a psychological concept rooted in anxiety about scarcity or insufficiency, particularly concerning essential resources like money, time, or opportunities. It's akin to FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), but instead emphasizes the anxiety of depleting one's existing resources rather than worrying about missed experiences. While FORO has not been as widely studied as FOMO in academic circles, the term has gained traction in financial and psychological contexts, particularly regarding retirement planning, economic behaviour, and decision-making. Although it’s unclear who explicitly popularized the term “Fear of Running Out,” it has become a recurring theme in financial planning discussions and among behavioural psychologists studying how individuals manage uncertainty and risk. The Psychology of FORO FORO is deeply rooted in psychological concepts of scarcity and loss aversion, both key ideas in behavioural economics. Loss aversion, central to Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s prospect theory, highlights that the pain of losing something outweighs the joy of gaining an equivalent amount. In the context of retirement, the fear of running out of money reflects this principle—financial depletion carries the weight of losing essential aspects like security, independence, and quality of life, making it feel particularly distressing. The work of researchers like Eldar Shafir and Senthil Mullainathan on the scarcity mindset further illuminates this phenomenon. They suggest that when people are preoccupied with avoiding resource depletion, they often develop tunnel vision, focusing narrowly on the immediate issue. For seniors worried about outliving their savings, this can manifest as excessive caution or hesitation in deciding to spend or draw down resources, even when such concerns may not be warranted. Faced with this dilemma, some seniors develop inertia, choose to do nothing, and ignore the situation altogether. According to a 2024 report by the Ontario Securities Commission, 13% of pre-retirees and 19% of retirees among Canadians aged 50 and older have a formal written retirement plan, which is a significant cause for concern. This reflects a widespread lack of structured financial and retirement literacy. Without a clear strategy, many individuals may not fully understand how to manage their resources effectively throughout retirement, particularly when it comes to de-accumulating (spending) assets in a tax-efficient manner. We can quickly start to see why many older Canadians have FORO. One key issue is that minimal accessible information exists on strategies for drawing down retirement savings to minimize taxes while ensuring long-term financial security. For example, the timing and order in which individuals withdraw from registered accounts like RRSPs, TFSAs, non-registered investments, or access their home equity can dramatically impact their overall tax burden and available income in retirement. Unfortunately, this type of guidance is often overlooked in financial planning resources, leaving most retirees guessing how much money is enough. The financial industry also contributes to this gap. Banks and many financial advisors are primarily compensated through commissions tied to the sale and management of investments, such as mutual funds or other financial products. This model does not incentivize them to provide comprehensive advice on strategically spending down savings. As a result, many seniors are left without the critical guidance they need to navigate the complexities of de-accumulation, leading to suboptimal emotionally driven decisions and increased financial stress. This lack of tailored advice is particularly problematic for Canadians who rely on paying off their homes as their primary financial plan. While homeownership is a valuable asset, it is not liquid, and converting it into usable retirement income can be challenging without proper planning. The fear of running out of money (FORO) becomes especially acute for these individuals, as they may not have the financial and retirement literacy or tools to make informed decisions about how to fund their retirement, especially concerning using home equity. In short, the low prevalence of formal retirement plans, insufficient education on tax-efficient de-accumulation, and the misaligned incentives of financial institutions significantly disadvantage seniors. This gap exacerbates financial insecurity and leaves many retirees vulnerable to the psychological and practical challenges of FORO, particularly those who rely on home equity, an illiquid asset, as their primary financial safety net. Addressing these issues requires a broader emphasis on financial and retirement literacy and unbiased, accessible advice tailored to retirees' unique needs. Key Components of FORO: 1. Scarcity Mindset—Seniors facing FORO might develop a scarcity mindset, which can lead to overly frugal behaviours. For example, they may reduce spending on essential support services or forego social activities to protect their savings, even when financially secure. 2. Emotional Triggers—FORO is tied to deeper emotional needs like safety, independence, and legacy. At its core is the fear that people will have nowhere to live, won’t have enough money to care for themselves, and will not have any money left to leave a legacy. 3. Decision Paralysis - FORO can cause retirees to delay allocating resources, from downsizing a home to sourcing pension-type income. This indecision can lead to missed opportunities or unnecessary sacrifices. 4. Overcompensation—In some cases, the fear of running out can lead to self-sabotage behaviours like hoarding money or withdrawing from social activities. These behaviours reduce quality of life and increase feelings of isolation. The Solution: A comprehensive approach that combines emotional support, practical planning, and mindset adjustments is essential to helping retirees overcome FORO. By addressing their fears and financial realities, they can gain the confidence to enjoy their retirement years without worrying about running out of money. 1. Acknowledgement and Understanding - Listen and empathize: Begin by genuinely listening to the retiree's concerns, recognizing that FORO is an emotional issue tied to deep-seated fears about security and independence. Normalize the fear: Reassure them that the fear of running out of money is common, especially in retirement. Explain the reasons behind this fear: Retirees often can’t return to work to supplement income. Lifespans and healthcare costs are unpredictable, creating uncertainty. The transition from accumulating wealth to spending it feels unnatural to many. 2. Develop a Retirement Spending Plan—Create a tailored plan. Outline a sustainable spending strategy aligning with the client's lifestyle, goals, and resources: Leverage expertise: Collaborate with their bank manager or financial advisor to develop a realistic budget covering essential and discretionary expenses. Focus on balance: Establish a balance between meeting current needs and maintaining future security. 3. Generate Pension-Like Income - Explore income solutions: Help them research ways to create predictable income streams, such as: Purchasing an annuity to convert part of their savings or equity into guaranteed income. Consider equity mortgage products for additional cash flow if they have sufficient home equity. Address misconceptions: Explain how these tools can reduce uncertainty and provide peace of mind. 4. Emergency Fund - Health care may be needed later in life and can be costly. Setting money aside for unexpected expenses will offer great comfort and peace of mind. 5. Mindset Shifts - Reframe perspectives: Encourage retirees to focus on the opportunities their resources provide rather than fixating on worst-case scenarios: Promote enjoyment: Remind them that retirement is a time to enjoy the fruits of their labour, not live in constant fear. Highlight the importance of self-care and experiences that bring joy and fulfillment. 6. Legacy Planning - Address legacy concerns: Help them create an estate plan or designate resources for loved ones and causes they care about, ensuring their wishes are honoured: Provide clarity: Show how planning for a legacy can reduce anxiety about leaving something behind while meeting their current needs. The Fear of Running Out is more than just a financial concern—it’s a deeply emotional and psychological issue for seniors facing the unpredictability of retirement. By addressing this fear in practical and empathetic ways, we can give retirees the tools and confidence to enjoy their golden years without worrying about depletion or feeling like they need to stockpile financial "water bottles" for a drought that may never come. And there you have it—FORO might be a formidable guest at the retirement table, but it doesn’t have to steal the show. By addressing the emotional roots of this fear, creating practical plans, and shifting the focus to what’s possible, retirees can turn their golden years into precisely that: golden. Remember, retirement isn’t about tiptoeing around scarcity; it’s about celebrating a lifetime of hard work and savouring the moments that make life rich. So, let’s leave FORO in the shadows where it belongs and step confidently into a retirement that truly shines. And let’s be honest, no one wants their legacy to read: "Lived frugally, died rich, and missed the Boat to the Caribbean." Don't retire---Re-Wire! Sue
Red Light Cameras Emerge as a Politically Divisive Issue
Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, is featured in a Newsday article about red-light camera programs and how they are emerging as a divisive political issues on Long Island. He likened the red-light camera program to that of congestion pricing for its “good government motive” aimed to improve traffic safety, charging drivers who violate the law while gaining money to help pay for the county police department. The issue, Levy said, is “a real tough one for politicians to gauge because of the mix of potential court cases and legislative actions that could be taken and the general mood of the public about anything that could be seen as a tax by another name.”
Pay Raises for LI Town Officials
Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, is featured in a Newsday article about pay raises for Long Island town officials. Among Long Island’s 13 towns, all but three gave raises to their town supervisors and council members, and all but two gave raises to their town clerks and tax receivers. Levy explained that many officials like the idea of telling voters each year that they aren’t getting a pay hike, but that means when they do enact a raise, the increase will be a big dollar amount, even if its average, over 10 years, is in line with cost-of-living increases. That big increase “looks awfully scary in a headline,” he said.
Canada’s RRSP Program Has Too Many Jobs
Summary: Since its inception in 1957, the Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) has been a cornerstone of Canada’s retirement system. However, the RRSP has taken on roles far beyond its original mandate, notably through the Home Buyers’ Plan (HBP) and the Lifelong Learning Plan (LLP). Although these programs provide short-term benefits, they significantly damage the long-term health of Canadians' retirement savings. This article explores how these additional roles are sabotaging retirement savings, highlights statistics about the state of RRSPs today, and discusses the disastrous impact these trends will have on future retirees. While listening to a recent economic presentation by Don Drummond, TD Bank's Chief Economist at the Mortgage Professionals Canada conference, the following stat stood out to me: "Median RRSP savings are $146K (RRSPs have been in existence for 6 decades)" I was stunned by how low this value was. Even with a government pension, in today's economic climate, to achieve a successful retirement, we need more than $146K saved. This prompted me to explore how the average value of RRSPs in Canada could be so low after some of us have had as much as 60 years to save. The average senior aged 65 in Canada receives $18,197 per year from OAS and CPP. If qualified for GIS, they would receive another $15,186 annually, for a total of $33,338 annually. This isn't much income, especially for homeowners who must pay for property taxes, utilities, upkeep, and maintenance. How it All Began At inception, the RRSP was called a Registered Retirement Annuity and was created in 1957. At the time, Canadians could contribute up to 10% of their income to a maximum of $2,500 annually. The goal was to give all Canadians the same tax benefits as members of registered employer-sponsored pension plans. Benefits of the RRSP Plan 1. Tax-Deferral: Contributions to an RRSP are tax-deductible, which can reduce your tax bill. 2. Tax-Free Growth: Your savings grow tax-free while the money is in the plan. 3. Retroactive: You can carry forward any unused contribution room to future years. The Multitasking Disaster Studies show that people are dreadful at multitasking; the same is true of government programs. Here is where the program went wrong. In 1992, the Home Buyer’s Plan (HBP) was made more flexible, which allowed first-time homebuyers to withdraw RRSP funds to buy a house. Then, in 1999, the Lifelong Learning Plan (LPP) was introduced, which permitted withdrawals to pay for education. The Home Buyers' Plan (HBP) was not introduced in 1957 alongside the Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) creation. Instead, the HBP was introduced in 1992 as a federal initiative to help Canadians buy their first homes by allowing them to withdraw funds from their RRSPs without tax penalties as long as they met specific conditions. Here's a timeline of crucial HBP withdrawal limits since its inception: Timeline of HBP and LLP Withdrawal Limits: 1992 - Introduction of the HBP • Maximum Withdrawal Limit: $20,000 per individual. • Purpose: To help first-time homebuyers purchase or build a home. 1999 – Introduction of Lifelong Learning Plan (LLP) • The annual withdrawal limit is $10,000 per individual • The lifetime withdrawal maximum is $20,000 per individual 2009 - First HBP increase • New Limit: $25,000 per individual. • The increase was introduced as part of federal budget changes to reflect rising housing costs. 2019 - Second HBP Increase • New Limit: $35,000 per individual. • Announced in the 2019 federal budget to support affordability for first-time homebuyers. 2019 -HBP Enhancement for Life Events • The HBP was expanded to allow individuals experiencing a marriage or common-law partnership breakdown to participate, even if they were not first-time homebuyers. 2024 - Recent increase • New Limit: $60,000 per individual. • The increase was introduced as part of federal budget changes to reflect rising costs. A Flawed Strategy The Home Buyers' Plan (HBP) and Lifelong Learning Plan (LLP) were introduced in Canada as tools to make housing and education more accessible. While well-intentioned, these programs effectively allow individuals to borrow from their future retirement savings—a strategy that can have significant negative consequences. Ask any high school economics student, and they will tell you that compromising two of the three main elements (principle and time) in investing growth will lead to a disappointing return. Here is the formula: principle X interest + time = compounded return. Are We Borrowing From the Future to Pay for Today? The Problem with the Home Buyers’ Plan (HBP): Addressing Housing Affordability at the Expense of Retirement The HBP permits individuals to withdraw up to $60,000 from their RRSP to buy a first home. In an environment of rising house prices, this measure may help buyers cobble together a down payment, but it drains retirement funds. The funds are unavailable to grow tax-free over decades, diminishing the compounding returns essential for retirement security. The Problem with the Lifelong Learning Plan (LLP): Financing Education by Sacrificing Retirement The LLP allows up to $20,000 in RRSP withdrawals to fund education, which can help individuals upskill. However, education often doesn’t yield immediate returns, and the withdrawn funds lose their growth potential, including the compounded returns. Why This Harms Future Retirees Issue #1: Loss of Compounding Growth Withdrawals disrupt the power of compounding, which is vital for retirement savings. For example, $35,000 left in an RRSP for 25 years at a 6% annual return could grow to over $150,000. If that same $35,000 were withdrawn 15 years ago and repaid over the same period as required by the HBP program, it would be worth $54,311, a loss of $95,689 Issue #2: Repayment Struggles While repayments are required, life’s expenses (mortgage, childcare, loans) often make it hard to repay on schedule. Failure to repay means the amount withdrawn is added to taxable income, further reducing the effectiveness of the programs. Issue #3: Insufficient Savings Most Canadians are already under-saving for retirement. Encouraging them to dip into their RRSPs exacerbates this shortfall. Two Different Problems. One Harmful Solution Housing Affordability Rising house prices are driven by supply-demand imbalances, speculation, and policy failures—not a lack of down payments. Increasing the HBP withdrawal limit does nothing to address the root causes of affordability, but it may drive prices higher by giving buyers more purchasing power. Retirement Security Retirement savings should be preserved and grown to ensure financial stability in later years. Programs like HBP and LLP blur the line between short-term needs and long-term planning. Why Would our Government Do This? Political Expediency Housing affordability and access to education are politically sensitive issues. Allowing individuals to tap into their RRSPs is a cost-neutral policy for the government (unlike direct subsidies or programs). Policies like these help politicians get elected or stay in office. And in proper political form, these policies only tell half the story. Vote for us because we will help you buy your first home, which is a great campaign strategy. Vote for us because we will make it look like we help you buy your first home when, in fact, we will set up a program that will allow you to borrow from yourself at the cost of your retirement, which is political suicide. Short-Sighted Economic Policies Policymakers may believe that homeowners and educated individuals are more financially secure, even if their retirement savings are compromised. The logic might be that owning a home or having better job prospects could mitigate future hardship. Assuming Home Equity is a Safety Net The government might assume that homeownership ensures financial stability in retirement. However, this overlooks that rising housing costs often mean seniors have high debt levels or are "house rich but cash poor." The Bigger Problem with the HBP and LLP Programs: No Warnings or Education Given to Canadians Neither the HBP nor the LLP adequately informs individuals of the long-term consequences of their decisions. To make matters worse, the participants of these programs will likely realize the impact once it is too late to take action. People considering retirement are often in their late 50s to early 60s, past their prime saving years. Borrowing from retirement accounts may seem like “borrowing from yourself,” but this lost growth can never be recouped. Many Canadians are not well enough informed to assess these trade-offs, leading to decisions that harm their financial future. In Case You’re Thinking, These Seniors Have Inadequate Savings - But at They At Least their Homes. The HBP and LLP programs may reflect a government view that seniors would be better off owning a home than relying solely on inadequate savings. But this is flawed for a number of reasons: A home is not a liquid asset—it cannot pay for groceries or healthcare. Also, Seniors with insufficient retirement savings often need help with financial distress despite owning property. They sometimes need reverse mortgages or sell their homes out of desperation. An Unfortunate Misguided Solution Rather than “quick fixes” that appear to solve immediate challenges while creating long-term problems, the Federal government should instead focus on longer-term, systemic solutions For housing: Governments need to curb speculative investments and provide targeted assistance for first-time buyers. Plus they need to focus on programs that increase housing supply, such as income tax incentives for homeowners to build accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These units could be rented out or used for caregivers. Or adopt a policy allowing first-time home buyers to not pay tax on their first $250,000 of income. First-time home buyers could use the tax savings as a down payment. For Education: Governments need to expand grant programs and low-interest loans to prevent reliance on retirement funds. This will not only help us increase the number of skilled workers to fill critical gaps in vital sectors such as technology, healthcare engineering and the trades. It will also contribute to a higher GDP and build a more sustainable tax base for future generations. Encouraging Canadians to steal from their future is not a sustainable strategy. Retirement savings should be viewed as sacred - not a piggy bank for solving unrelated issues. Don’t Retire … Re-Wire! Sue
Trump, Trade and Tariffs What to Expect, Will They Work and Who Benefits?
The threat of 25 % tariffs on Canada and Mexico had newsrooms buzzing, politicians scrambling and economists calculating who wins and who loses when trade wars break out among usually amicable neighbors. Factor in Greenland and China - and the story went global. It was a topic that headlined the news as many have watched and waited since the election for President Trump's first days in office to see what the country can expect with incoming policy changes. President Donald Trump said in an Oval Office signing ceremony Monday evening that his administration will impose 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada on February 1, an extraordinary change in North American trade policy that could raise prices for American consumers. Trump still outlined his broader trade policy for his second term in an executive action Monday. But that action — described by sources as a “placeholder” — doesn’t institute new global tariffs that Trump promised on Day One. As a candidate, Trump proposed sweeping and across-the-board tariffs: up to 20% on imports from all countries, with a 25% tax on goods from Mexico and Canada, plus a punishing 60% levy on goods from China. He also pledged to use tariffs as a negotiating tool on other countries, including, for example, Denmark — putting pressure on the European nation to give control of Greenland to the United States. Asked Monday at an Oval Office signing ceremony about tariffs on China, Trump noted extensive tariffs he imposed during his first administration were still in effect after former President Joe Biden largely left them in place. And on universal tariffs, Trump punted, saying, “We may, but we’re not ready for that just yet.” The executive action signed Monday directed the secretaries of Commerce and Treasury and the United States Trade Representative to investigate the causes of America’s trade deficits with foreign nations, to determine how to build an “External Revenue Service” to collect tariffs, to identify unfair trade practices and to review existing trade agreements for potential improvements. It also directs the government agencies to analyze how the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (the USMCA) signed by Trump in his first term is affecting American workers and businesses — and whether America should remain in the free trade agreement. January 21 - CNN As business and political leaders in many countries, especially North America wait for what's ahead, there are questions to be asked: What industries will be targeted? Will tariffs cause higher prices for consumers and increased inflation? Who wins if an all-out trade war happens? How will interwoven sectors like the auto industry and agriculture be impacted? If you're a journalist covering this ongoing story - then let us help. William J. Luther, Ph.D., is an associate professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, director of the American Institute for Economic Research’s Sound Money Project, and an adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives William is available to speak with media. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
What the 2025 Tax Season May Look Like According to the IRS
The 2025 tax filing season will begin on Jan. 27. The Internal Revenue Service warns it may not be functioning as adequately due to the Republican-controlled congress rescinding IRS designated funding, causing cuts in staffing and potential technological updates to become stagnant. During the Biden administration the IRS was granted extra funding as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, passed exclusively with Democratic votes. The Trump administration has introduced a new scanning technology allowing tax returns to be filed quicker, upon the cut in previous IRS funding. This online filing system will allow taxpayers to file electronically with IRS for free, cutting out any unnecessary third party. There are concerns that the cut in funding may cause Trump's IRS updates to delay. How will the cut in IRS funding affect the 2025 tax season? Economics expert, Dr. Jared Pincin weighs in on the discussion of how fund distribution will look under Trump administration in recent interview. Trump administration has cut funding for IRS from $80 Billion to $60 Billion through 2031. During his campaign for presidency Trump promised a reallocation for funding and distribution. How will we see Trump's policies redistribute funding? Trump's new system, Direct File, is available in 24 states with hopes to make the 2025 tax season smoother than ever. Concerns arise that Trump's cut in funding to reallocate elsewhere may make his system to be come stagnant, causing delays and longer wait times for tax payers. Will Trump's new tax filing system make the 2025 tax season smoother or another nightmare? President-elect Trump promised stricter tariffs on manufacturing industries and more aggressive industrial policies. Rescinding IRS funding is just the beginning of Trump's reallocation of funding. How will we see the change in funding affects businesses? If you are covering the the U.S. economy during the Trump administration and need to know more, let us help with your questions and stories. Dr. Jared Pincin is an expert on economics and is available to speak to media regarding the Trump administration and the economy – simply click on his icon or email mweinstein@cedarville.edu to arrange an interview.
Drops in the Bank of Canada rate will not solve housing affordability.
Summary: The Bank of Canada’s interest rate cuts won’t resolve Canada’s housing affordability crisis. Factors such as skyrocketing home prices, unaffordable down payments, and stagnant wage growth are other primary challenges to address. A personal example offered by the author shows how the price of her Toronto home surged over 1,000% from 1983 and 2024 while her wages during the same period rose only 142%. While some see this issue as a consequence of Baby Boomers remaining in their homes, it's more nuanced than that. We have systemic barriers in Canada that necessitate targeted policy changes. It’s time to tackle affordability and implement effective solutions. The Bank of Canada met today, to determine interest rates for the last time this year. They announced a drop of .50 basis points. This is part of a broader effort to stimulate economic growth in Canada, which faces challenges, especially a softening labor market and persistent inflation. Why Should You Care? Interest rates determine how affordable our debt will be and what return we can expect on our savings. Since mortgages represent most consumer debt, interest rates directly impact affordable housing costs, making them very newsworthy. However, interest rates only tell part of the story. When the Bank of Canada lowers its rate, it primarily impacts variable-rate mortgages. These are tied directly to the BoC's overnight rate, so a rate cut can reduce the interest costs on these loans. Homeowners with variable rates would likely see a reduction in their payments, with more of their payments going toward principal rather than interest. People without debt and savings (primarily seniors) will see a drop in their investment returns. In contrast, fixed-rate mortgages, which are not directly tied to the BoC's rate, are influenced more by the bond market, particularly the 5-year government bond yield. The current trend in bond yields suggests that fixed mortgage rates could also decrease over time. Let’s pause here and talk about the affordability of houses and how interest rates are not the reason housing is out of reach for most first-time buyers. A walk down memory lane might offer some perspective. I purchased my first home in the fall of 1983 for $63,500 (insert head shake). I was 27 years old, and before you do the math, yes, I am a Baby Boomer. My first serious (so I thought) live-together relationship had just ended, and I was looking for a place to live. I had finished school and had a good full-time job with Bell Canada. A rental would have been preferred, except I had a dog. Someone suggested that I buy a home. I did not know very much about purchasing real estate or homeownership, for that matter. But I was young and willing to learn. I had been working full-time for two and a half years. During my orientation at Bell Canada, my supervisor told me to sign up for their stock option program. She said I would never miss the money or regret signing up for the plan. She was right. When I purchased my home, there was enough money in my stock account for a down payment and closing costs. My interest rate was a terrifying 12.75%, yielding a mortgage payment of just under $670 monthly. The lender deemed this affordable based on my $18,000 annual wage. Life was good. This was in 1983, when the minimum down payment for a home purchase in Canada was typically 10% for most buyers. However, a lower down payment could be possible with mortgage insurance (provided by organizations like Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation (CMHC), which allowed buyers to put down as little as 5%, provided they qualified for insurance. This was commonly available for homes under $150,000, with stricter terms for higher-priced homes. If you had a higher down payment of 25% or more, mortgage insurance wasn't required, and you could avoid extra costs associated with insured mortgages. This was part of broader efforts by the government to make homeownership more accessible, especially amid the high interest rates of the time. So let's do the math. Circa 1983 I first needed to prove that I had saved $3,175 in down payments and $953 in closing costs for $4128. In the 2.5 years I worked at Bell Canada, I saved $4,050 (including Bell Canada’s contribution) in stocks. I also had another $5,000 in my savings account. $9,000 was enough to complete the transaction and leave me with a healthy safety net. Fast forward to 2024 Let’s compare what the same transaction would look like today. Using the annual housing increase cited on the CREA website, the same house would be valued at approximately $700,000 today. Interest rates are much lower today, at 4.24%, yielding a mortgage payment of $3,545. 1. The down payment rules have changed. For the first $500,000, The minimum down payment is 5%. 5% X 500,000=25,0005\% \times 500,000 = 25,0005% X 500,000 = $25,000 2. The minimum down payment for the portion above $500,000 is 10%. 10% X (700,000−500,000) = 20,00010\% \times (700,000 - 500,000) = 20,00010% X (700,000−500,000) = $20,000 3. Total minimum down payment: 25,000+20,000 =4 5,00025,000 + 20,000 = 45,00025,000+20,000 = $45,000 Thus, the minimum down payment for a $700,000 home is $45,000. Here is the comparison: 1983 Scenario 2024 Scenario Variance Purchase Price: $63,500 $700,000 up 1002% Down Payment: $3,175 $45,000 up 1317% Loan Amount: $60,325 $655,000 up 986% Interest Rate: 12.75% 4.24% down 200% Monthly Mortgage Payment: $670 $3,545 up 429% Wage: $18,000 $43,500 up 142% Gross Debt Service Ratio: 44.6% 97.8% up 119% Time to Save for Down payment: 2 years 12.4 years up 520% *Please note that this example does not include mortgage insurance The real problem As you can see, housing was much more affordable for me in 1983 and far from cheap in 2024. During the past 41 years, wages have increased by 142%, yet interest rates have dropped by 200%. But the most significant impact on affordability has been the over 1,000% increase in housing prices. So why is all the focus on interest rates? At the risk of oversimplifying a complicated issue, I believe the media often uses interest rates as a "shiny penny" to capture attention, diverting focus from deeper housing affordability issues. This keeps the spotlight on inflation and monetary policy, aligning with economic agendas while ignoring systemic problems like down payment barriers and the shortage of affordable homes. Indeed, a movement in interest rates often has an immediate and noticeable impact on borrowers' affordability, making it a hot topic for news and policymakers. However, the frequency and consistency of the Bank of Canada meetings on interest rates give the impression that rates are the primary issue, even though they are just one part of a complex system. For example, even if the Bank of Canada dropped interest rates below zero, it would do little to solve today’s homeownership affordability issue. The real problems: 1. Down Payment Challenges: With housing prices skyrocketing, the 5%- 20% down payment required has become insurmountable for many, particularly younger buyers. High rents, stagnant wage growth relative to home prices, and rising living costs make saving nearly impossible. 2. Lack of Affordable Starter Homes: Due to profitability and zoning restrictions, housing developments often prioritize larger, higher-margin homes or luxury condos over affordable single-family starter homes. 3. Misplaced Generational Blame: Blaming Baby Boomers for "holding onto homes" oversimplifies the issue. They are staying put due to limited downsizing options, emotional attachments, or the need for housing stability in retirement, not a desire to thwart younger generations. 4. Political Challenges: Addressing structural issues like zoning reform or incentivizing affordable housing construction requires political will and collaboration, which can be slow and contentious. A broader lens is needed to understand and address the actual barriers to home ownership. Interest drops are merely a band-aid solution that misses the central issue of saving a down payment. The suggestion that we have an intergenerational issue needs to be revised. The fact that Baby Boomers are holding on to their homes should not surprise anyone. However, Real Estate models that predicted copious numbers of Baby Boomers selling their homes to downsize got it wrong. Downsizing was a concept conceived in the 1980s. Unfortunately, it did not account for record-setting home price increases or inflation, leaving it undesirable for today’s seniors. Although this is a complex issue, a few suggested solutions are worth exploring. What can be done? Focus on Policy Innovations: To create housing, increase supply, curb speculative investments, and provide targeted assistance for builders to build modest starter homes. To create rentals, homeowners should also receive income tax incentives to build Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). These could be used as affordable rentals or to house caregivers for senior homeowners. Today, The federal government announced a doubling of its Secondary Suite Loan Program, initially unveiled in the April 2024 budget. This is a massive step in the right direction. To create down payments, adopt a policy allowing first-time home buyers to avoid paying tax on their first $250,000 of income. Then, they could use the tax savings as a down payment. Focus on Education and Advocacy: Include a warning that helps consumers understand that withdrawing from RSPs results in a significant loss of compound interest related to withdrawals and how this can harm income during retirement. Encourage early inheritance to create gifted down payments. Normalize the concept by emphasizing the benefits to the giver and the receiver. Educate the public on using financial equity safely and create down payments as an early inheritance for their heirs. This will shift the conversation and initiate an intergenerational transfer of wealth that empowers the next generation to own a home. The Bottom Line While the Bank of Canada interest rate cut may ease some financial strain for homeowners with variable-rate mortgages, it will do little to address the core issue of housing affordability. The media's fixation on interest rates as a "shiny penny" distracts from more profound systemic barriers, such as the inability to save for a down payment and the lack of affordable housing stock. These challenges require targeted policies, structural reforms, and intergenerational collaboration to be tackled effectively. The focus must shift from short-term rate adjustments to long-term solutions that prioritize accessibility and affordability in housing. Without meaningful action, homeownership will remain out of reach for many, perpetuating the cycle of financial inequity across generations. Dont't Retire... Re-Wire! Sue
As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office in January, many business owners are preparing for his proposed economic plan to install tariffs on all imported goods. He has also spoken of a plan to add additional tariffs on imports from countries such as China. There is concern that imposing such tariffs would raise the cost of everyday goods in the United States. Looking forward, what are the potential risks and benefits of Trump's tariff plan? Economics expert, Dr. Jared Pincin, recently weighed in on this discussion. Here are three key details from his latest interview: A tariff is a tax on imports. Trump has stated that on his first day in office, he will put a 25% tax on all products coming in from Canada and Mexico. Will this effectively raise revenue without impacting consumers? If these tariffs are actually put into place, Pincin states that they do have the potential to put upward pressure on prices. How would this affect not only consumers, but also business owners? And what can business owners do to prepare for this possibility? Trump has proposed that tariffs will deter the flow of illegal drugs into the United States, with tariffs putting pressure on countries like Mexico and China. What is the chance that these countries react with their own retaliatory tariffs? If you are covering the the U.S. economy during the Trump administration and need to know more, let us help with your questions and stories. Dr. Jared Pincin is an expert on economics and is available to speak to media regarding the Trump administration and the economy – simply click on his icon or email mweinstein@cedarville.edu to arrange an interview.
The Great Trillion Dollar Wealth Transfer
Summary: Between now and 2026, over $1 Trillion of wealth will move from Canadian Baby Boomers to younger generations. Dubbed the “Great Wealth Transfer,” this change is underscored by a cultural shift toward “giving while living,” where seniors are motivated to share their wealth during their lifetimes, driven by factors including personal satisfaction, rising costs for younger generations, and tax efficiency. These shifts in wealth highlight the importance of open, informed Intergenerational conversations and the need for trusted financial advice to manage this transfer effectively. However, it risks widening wealth gaps between the haves and have-nots. Better financial literacy, tax planning, and a better understanding of real estate’s role in estate planning and wealth management are essential for ensuring equity and sustainable financial legacies. What it Means • The Largest Transfer of Wealth Is Happening Now: Between now and 2026, over $1 Trillion of wealth will move across multiple generations from Canadian Baby Boomers to their GenX and Millennial heirs. • A Culture Shift is Happening: Older Canadians are now, more than ever, “giving while living.” They actively want to share their wealth with younger family members while still healthy. In many families going forward, you won't hear that familiar phrase, "Hey Gram, Stop Spending My Inheritance!" • We aren't fully prepared for this shift: Families need informed, intergenerational conversations among themselves and with trusted financial advisors. They also need to better understand how some of their more significant assets, such as real estate, can provide tax-efficient ways to unlock and share wealth with younger family members. Boomers are sharing their wealth while they still have their health. Many Canadians have joined the growing trend of “giving while living.” This trend is not only changing societal norms but is also spreading like wildfire. The current economic climate, with out-of-reach housing prices coupled with Boomers wanting to witness the impact of their financial gifts, makes for a perfect storm. This storm, valued at 1 trillion dollars, could rebalance the distribution of wealth for many fortunate beneficiaries. Let’s explore what is motivating the Baby Boom generation in Canada to leave a living inheritance to a younger generation: 1. Psychological Reasons: Many seniors want to help their children or grandchildren with significant expenses such as education or home purchases. This provides a gratifying sense of pride. The logic is that they (children or grandchildren) will eventually get their money, so why not give it to them now when they need it the most? 2. Economic Reasons: Some parents or grandparents feel compelled to step in and help financially as they see their adult children and grandkids struggling. It may be to help fund education or to pay off debt such as a student loan. The burden of debt often delays other decisions, such as having children, traveling, or saving for a down payment on a first home or a bigger home to accommodate a larger family. And the price of homes today is well beyond the means of the younger generation, even without student debt. 3. Personal Reasons: Older Canadians often find joy in seeing their financial contributions positively impact their loved ones during their lifetime. Sometimes, there are some less conspicuous motivators as well. Improving their children’s financial situation may entice them to have precious grandchildren, or providing financial assistance could allow the gift giver to have a say on how the money is spent—something they would have less control over if they were deceased. 4. Tax Savings: Distributing wealth while alive can reduce the size of an estate and minimize probate fees. And with the popularity of RESP's and TFSA's there are options to gift or contribute to these plans that may offer tax advantages. And some seniors aim to avoid conflicts by distributing assets directly, ensuring clarity and fairness. 5. Cultural Reasons: Traditional notions of inheritance and family values are evolving. Many Baby Boomers see their wealth as a tool to uplift and empower their families while they are alive and are able to counsel their families on preserving and spending the money wisely. This is an opportunity for seniors to create a legacy while alive. Sharing wealth can bring a sense of purpose, gratitude, and connection. For many, it’s an opportunity to strengthen family bonds and pass on values like generosity, financial literacy, and responsibility. Impact • A Wider Wealth Gap: This transfer of wealth could have a significant impact by increasing the income disparities between the haves and have-nots. According to figures from the Canadian Professional Accountants Association, at the end of 2022, the wealthiest families in Canada (the top 20 percent) accounted for two-thirds of the country’s net worth, while the bottom 40 percent accounted for just 2.6 percent. In this latest economic cycle of soaring inflation and growing credit card debt, the net worth of Canada’s least wealthy households is suffering. And while we’ve seen recent increases in capital gains taxes, more changes from the federal government will likely be required to bridge this wealth divide. • The Need for Honest Intergenerational Conversations. Let’s face it: having a transparent conversation with family members about death and money is awkward. But post-pandemic, we’re seeing more seniors looking closely at their financial and estate plans to see what they can do to pass on wealth to deserving and often younger family members. Getting to know the impact of one’s gifts has its practical advantages in addition to the karma generated. Whether it’s to help a family member buy their first home, pay down college debt or start a business, these gestures can be transformative for other family members and very satisfying for seniors. As the saying goes, "you can’t take it with you." • The Need for Trusted Advisors. For many of these younger beneficiaries lucky to receive this generational transfer, having a clear financial plan that extends to informed tax strategies will be vital. The entire community, from financial planners to accountants, lawyers and mortgage brokers, have a lot of work ahead of them, according to the research. A recent Ipsos Reid study suggests Canadians are primarily unprepared to manage their inherited money. The Ipsos poll (conducted on behalf of RBC Insurance) reveals that 61 percent of Canadians don’t feel knowledgeable about (or haven’t even heard of) the probate process or the process to establish the validity of a will, and 57 percent don’t know that specific insurance policies can mitigate estate tax burden. • Improved Financial Literary for All Ages. Conversations about money also need to extend to better discussions about how significant assets such as real estate holdings contribute to wealth. For instance, given a considerable proportion of many family estates are related to real estate and more seniors are looking to “Age in Place” at home, seniors and their adult children must understand various financial strategies, such as equity lending, that can give seniors the financial freedom to age in place while giving them the cashflow to help younger family members while reducing potential tax burdens. Getting to know the impact of one’s gifts has its practical advantages in addition to the karma generated. Whether it’s to help a family member buy their first home, pay down college debt or start a business, these gestures can be transformative for other family members and very satisfying for seniors. As the saying goes, "you can’t take it with you." The Bottom Line One thing is certain. This is an infrequent event, which, over the next few years, will benefit many. Much is on the line for families, the financial industry, and our government. We should expect to see more discussions on tax reform and addressing wealth disparities to ensure social stability and economic growth. And it will require the financial industry to adapt in a number of ways. For instance, how should we account for these demographic shifts and potentially longer lifespans in our guidelines and how we work with clients? I also hope we see more open and honest discussions about family legacy and financial literacy/education, which play a significant role in preparing the next generation to handle inherited wealth responsibly. As I continue research for my upcoming book, I'm looking closer at demographic trends, gaps in financial literacy, to how our industry needs to work better with Seniors in a way that recognizes these emerging cultural and economic shifts. I'd like to know what you think. Drop me a line in the comments, or reach out to me directly at our new website - www.retirewithequity.ca Don't Retire...Re-Wire! Sue
Does Donald Trump Like Seniors?
At 78, Donald J. Trump already has 13 years of experience as a senior citizen. During his previous presidency, he occasionally referenced his senior status, particularly when discussing issues affecting older Americans. For example, in the 2020 election campaign, he acknowledged his age and addressed fellow seniors directly in his messaging, sometimes referring to himself as part of the senior community. Looking at his record, Trump appears to have a complex relationship with seniors. While expressing support for essential programs such as Social Security and Medicare, he often weaves the needs of seniors into his rhetoric. Yet some of his policy decisions have created mixed feelings among older Americans and advocacy groups. While pledging to protect these programs, he’s considered budget-cut proposals to reduce the funding of both these programs. Plus, his administration attempted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. While even the smartest of experts have learned it’s difficult to predict what Donald Trump will do on key policy decisions, there are some clues as to how his move back into the Oval Office will impact Canada and, more specifically, seniors. This topic got me wondering. Does Trump (a senior himself), like seniors? Let’s look closer at this demographic. Everyone knows that older people are the most reliable voters. The stats are compelling. According to Elections Canada - 75% of Canadians aged 65-74 voted compared to 48% of those aged 18-24. - The statistics for our US neighbours are similar, with 70% of Americans aged 65+ voting and 50% of Americans aged 18-29 voting. Knowing this voting power of the senior demographic, did Trump pander to this voting cohort? Yes, he most certainly did. He knew that as people age, their concerns narrow to a smaller list of critical topics such as Financial Security, Health, and Safety. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump focused heavily on appealing to older voters, who historically make up a significant portion of the electorate and are more likely to vote. His campaign emphasized economic stability, protecting Social Security and Medicare, and national security—particularly relevant to older demographics. Let’s take a closer look at how the Trump administration could impact Canada's senior demographic in the following areas: Inflation Background: Inflation has a direct correlation to the cost of living. As the prices of goods and services rise over time, the purchasing power of money decreases – a challenge for many seniors. Critical expenses like housing, healthcare, food, and utilities could increase noticeably, putting pressure on limited retirement incomes and pensions. All this is stressful. According to a 2024 national survey of over 2,000 Canadians (conducted by Leger on behalf of FP Canada), money remains the top stressor for Canadians, with 44 percent citing money as their primary concern; That's up from 40 percent in 2023 and 38 percent in both 2022 and 2021. What This Means: Two of Trump’s biggest promises in his campaign (mass deportation of undocumented immigrants and more restrictive trade regulations) would have a "significant impact," according to an article by Ellen Cushing in the Atlantic. A domestic labour shortage plus double-digit import taxes would raise food prices on both sides of the border. Cushing goes on to say that “deporting undocumented immigrants would reduce the number of workers who pick crops by 40-50%.” While this rhetoric may have played well during the campaign, you can't fake the simple math here. Fewer workers means higher wages. That means higher prices. And the senior demographic will be hit hard because of their fixed incomes. Many will eat less of the expensive grocery store items like fresh meat, fruits and vegetables to make ends meet. Food prices will inevitably climb with these policies. The only question is when. According to a new poll conducted for CIBC and Financial Planning Canada on November 27, 2023, approximately 75% of working Canadians still need a formal financial plan for retirement. And many retirees face economic difficulties. A whopping 25% are still carrying debt into retirement. Many also report they have a substantial portion of debt and report that their retirement lifestyle isn't as comfortable as expected. The impact of inflation could be dire with few solutions; it is different for these older Canadians because they cannot re-enter the workforce. The only saving grace is that many of the hardest-hit Canadians are homeowners with equity options. Interest Rates Prediction: According to Beata Caranci, SVP & Chief Economist of TD Bank, the US is likely to raise interest rates to control growth. Canada is also expected to increase its rates, mainly to keep the Canadian dollar stable against the U.S. dollar. The Bank of Canada could be forced to rescind the projected planned interest rate reductions or at least reduce them. However, it's a delicate balancing act. Our economy could suffer if we don’t mirror the US increases in interest rates. Impact: Increasing Canadian interest rates will impact seniors by increasing mortgage carrying costs. At the same time, older Canadians with investment savings could see increased returns on these savings. A rise in interest rates would also impact housing prices and foreign exchange rates. House Prices Background: Economic, demographic, and policy-related factors influence home prices in Canada. The new Trump administration will undoubtedly impact these factors. To understand this area, let's examine some significant variables affecting housing costs. 1. Supply and Demand When housing supply is limited, and demand is high, prices rise. Conversely, when supply exceeds demand, prices stagnate or fall. Should the new administration adopt more restrictive immigration policies in the US, Canada might see an increased influx of skilled workers and families seeking an alternative place to live. Housing demand will likely increase in major Canadian cities—Toronto, Vancouver, and Calgary- resulting in price increases. 2. Population Growth An increase in population or immigration boosts housing demand, particularly in urban centers, consequently increasing home prices. Canada welcomed 485,000 immigrants in 2024, many of whom settled in cities like Toronto and Vancouver. This influx has driven up demand for housing, contributing to price increases. The Canadian government has recently reduced the number of immigrants we allow into our country, dropping the number from 500,000 to 395,000 in 2025. Current immigration numbers plus any overflow from the US should keep demand buoyant and we could see home prices continue to rise. However, Canada needs more housing, especially in high-demand urban areas. In addition to immigration, slow construction timelines and zoning restrictions are contributing factors. Canada's ongoing housing shortage and the potential impacts of Donald Trump's election win in the U.S. could exert upward pressure on home prices, particularly in major cities like Toronto and Vancouver. These cities, already grappling with limited housing and high prices, will likely see further price increases due to increased demand. Without robust policy interventions to increase the housing supply, Canada’s housing prices, particularly in major centers, will likely continue rising. And there will be winners and losers here. This is great news for seniors wishing to sell and exit the market by finding other living arrangements, such as renting, moving in with family, or entering retirement homes. It is even better news for seniors wishing to age in place as they will have more equity to fund their retirement. But it’s disappointing news for those wishing to downsize and stay in the same communities. They may be able to sell high, but they could also be forced to buy high. 3. Foreign Currency Trump's policies, such as tax cuts and protectionist trade measures, have historically strengthened the U.S. dollar. If similar policies are reintroduced, the U.S. dollar could become more robust due to increased investor confidence and perceived economic growth in the U.S. That’s bad for Canadians traveling or living in the U.S. Trump's potential trade disputes, particularly with China, and his aggressive geopolitical stance could also create uncertainty in global markets. While this might temporarily strengthen the U.S. dollar as a haven, long-term concerns about trade wars and deficits could cause fluctuations, impacting the Canadian dollar's stability against the U.S. dollar. This volatility directly impacts Canadians, especially those with significant financial exposure to the U.S. dollar. A second Trump presidency will likely impact the exchange rate between Canadian and U.S. dollars, which is especially relevant for 85% of Canadian Snowbirds, who, according to Snowbird Advisor, spend winters in the United States. This number was estimated to be 900,000 in 2023. These seniors may face increased expenses for property taxes, utilities, and other daily living costs in the U.S. If exchange rate volatility persists, locking in more favourable rates or using specialized currency exchange services, US credit/debit cards with lower transaction fees, and using US dollar accounts might be wise - especially for more significant financial transactions. The Bottom Line One thing is certain. Trump's second term has the potential to impact many Canadian seniors if he implements the policies he discussed during his election campaign. While some could benefit financially from higher home equity and investment returns, many may need help with increased living costs, especially food and foreign exchange challenges, particularly Snowbirds and those on fixed incomes. While we are all watching this situation unfold, one thing is sure. It's difficult to predict if Trump’s second term will make Canadian or US seniors "great again."