Drops in the Bank of Canada rate will not solve housing affordability.

Spoiler Alert: The problem isn't just about interest rates

Dec 11, 2024

7 min

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

Find Experts

Oct 21, 2026

4 min

Why the retirement plan that worked for your parents is failing millions of Canadians

Last month, I found a jar of mustard at the back of my fridge with a best-before date of 2019. It looked and smelled fine. My wife watched me unscrew the lid like I was about to eat gas-station sushi, and I threw the mustard away. I wish Canadians gave their retirement plans the same hard look, because most of the advice we hand people over 55 carries a best-before date of 1990, the year my parents' retirement began. They met at the grocery chain where they both worked, and each left with a defined-benefit pension: a monthly cheque that arrived for the rest of their lives, regardless of what the stock market did. Their employer bore the investment risk. Their job was to show up at the retirement party and eat the cake. That plan stood on three legs: a workplace pension, CPP and Old Age Security, and a paid-off house you would eventually sell to trade down. In 1991, a 65-year-old Canadian man could expect to live about 16 more years and a woman about 20. A plan built for that stretch did its job. Look at those legs today. Only 37.7 per cent of paid workers in Canada belonged to a workplace pension plan of any kind in 2023, according to Statistics Canada, and coverage has been declining for two decades. For most people, the cheque that used to arrive like the newspaper has been replaced by a statement that reads like a horoscope. CPP and OAS were never meant to carry anyone alone. That leaves the house. A 2023 CPP Investments survey found that only 45 per cent of Canadians have a financial plan for retirement, yet about three in four Canadians aged 55 to 74 own their homes. For millions of families, the house was the plan: buy it, pay it off, and burn the mortgage papers in a roasting pan. The old playbook still has one instruction for that asset, unchanged since 1990: sell, move, and hope the condo is cheaper. Most like to stay in their neighbourhood. In Toronto, they usually can't afford to. The calendar changed, too. My parents' plan was built for that 15-to-20-year stretch. Today, Canadian financial planning standards give a 65-year-old couple an even chance of one living to 94, a retirement closer to 30 years. That is about 10 extra years of groceries, property tax and dental work, and nobody gave the plan a raise to cover them. Larry Fink, who runs BlackRock, put his finger on it in his 2024 letter to investors: we have worked hard to help people live longer and much less hard to help them afford those extra years. Those years arrived just as the guaranteed pension cheque was disappearing, a change Fink called "a shift from financial certainty to financial uncertainty." When the man in charge of the world's largest pile of other people's money says so, I'd put down the mustard. Our system does a fine job of helping people pile up money, then goes quiet the moment they need that pile to become a paycheque. We hand people a savings target, a risk questionnaire and an RRSP deadline. On their last day of work, we hand them a bouquet. How much do you withdraw? Which account first? What happens to your OAS when your RRIF minimum pushes you past the clawback threshold? Where does the house fit? The old plan shrugs. The strain shows. Statistics Canada reports that among Canadians aged 65 to 74 who worked in 2022, almost half did so out of necessity. After a late-life divorce, my mother returned to part-time work at a grocery store. She had done everything the old plan asked of her. The usual reply is that people just need to save more. Telling a 72-year-old to save more is like telling a marathoner at kilometre 40 to train harder. An up-to-date plan opens with the question that matters at 65: how will this money cover the bills for 30 years? Home equity goes on the balance sheet at the first meeting, pulled from the drawer marked "emergencies and inheritance." Ninety-one per cent of Canadians say they want to live independently in their own homes for as long as possible, so a good plan offers ways to do that beyond a For Sale sign. And the industry that spent 40 years teaching people to save owes them the same energy in how to spend it. I have a modest proposal for the banks. Every February, you run RRSP season, complete with sailboat commercials. Give us an RRIF season to match, with the same budget, and put a drawdown plan in front of every client who turns 65. And while you are at it, switch the word "savings" to "spending" or "paycheque" on our bank account. Take your retirement plan out of the back of the fridge and check the date on the lid. If it says 1990, you know where it goes. My wife will be happy to show you the garbage. This Opinion Article was published in the Business Section of the Saturday Star and online Toronto Star on October 17, 2026,

Oct 14, 2026

8 min

When Two Retirements Collide

All this talk lately about Trump and Carney squaring off has made me reflect on matters closer to home. My living room has never quite reached the level of a televised leaders’ debate, but retirement has a way of turning minor domestic disagreements into full parliamentary sessions. And unlike politicians, you can’t call a recess and fly to Florida. For years, we’ve been sold a lovely picture of retirement. The alarm clock disappears. The kids have finally stopped treating your house like a storage locker. There are leisurely breakfasts, travel, golf, grandchildren, and coffee on the patio on a Tuesday morning simply because you can. And there is your spouse. Every. Single. Day. For many couples, this is wonderful. Even in the happiest relationships, though, somewhere around the third consecutive Tuesday morning together, a thought may quietly surface: Have you always chewed like that? We spend years trying to figure out whether we have enough money to retire. We calculate pensions, RRSPs, CPP, home equity, and how long our savings might last. We consult financial planners and make budgets. Some of us even build colour-coded spreadsheets, which I think is taking things a little far (just saying). Far fewer couples spend time figuring out how they will retire together, and that’s a different calculation altogether. Two Retirement Plans before One During our working years, most couples have something that retirement quietly removes: separation. You go to work. I go to work. You have your colleagues, routines, frustrations, and responsibilities, and I have mine. We leave each other in the morning, collect a day’s worth of stories, and come home with something to talk about. Retirement can fold two fairly independent lives into the same house and the same calendar, usually by the first Monday. Research backs this up. A German study of 2,117 couples, drawing on more than 30 years of national survey data, found that on average both partners grew more satisfied with life around retirement. The changes were also highly correlated within couples, so when one partner’s satisfaction slipped, the other’s tended to slip right along with it (Weber et al., 2021). Your retirement becomes my retirement, whether I applied for the position or not. Then come the expectations. One person has been dreaming of travelling for 20 years. The other would happily never set foot in an airport again. One wants to move, and one wants to stay. One wants to golf four days a week. The other thought retirement meant finally doing things together. One wants to help the kids financially. The other believes the kids are 43 and it may be time they gave adulthood a whirl. Even the timing can cause friction. One of you retires in June, the other has three years left before the pension kicks in, and suddenly someone is home all day reorganizing the spice drawer. Research on how couples make retirement decisions suggests that the way the call gets made, and whether both people feel they had a say, shapes how satisfied they are with retirement afterward (Szinovacz & Davey, 2005). The relationship you bring into retirement also comes along for the ride. Old patterns of closeness and conflict travel with you like carry-on luggage, and retirement simply changes the scenery around them (Davey & Szinovacz, 2004). That makes me wonder whether every couple needs two retirement plans before they have one. What does your retirement look like? What does mine look like? Where do they overlap? Those questions may matter more than whether we can afford the Viking cruise. And Then There’s Money Of course there is. Money has always had an extraordinary ability to walk into a perfectly pleasant conversation and leave with a baseball bat. In retirement it gets even more emotionally charged, because our financial psychology shifts. During our working years, another paycheque is always coming. In retirement, many of us start drawing down assets we spent decades building, which can feel completely sensible to one spouse and mildly terrifying to the other. This is where FORO, Fear of Running Out, can pull up a chair at breakfast. One partner sees $800,000 as security. The other sees the same $800,000 as a number that can only get smaller. Suddenly a $12,000 trip to Italy is carrying a lot of luggage: safety, control, mortality, and whether 93-year-old you might someday need that money. Then health can change the equation again. A spouse gets sick. Mobility changes. One person becomes a caregiver, and independence starts to slip away. Retirement plans that once looked beautifully aligned suddenly don’t, and that is a lot of change for any relationship to absorb. Apparently, Fighting Isn’t Necessarily Bad Three very different thinkers have helped me rethink the whole subject: an ancient Chinese general, a modern conflict facilitator, and a psychologist with a lab full of arguing couples. Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is about military strategy, yet one of its most enduring ideas travels surprisingly well into marriage: understand the situation, understand the other person, and don’t waste resources on battles that don’t need to be fought. Priya Parker comes at conflict from almost the opposite direction in her new book, The Art of Fighting (2026). Her work explores how conflict can strengthen relationships when people engage with it well. She calls this idea “healthy heat.” Some difficult conversations need enough heat to burn through to what actually matters. Then there is psychologist John Gottman, who studied couples over time and found something I love: happy couples don’t all fight the same way (Gottman, 1993). His research identified three stable types. Validators calmly talk their disagreements through. Avoiders would much prefer to change the subject. Volatile couples argue loudly and passionately and keep their marriages intact anyway. The couples headed for trouble were the hostile ones, along with the ones who had quietly checked out. So you and I don’t have to argue like the nice couple down the street. They look exhausted and bored, to be frank. What seems to matter is whether we can disagree and still hold on to respect, affection, and the sense that we are on the same side. That calls for something to sit beside the retirement financial plan. The Retirement Rules of Engagement 1. Figure out what you’re really fighting about. Before digging in your heels, ask why this matters so much to each of you. The argument about selling the house may really be about losing independence. A fight over spending can be tangled up with FORO. Too much golf might be about purpose for one person and loneliness for the other. And the argument about money may have very little to do with the actual numbers. Once the real issue is on the table, at least you’re having the right argument. 2. Choose your battles. Sun Tzu would make an excellent retirement consultant. Some things matter enormously, and others really don’t. If your spouse has loaded the dishwasher incorrectly for 37 years and everyone is still alive, victory may no longer be strategically important. 3. Keep the heat healthy. Disagreement has a place in a strong relationship. Parker’s idea of healthy heat gives us permission to have uncomfortable conversations without treating the discomfort as proof that the relationship is in trouble. Say the difficult thing. Ask the awkward question. Then stay curious about the answer. 4. Remember who is sitting across from you. This is the person you chose to build a life with. Opposing counsel bills by the hour. Gottman’s research is especially useful here, because hostility and emotional disengagement are the real warning signs. Anger passes. Contempt has a nasty habit of moving into the spare room. 5. Build some mine, yours, and ours. Two people don’t need to become one organism to have a good retirement. Separate interests, friendships, and activities give each partner purpose and independence, plus fresh material for dinner conversation. Then build the shared things on purpose too: travel, grandchildren, exercise, volunteering, cottage time, date nights, or whatever makes retirement feel like ours. A little absence can still make the heart grow fonder. 6. Know when you’re stuck. If you keep having the same argument, if conversations regularly turn hostile or contemptuous, or if one of you has simply stopped engaging, outside help may be worth it. A couples therapist can untangle relationship patterns. A financial planner can put real numbers around money fears. A retirement coach can help when identity and purpose are causing friction. Sometimes the most useful person at the kitchen table is the third one. What About Grey Divorce? Grey divorce is worth a few minutes here, because ending a marriage later in life is especially hard to recover from financially, and it ripples through the whole family, right down to the grandchildren who now spend Christmas in two places. The Canadian story, however, is less dramatic than the headlines suggest, partly because so many of those headlines are American. In the United States, adults 50 and older made up 8% of all divorces in 1990 and nearly 40% in the latest figures, and their divorce rate doubled between 1990 and 2010 before levelling off (Westrick-Payne & Brown, 2024). Canada never had that boom. Statistics Canada reports that the divorce rate among Canadians aged 50 and older rose 26% between 1991 and 2006, from 4.2 to 5.3 divorces per 1,000 married people, and has since remained relatively stable (Statistics Canada, 2022). Grey divorce remains considerably less common here than divorce among younger adults, so if you’ve read that it has doubled, you were reading about Americans. Still, divorce at 65 is financially different from divorce at 35. There are fewer working years to rebuild. One household becomes two. Housing, retirement income, pensions, estate plans, and family relationships can all take a hit, and women tend to feel it most. A Statistics Canada study that tracked Canadians from their mid-50s into their 70s found that divorced women kept about 70% of their family income, compared with about 87% for women who stayed married (Mehdi, 2023). The study concluded that divorce lowers living standards in retirement more than the death of a spouse does. Till Death Do Us Part Is Longer Than It Used to Be A couple retiring in their 60s could easily have another 20 or 30 years together. That’s an extraordinary gift. It’s also a very long time to argue over the thermostat. Our health will change, our finances may shift, and our interests will wander off in directions neither of us saw coming. The people we were when we walked away from our careers won’t necessarily be the people we are at 75, 80, or 90, so our relationships need room to grow with us. So pick the battles worth fighting, bring a little healthy heat to the ones that matter, and concede the rest, especially the dishwasher. Thirty years of retirement works out to more than 1,500 Tuesdays together. It would be a shame to spend them arguing about the forks. Don’t retire. ReWire. Sue P.S. Retiring solo? Don’t get too comfortable. Many of the same issues show up with adult children, friends, and family, along with everyone’s sudden assumption that you now have all kinds of free time. I’ll tackle that one in two weeks. My Book is Available for Order: I hope you will consider ordering a copy of Your Retirement Reset for yourself, a friend, or someone you love. Published by ECW Press and is available through Indigo or Amazon and McNally Robinson. If you like supporting Canadian booksellers, check with your local independent bookstore too. Most can order it.

Sep 29, 2026

3 min

MEDIA ADVISORY: “Your Retirement Reset” by Canadian Retirement Expert Susan Pimento Arrives in Bookstores Across Canada

Practical guide to turning home equity into lasting retirement income is now available at Indigo, independent bookstores, Amazon.ca and McNally Robinson, and through Simon & Schuster in the U.S., in paperback, ebook and audiobook. Pimento is on a national media tour. TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA, September 29, 2026 -- Many Canadians share the same quiet worry: running out of money before they run out of life. Retirement expert Susan Pimento has a name for it: FORO, the Fear Of Running Out. As of today, her answer to it is in bookstores across the country. Your Retirement Reset: How to Convert Home Equity into Financial Security, published by ECW Press, is now in stores nationwide, including Indigo and Chapters locations and independent booksellers. It is also available on Amazon.ca and from Canadian independent bookseller McNally Robinson, in trade paperback, ebook and audiobook. In the United States, readers can order the book through Simon & Schuster. The book is written for Canadians in or near retirement and for the adult children who help them plan. It addresses a gap in how Canadians talk about retirement. Most advice is about saving. Very little explains how to turn what people have built into steady income that lasts. For many retirees, the family home is their largest asset. Your Retirement Reset explains, in plain language, the tools Canadians can use to unlock home equity. It shows how those tools fit alongside government benefits and registered savings, and how to weigh the trade-offs with family before making a decision. “Canadians have been told to save, save, save. Nobody tells them how to spend it,” said Pimento. “Meanwhile, the biggest asset most retirees own is right under their feet, and they’ve been taught to treat it like it’s off limits. A lot of people are house-rich and cheque-poor. This book is for anyone lying awake at 3 a.m. doing retirement math. You’ve done the hard part. Now let’s make it work for you.” “The book is about something that affects every one of us. How we're going to live and live well in the second half of our lives. Sue challenges us to think differently about retirement, especially the difference between having assets and having the income we need to enjoy life. She also challenges the traditional idea that the equity in our homes should simply sit there untouched until we die. Used thoughtfully and conservatively, she believes home equity can be a part of the retirement income conversation,” said Jennifer Smith, Publisher at ECW Press, at the book launch. National Media Tour Underway Susan Pimento is on a national media tour, and ECW Press is booking interviews with broadcast, print, podcast and online outlets. She can speak to: FORO (the Fear Of Running Out) and why it is keeping retirees up at night How Canadians can use home equity safely as a source of retirement income Common myths about reverse mortgages and downsizing What the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pensions means for today’s retirees How adult children can start the money conversation with their parents To request an interview, contact Cassie Smyth, Publicist, at ECW Press (details below). Readers can find free resources and learn more about Pimento’s work at retirewithequity.ca. Book Details Title: Your Retirement Reset: How to Convert Home Equity into Financial Security Author: Susan Pimento Publisher: ECW Press In stores: September 29, 2026 Formats: Trade paperback, ebook, audiobook Price: $28.95 (Canada); US$28.95 (United States) ISBN (paperback): 978-1-77041-897-4 Pages: 280 US distribution: Simon & Schuster About Susan Pimento and Retire with Equity Susan Pimento is a Canadian retirement expert, author and founder of Retire with Equity, an education and advocacy platform on retirement financing. She spent more than 30 years in banking and mortgage lending, including as a Vice President at a Schedule I bank. She advises financial institutions and policymakers on modernizing retirement solutions for Canadians 55+, and co-authored EY Canada’s report The Canadian Retirement Evolution. Her motto: “Don’t Retire…ReWire!” Learn more at retirewithequity.ca Media Contact Cassie Smyth, Publicist ECW Press cassie@ecwpress.com | 416-694-3348 | info@ecwpress.com

View all posts

Drops in the Bank of Canada rate will not solve housing affordability.

Spoiler Alert: The problem isn't just about interest rates

Read More

Why the retirement plan that worked for your parents is failing millions of Canadians

When Two Retirements Collide

MEDIA ADVISORY: “Your Retirement Reset” by Canadian Retirement Expert Susan Pimento Arrives in Bookstores Across Canada

You might also like...

Why the retirement plan that worked for your parents is failing millions of Canadians

When Two Retirements Collide

MEDIA ADVISORY: “Your Retirement Reset” by Canadian Retirement Expert Susan Pimento Arrives in Bookstores Across Canada