Choose one: 400k/yr (before taxes) until you turn 65, or a 7 million lump sum (no taxes)

[acri1]

For the 400k/yr, it's taxed normally, and you get it until you turn 65. Only conditions are -

1. It's on top of your other income, however you do have to pay taxes on it.
2. No cost of living/inflation adjustments. It's 400k and that's that.
3. Once you turn 65 it's over (hopefully you saved for retirement).
4. If you die before 65, too bad. Your family does not get the 400k you would've gotten.

For the 7 million, it's a lump sum and you don't have to pay any taxes on it. Once it's gone, it's gone. Which are you going with?

 

[sicksoulja]

Damnit I didn’t read BEFORE taxes, which makes me want to change to the 7m’s.

The 7m is nice but I’ll probably blow through the shyt is my only worry.

 

[JLova]

Lump sum.

 

[Conan]

This is a simple math problem.

Take the lump sum.

 

[acri1]

This is a simple math problem.

Take the lump sum.

Well...it's a math problem if you assume you're disciplined enough not to waste the lump sum

 

[Double Rice No Beans]

Yearly. Im young enough where it makes sense

 

[Swirv]

I’m at the age where the lump sum makes more sense considering the tax burden I would have if I took payments.

 

[Conan]

Well...it's a math problem if you assume you're disciplined enough not to waste the lump sum

I get $7M and after taking $500k for personal purposes , I'm sticking the rest in an index fund and leaving it for the next 30 years.

 

[ba'al]

Feel like this been a thread already.

But my answer is I'd take both.

 

[Roger king]

I would take the 400k on a yearly basis, that could help alot right now to get a good home, start a business and put some thought in some smart investments , the larger sum of funds is liable to be spent irresponsibly because it is in large amount, where as the other it is partly payment and you can plan on it or as the situation warrants

 

[Elim Garak]

Give me the 7 million.

 

[Rekkapryde]

I’m at the age where the lump sum makes more sense considering the tax burden I would have if I took payments.

Add inflation too.
100k now is 50k thirty years ago

 

[IsThatBrothaMouzone?]

For the 400k/yr, it's taxed normally, and you get it until you turn 65. Only conditions are -

1. It's on top of your other income, however you do have to pay taxes on it.
2. No cost of living/inflation adjustments. It's 400k and that's that.
3. Once you turn 65 it's over (hopefully you saved for retirement).
4. If you die before 65, too bad. Your family does not get the 400k you would've gotten.

For the 7 million, it's a lump sum and you don't have to pay any taxes on it. Once it's gone, it's gone. Which are you going with?

7 milly EVERY TIME

I have 27 yrs until age 65...so the 400k = 10.8M before taxes.

7 mil is no taxes and I can invest ASAP. Easy choice.

 

[O³ (O cubed)]

8 million. I'll be 65 sooner than later

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Even if I was 20 years old I’d take the $7M.

The $7M option is clearly the better option from a purely mathematical standpoint. Only people who should take the $400k option are those being honest with themselves about their discipline/knowledge to not blow that $7M. And let’s be reality, more people need to stop lying to themselves and admit they’re in that camp.