this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
734 points (98.8% liked)

World News

32347 readers
408 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shikitohno@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

the same reason that you’re better off taking the lump sum vs the 30 year pay out if you win the lottery.

money today that i can use today is worth more than money tomorrow.

You might be theoretically better off in an ideal outcome, but I'm pretty sure taking the 30 year payout is the generally recommended option. If I were to win the Mega Millions at the current level, I would need to make investments that paid $96,244,081 over 30 years just to equal the tax savings of taking the annuity versus the lump sum payment. That works out to a 3.1% return on the initial lump sum, every year, 30 years straight. Granted, this isn't exactly impossible, but it does require a few caveats. For example, this assumes you don't actually spend any of that money, investing 100% of it and never having a bad year. Of course, the average lotto winner is not exactly known for their great ability to invest their money. Meanwhile, there's nothing preventing the person taking the 30-year annuity from investing a portion of their annual payouts, which are guaranteed, while returns on investments are explicitly not guaranteed.

A guaranteed $96,244,081 return is a better investment than a possible $200,000,000 that's continent on absolutely nothing going wrong for the next 30 years, but the sort of people who run companies seem to forget about this these days.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

money now is worth more than money later.

because of inflation, and also because i can use it now. money i am getting in 30 years is no good to me now.

this isn't that hard of a concept.

[–] shikitohno@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

When your justification is an uncertain investment, it isn't that hard of a concept to realize you're wrong. You're literally the only person I've ever seen advocating for the lump sum payment as the financialyl sound move when it quite nearly halves 100% sure income.

Inflation is also much less of a concern when you're talking about literal millions of dollars, unless you're talking about the Zimbabwe national lotto. If you're living in a way that your ability to live with $15,000,000/year towards the end of a 30-year annuity payout has materially changed, you have bigger issues than inflation going on.