Inflation-complicated compound interest

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the future value of a retirement investment based on a 9% contribution from a $60,000 salary, which increases annually by 3% inflation. The user seeks to understand how to account for this inflation-adjusted contribution while assuming a 7% annual return over 30 years. A starting balance of $100,000 is also mentioned, but clarification is needed on its role in the calculations. A suggested method involves adjusting the returns to real terms by dividing by the inflation rate, resulting in an effective return of 3.88% after inflation. The user aims to compare the outcomes of contributing 9% versus 12% of the salary.
NicholasMM
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi gang, I need help with a formula if somebody with an enormous brain and generous heart has some spare time.

I need to work out what 9% of $60,000 ($5400) invested annual at 7% (net of fees and taxes) would grow to in 30 years, with the $60,000 increasing by 3% inflation each year (so the figure that 9% amounts to grows each year).

There is also a starting balance of $100,000.

I then need to be able to alter that 9% and make it 12% to see what the difference would be in the result.

If anybody can help a maths knucklehead such as myself that would be wonderful.

Thanks ... Nick.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't think I understand the statement of the problem. Are you looking for the nominal or the real amount? Is 3% the inflation rate -- because in the problem it sounds like a COLA? What is the $100,000 starting amount -- does it include the $60,000 or not? If so, what happens with the other $40,000, is it invested at the risk-free rate (which is what?)?
 
Hi CR, I didn't explain myself very well.

In Australia, we have compulsory retirement savings of 9% of our annual wage ($60,000 in my example).

I'm trying to work out what those contributions would grow in 30 years, given 7% returns (for simplicity, net of fees and taxes) a year and, critically, with the annual wage (again, $60, 000 in my example) rising each year in line with inflation of 3%pa, so that the 9% compulsory amount increases too each year.

I then want to change the 9% to 12% to compare how tipping in each year an amount extra to the compulsory 9% would effect the result (that is, the investment balance).

The $100,000 would be the retirement account balance when the retirement investor switched from 9% of annual wage to 12%.

I know how to work out the FV of $5400 (9% of $60,000) invested at 7% for 30 years. What I don't know is how to do is allow for the $5400 to increase each year in line with inflation.

I'd really love it if you knew a formula for this that I could punch into google calc.

Thanks CR. I hope I haven't just made it much more confusing! ... Nick.
 
NicholasMM said:
I know how to work out the FV of $5400 (9% of $60,000) invested at 7% for 30 years. What I don't know is how to do is allow for the $5400 to increase each year in line with inflation.

The easy way, then, is to divide everything by 1.03 each year so you're working in real (not nominal) terms. Thus you get 3.88% after-inflation returns (1.07/1.03 - 1) and your contribution stays at $5400 inflation-adjusted dollars.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top