REPEAT FROM SOURCE: Northern Dynasty: Update on Negotiations with EPA
In the latest EPA court filing, dated July 3, 2025, the text includes "…agency officials were briefed on the litigation and have been actively considering the agency decisions. Agency officials remain open to reconsideration, and defendants and PLP are negotiating to explore a potential settlement. Those discussions have addressed a potential further submission from PLP that would inform any agency reconsideration. Defendants and PLP currently expect to reach agreement within the next two weeks about what that submission would entail…Accordingly, defendants and PLP respectfully request that the Court extend the abeyance for an additional 14 days, with a status report due on July 17, 2025…"
'We are pleased to be in discussions with the EPA, because we see this as the fastest path forward for withdrawal of the veto. They have asked for additional information to assist in finalizing that decision,' said Ron Thiessen, Northern Dynasty President and CEO. 'A decision to withdraw this egregious and unsubstantiated veto would help the U.S. to secure a domestic supply of metals like copper, which is critical for the economy because of its fundamental use in electrification, and rhenium, which is a key component in several military applications. It also provides the opportunity for significant economic benefits over generations in this region of Alaska, the state and the country and would be consistent with the stated pledge of this administration to remove impediments to permitting.'
About Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Northern Dynasty is a mineral exploration and development company based in Vancouver, Canada. Northern Dynasty's principal asset, owned through its wholly owned Alaska-based U.S. subsidiary, Pebble Limited Partnership, is a 100% interest in a contiguous block of 1,840 mineral claims in Southwest Alaska, including the Pebble deposit, located 200 miles from Anchorage and 125 miles from Bristol Bay. The Pebble Partnership is the proponent of the Pebble Project.
For further details on Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Project, please visit the Company's website at www.northerndynastyminerals.com or contact Investor services at (604) 684-6365 or within North America at 1-800-667-2114. Public filings, which include forward looking information cautionary language and risk factor disclosure regarding the Company and the Pebble Project can be found in Canada at www.sedarplus.ca and in the United States at www.sec.gov.
Ronald W. Thiessen
President & CEO
U.S. Media Contact:
Dan Gagnier, Gagnier Communications (646) 569-5897
Forward Looking Information and other Cautionary Factors
This document includes certain statements that may be deemed 'forward-looking statements' under the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and under applicable provisions of Canadian provincial securities laws. All statements in this document, other than statements of historical facts, which address permitting, including the withdrawal of the EPA veto and the development and production for the Pebble Project are forward-looking statements. Additional forward looking statements made by the Company under its continuous disclosure obligations include statements regarding (i) the development plan for the Pebble Project (ii) the right-sizing and de-risking of the Pebble Project, (iii) the design and operating parameters for the Pebble Project development plan, including projected capital and operating costs, (iv) the social integration of the Pebble Project into the Bristol Bay region and benefits for Alaska, (v) the political and public support for the permitting process, (vi) the ability of the Pebble Project to ultimately secure all required federal and state permits, (vii) the ability of the Company and/or the State of Alaska to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's ('EPA's') Final Determination process under the Clean Water Act and ultimately the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Record of Decision ('USACE ROD') through legal actions; (viii) exploration potential of the Pebble Project, (ix) future demand for copper, gold and other metals, (x) if permitting is ultimately secured, the ability to demonstrate the Pebble Project is ultimately commercially viable, and (xi) the potential addition of partners in the Pebble Project. Although NDM believes the expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements should not be in any way be construed as guarantees that the Pebble Project will secure all required government permits or regarding the ability of NDM to develop the Pebble Project in light of the USACE ROD and its subsequent remand decision and the EPA's Final Determination, establish the commercial feasibility of the Pebble Project, achieve the required financing or develop the Pebble Project.
Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of factors and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by NDM as of the date of such statements, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Assumptions used by NDM to develop forward-looking statements include the assumptions that (i) the Pebble Project will obtain all required environmental and other permits and all land use and other licenses without undue delay, (ii) any feasibility studies prepared for the development of the Pebble Project will be positive, (iii) NDM's estimates of mineral resources will not change, and NDM will be successful in converting mineral resources to mineral reserves, (iv) NDM will be able to establish the commercial feasibility of the Pebble Project, and (v) NDM will be successful in its legal action against the EPA and the USACE and any action taken by the EPA in connection with the Final Determination will ultimately not be successful in restricting or prohibiting development of the Pebble Project.
In addition, the likelihood of future mining at the Pebble Project is subject to a large number of risks and will require achievement of a number of technical, economic and legal objectives, including (i) the current development plan may not reflect the ultimate mine plan for the Pebble Project, (ii) obtaining necessary mining and construction permits, licenses and approvals without undue delay, including without delay due to third party opposition or changes in government policies, (iii) finalization of the mine plan for the Pebble Project, (iv) the completion of feasibility studies demonstrating that any Pebble Project mineral resources that can be economically mined, (v) completion of all necessary engineering for mining and processing facilities, (vi) the ability of NDM to secure a partner for the development of the Pebble Project, and (vi) receipt by NDM of significant additional financing to fund these objectives as well as funding mine construction. NDM is also subject to the specific risks inherent in the mining business as well as general economic and business conditions. Investors should also consider the risk factors identified in the Company's Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2024, as filed on SEDAR+ ( www.sedarplus.ca ) and included in its annual report on Form 40-F filed on EDGAR ( www.sec.gov ), as well as the risk factors set out in the Company's subsequent public continuous disclosure filings available on SEDAR+ and EDGAR. For more information on the Company, Investors should review the Company's filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission at www.sec.gov and its home jurisdiction filings that are available at www.sedarplus.ca.
The National Environment Policy Act Environmental Impact Statement process requires a comprehensive 'alternatives assessment' be undertaken to consider a broad range of development alternatives, the final project design and operating parameters for the Pebble Project and associated infrastructure may vary significantly from that currently contemplated. As a result, the Company will continue to consider various development options and no final project design has been selected at this time.
SOURCE: Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
press release
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TSX futures flat ahead of US inflation data
(Reuters) -Futures linked to Canada's benchmark index were flat on Wednesday as concerns about tariff-induced inflation weighed on the markets ahead of U.S. producer prices data due later in the day. Futures on the S&P/TSX index were unchanged at 1,607.9 points by 06:17 a.m. ET (1017 GMT). Trade tensions remained in focus after U.S. President Donald Trump announced a 19% tariff on Indonesian goods as part of a new deal, one of several agreements ahead of an August 1 deadline for broader tariff hikes. Investors will keep a close watch on the U.S. producer prices data due later in on Tuesday, searching for signs of rising costs at the factory gate. In the U.S., markets were cautious after Tuesday's inflation report that showed consumer prices picked up in June, likely marking the start of a long-anticipated tariff-induced increase in inflation. On Tuesday, data showed Canada's annual inflation rose to 1.9% in June from 1.7% in May. Money markets have largely priced out the chances of a rate cut at the Bank of Canada's next policy decision on July 30 in response to the inflation data as well as stronger-than-expected jobs data on Friday. [0#CADIRPR] Gold prices gained on Wednesday on a softer dollar. Oil prices, steadied. [O/R] [GOL/] In company news, Canadian gold and copper miner Aura Minerals said on Tuesday it plans to raise about $196.4 million from its U.S. initial public offering. Toronto's benchmark S&P/TSX composite index pulled back on Tuesday from a record high as investors assessed U.S. bank earnings and the domestic inflation data. FOR CANADIAN MARKETS NEWS, CLICK ON CODES: TSX market report [.TO] Canadian dollar and bonds report [CAD/] [CA/] Reuters global stocks poll for Canada Canadian markets directory Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNET
25 minutes ago
- CNET
US Tariffs Could Be Triggering New Inflation Woes. Everything You Need to Know
The off-again, on-again nature of US tariffs in 2025 has many consumers anxious about the future. James Martin/CNET The One Big Beautiful Bill may have been signed into law, but the economic plan of the second Trump administration is still uncertain due to the confusion around tariffs. President Donald Trump unleashed chaos on April 2 ("Liberation Day") when he unveiled a laundry list of heavy tariffs for countries around the world. He then paused them for 90 days after the stock market dramatically tumbled. That 90-day pause was supposed to end this week, but the tariffs have been been extended again through Aug. 1. More recently, the administration hiked tariffs against Canada to 35% and threatened Brazil with a 50% rate, while the US Labor Department announced on Tuesday that consumer prices rose 2.7% in June, the highest spike since February. Amid the uncertainties and upheavals, Trump has barreled forward with his plans, including doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and announcing a new plan to increase the rate for China to 55%. He also hyped up a trade deal on July 2 that leaves Vietnam's import tax rate at a historically high 20%. The sweeping tariff initiative will likely impact your cost of living, which we know from our surveys is something you're worried about. That all came after Trump's push hit its biggest roadblock yet, when the US Court of International Trade ruled late last month that Trump had overstepped his authority when he imposed tariffs. That ruling was stayed, but the fight is likely to head to the Supreme Court. All the while, major US companies like Apple and Walmart have butted heads with the administration over the tariffs and their bluntness about how tariffs will make affording things harder for consumers. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Click to unmute Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Skip Backward Skip Forward Next playlist item Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration 9:42 Loaded : 6.13% 0:00 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 9:42 Share Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Amid all this noise, you might still be wondering: What exactly are tariffs, and what will they mean for me? The short answer: Expect to pay more for at least some goods and services. For the long answer, keep reading, and for more, check out CNET's price tracker for 11 popular and tariff-vulnerable products. What are tariffs? Put simply, a tariff is a tax on the cost of importing or exporting goods by a particular country. So, for example, a 60% tariff on Chinese imports would be a 60% tax on the price of importing, say, computer components from China. Trump has been fixated on imports as the centerpiece of his economic plans, often claiming that the money collected from taxes on imported goods would help finance other parts of his agenda. The US imports $3 trillion worth of goods from other countries annually. The president has also shown a fixation on trade deficits, claiming that the US having a trade deficit with any country means that country is ripping the US off. This is a flawed understanding of the matter, many economists have said, since deficits are often a simple case of resource realities: Wealthy nations like the US buy specific things from nations that have them, while those nations in turn may not be wealthy enough to buy much of anything from the US. While Trump deployed tariffs in his first term, notably against China, he ramped up his plans more significantly for the 2024 campaign, promising 60% tariffs against China and a universal 20% tariff on all imports into the US. "Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented," Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan last year. At one point, he called himself "Tariff Man" in a post on Truth Social. Who pays the cost of tariffs? Trump repeatedly claimed, before and immediately after returning to the White House, that the country of origin for an imported good pays the cost of the tariffs and that Americans would not see any price increases from them. However, as economists and fact-checkers stressed, this is not the case. The companies importing the tariffed goods -- American companies or organizations in this case -- pay the higher costs. To compensate, companies can raise their prices or absorb the additional costs themselves. So, who ends up paying the price for tariffs? In the end, usually you, the consumer. For instance, a universal tariff on goods from Canada would increase Canadian lumber prices, which would have the knock-on effect of making construction and home renovations more expensive for US consumers. While it is possible for a company to absorb the costs of tariffs without increasing prices, this is not at all likely, at least for now. Speaking with CNET, Ryan Reith, vice president of International Data Corporation's worldwide mobile device tracking programs, explained that price hikes from tariffs, especially on technology and hardware, are inevitable in the short term. He estimated that the full amount imposed on imports by Trump's tariffs would be passed on to consumers, which he called the "cost pass-through." Any potential efforts for companies to absorb the new costs themselves would come in the future, once they have a better understanding of the tariffs, if at all. Which Trump tariffs have gone into effect? Following Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements on April 2 and subsequent shifting by the president, the following tariffs are in effect: A 50% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, doubled from 25% as of June 4. A 30% tariff on all Chinese imports until the new deal touted by Trump takes effect, after which it will purportedly go up to 55%. China being a major focus of Trump's trade agenda, it has faced a rate notably higher than other countries, peaking at 145% before trade talks commenced. 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and 35% on those from Canada. This applies only to goods from each country that are not covered under the 2018 USMCA trade agreement brokered during Trump's first term. The deal covers roughly half of all imports from Canada and about a third of those from Mexico, so the rest are subject to the new tariffs. Energy imports not covered by USMCA will be taxed at only 10%. A 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars and auto parts. A sweeping overall 10% tariff on all imported goods. For certain countries that Trump said were more responsible for the US trade deficit, Trump imposed what he called "reciprocal" tariffs that exceed the 10% level: 20% for the 27 nations that make up the European Union, 26% for India, 24% for Japan and so on. These were meant to take effect on April 9 but were delayed by 90 days due to historic stock market volatility, and then delayed again to Aug. 1. These rates are subject to change until that new effective date, and some have already been altered: the rate against Japan was upped to 25%, the same as the rate against South Korea; Trump has also threatened a 50% rate against Brazil. Trump's claim that these reciprocal tariffs are based on high tariffs imposed against the US by the targeted countries has drawn intense pushback from experts and economists, who have argued that some of these numbers are false or potentially inflated. For example, the above chart says a 39% tariff from the EU, despite its average tariff for US goods being around 3%. Some of the tariffs are against places that are not countries but tiny territories of other nations. The Heard and McDonald Islands, for example, are uninhabited. We'll dig into the confusion around these calculations below. Notably, that minimum 10% tariff will not be on top of those steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. Canada and Mexico were also spared from the 10% minimum additional tariff imposed on all countries the US trades with. On April 11, the administration said smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics, along with flat panel displays, memory chips and semiconductors, were exempt from reciprocal tariffs. But it wasn't clear whether that would remain the case or whether such products might face different fees later. How were the Trump reciprocal tariffs calculated? The numbers released by the Trump administration for its barrage of "reciprocal" tariffs led to widespread confusion among experts. Trump's own claim that these new rates were derived by halving the tariffs already imposed against the US by certain countries was widely disputed, with critics noting that some of the numbers listed for certain countries were much higher than the actual rates and some countries had tariff rates listed despite not specifically having tariffs against the US at all. In a post to X that spread fast across social media, finance journalist James Surowiecki said that the new reciprocal rates appeared to have been reached by taking the trade deficit the US has with each country and dividing it by the amount the country exports to the US. This, he explained, consistently produced the reciprocal tariff percentages revealed by the White House across the board. "What extraordinary nonsense this is," Surowiecki wrote about the finding. The White House later attempted to debunk this idea, releasing what it claimed was the real formula, though it was quickly determined that this formula was arguably just a more complex version of the one Surowiecki deduced. What will the Trump tariffs do to prices? In short: Prices are almost certainly going up, if not now, then eventually. That is, if the products even make it to US shelves at all, as some tariffs will simply be too high for companies to bother dealing with. While the effects of a lot of tariffs might not be felt straight away, some potential real-world examples have already emerged. Microsoft has increased prices across the board for its Xbox gaming brand, with its flagship Xbox Series X console jumping 20% from $500 to $600. Kent International, one of the main suppliers of bicycles to Walmart, announced that it would be stopping imports from China, which account for 90% of its stock. Speaking about Trump's tariff plans just before they were announced, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that they would generate $6 trillion in revenue over the next decade. Given that tariffs are most often paid by consumers, CNN characterized this as potentially "the largest tax hike in US history." Estimates from the Yale Budget Lab, cited by Axios, predict that Trump's new tariffs will cause a 2.3% increase in inflation throughout 2025. This translates to about a $3,800 increase in expenses for the average American household. Reith, the IDC analyst, told CNET that Chinese-based tech companies, like PC makers Acer, Asus and Lenovo, have "100% exposure" to these import taxes, with products like phones and computers the most likely to take a hit. He also said that the companies best positioned to weather the tariff impacts are those that have moved some of their operations out of China to places like India, Thailand and Vietnam, singling out the likes of Apple, Dell and HP. Samsung, based in South Korea, is also likely to avoid the full force of Trump's tariffs. In an effort to minimize its tariff vulnerability, Apple has begun to move the production of goods for the US market from China to India. Will tariffs impact prices immediately? In the short term -- the first days or weeks after a tariff takes effect -- maybe not. There are still a lot of products in the US imported pre-tariffs and on store shelves, meaning the businesses don't need a price hike to recoup import taxes. Once new products need to be brought in from overseas, that's when you'll see prices start to climb because of tariffs or you'll see them become unavailable. That uncertainty has made consumers anxious. CNET's survey revealed that about 38% of shoppers feel pressured to make certain purchases before tariffs make them more expensive. About 10% say they have already made certain purchases in hopes of getting them in before the price hikes, while 27% said they have delayed purchases for products that cost more than $500. Generally, this worry is the most acute concerning smartphones, laptops and home appliances. Mark Cuban, the billionaire businessman and Trump critic, voiced concerns about when to buy certain things in a post on Bluesky just after Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements. In it, he suggested that consumers might want to stock up on certain items before tariff inflation hits. "It's not a bad idea to go to the local Walmart or big box retailer and buy lots of consumables now," Cuban wrote. "From toothpaste to soap, anything you can find storage space for, buy before they have to replenish inventory. Even if it's made in the USA, they will jack up the price and blame it on tariffs." CNET's Money team recommends that before you make any purchase, especially a high-ticket item, be sure that the expenditure fits within your budget and your spending plans. Buying something you can't afford now because it might be less affordable later can be burdensome, to say the least. What is the goal of the White House tariff plan? The typical goal behind tariffs is to discourage consumers and businesses from buying the tariffed, foreign-sourced goods and encourage them to buy domestically produced goods instead. When implemented in the right way, tariffs are generally seen as a useful way to protect domestic industries. One of the stated intentions for Trump's tariffs is along those lines: to restore American manufacturing and production. However, the White House also says it's negotiating with numerous countries looking for tariff exemptions, and some officials have also floated the idea that the tariffs will help finance Trump's tax cuts. Those things are often contradictory: If manufacturing moves to the US or if a bunch of countries are exempt from tariffs, then tariffs aren't actually being collected and can't be used to finance anything. This and many other points have led a lot of economists to allege that Trump's plans are misguided. As for returning -- or "reshoring" -- manufacturing in the US, tariffs are a better tool for protecting industries that already exist because importers can fall back on them right away. Building up the factories and plants needed for this in the US could take years, leaving Americans to suffer under higher prices in the interim. That problem is worsened by the fact that the materials needed to build those factories will also be tariffed, making the costs of "reshoring" production in the US too heavy for companies to stomach. These issues, and the general instability of American economic policies under Trump, are part of why experts warn that Trump's tariffs could have the opposite effect: keeping manufacturing out of the US and leaving consumers stuck with inflated prices. Any factories that do get built in the US because of tariffs also have a high chance of being automated, canceling out a lot of job creation potential. To give you one real-world example of this: When warning customers of future price hikes, toy maker Mattel also noted that it had no plans to move manufacturing to the US. Trump has reportedly been fixated on the notion that Apple's iPhone -- the most popular smartphone in the US market -- can be manufactured entirely in the US. This has been broadly dismissed by experts, for a lot of the same reasons mentioned above, but also because an American-made iPhone could cost upward of $3,500. One report from 404 Media dubbed the idea "a pure fantasy." The overall sophistication and breadth of China's manufacturing sector have also been cited, with CEO Tim Cook stating in 2017 that the US lacks the number of tooling engineers to make its products. For more, see how tariffs might raise the prices of Apple products and find some expert tips for saving money.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Should Douglas, 66, start drawing down his savings in order to maximize tax?
Douglas,* 66, is getting mixed messages from advisers. His financial adviser wants him to leave the money he has in his registered accounts to grow while his accountant says it is time to start drawing down those funds to minimize tax. Retired since 2020, Douglas lives in Ontario with his wife of seven years, Anne,* who is also retired. This is a second marriage for both Douglas and Anne. They purchased their forever home together — now valued at $900,000 and which they each own equally — are debt-free, keep their finances separate and contribute to shared expenses. So far, Douglas's non-indexed employer pension and government benefits have met his cash flow needs, but he is concerned about the growing impact of inflation. 'We have a great life together,' said Douglas. 'We travel a lot, and plan to continue to do more of the same.' Douglas's annual expenses are about $43,200 including $6,000 for travel. His annual income is about $48,300 before tax. This includes about $24,000 from a locked-in retirement account (LIRA) that is not indexed to inflation, $3,380 in employer benefits, $12,100 in Canada Pension Plan (CPP) benefits and $8,600 in Old Age Security (OAS) payments. Anne's annual income is similar. Douglas's investment portfolio includes about $240,000 in registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs), $490,000 in a LIRA and $28,000 in a tax-free savings account (TFSA) largely invested in stocks and some equity funds. He dipped into his TFSA and a non-registered account to help one of his children and is now working on building both back up. He contributes $300 a month to his TFSA. He also has an emergency fund of about $6,000 in a savings account. 'Does it make financial sense to convert my RRSP to a registered retirement income fund (RRIF) now and begin withdrawing funds to increase TFSA contributions and to rebuild my non-registered investment account?' he asked. A father of two adult children, stepfather to Anne's two adult children and grandfather to six grandchildren, Douglas is also focused on their future. 'What are the best strategies to preserve or grow my portfolio to ensure I can live comfortably and leave an estate for my children?' Barring any major changes to his current lifestyle and assuming an average long-term annual return of seven per cent on his nearly $760,000 equity-based portfolio, Douglas can afford to withdraw an additional $4,500 a year — the maximum amount he can withdraw without pushing him into a higher tax bracket — or 3.5 per cent of his investments (up from the 3.2 per cent he is currently withdrawing). According to a long held general rule of thumb for retirement spending, withdrawing up to four per cent of your total investments has been sustainable 97 per cent of the time in the past 150 years, said Ed Rempel, a fee-for-service financial planner, tax accountant and blogger. That said, Rempel's best advice for Douglas is to wait two years, just before he turns 68, to start withdrawing $4,500 a year more from his LIRA – and only his LIRA. 'There doesn't seem to be a reason to start and pay tax on these funds when he doesn't need the money and it can continue to grow,' said Rempel. 'The reason he should wait two years specifically, instead of doing it now, is interesting. In general, it is worthwhile paying 20 per cent tax now to avoid 30 per cent tax in less than five years, but not really for more than five years from now. Douglas will be pushed into the 30 per cent tax bracket at age 72 (six years from now) when he is required to have converted his RRSP to a RRIF. That is why it should be worthwhile for Douglas to withdraw the funds at age 68, but not now at age 66.' When he does withdraw these additional funds, the extra $4,500 a year will trigger $900 (20 per cent) in tax amounting to $3,600 a year after tax, allowing him to double his monthly contributions to his TFSA from $300 to $600. As for his RRSP, Rempel said Douglas should wait to convert to a RRIF until he is required to at age 71. 'There is no tax advantage to start withdrawing funds from the RRIF before then. Any extra money he wants can come from the LIRA while still remaining under the 7.5 per cent maximum life income fund (LIF) — the account used to manage LIRA funds — withdrawal limit. The LIRA/LIF is less flexible than an RRSP/RRIF, so he should only withdraw from it.' To address Douglas's concerns about the high cost of living, Rempel said he can increase the amount he withdraws from his LIRA by the inflation rate. 'Douglas could live a bit more comfortably now by withdrawing an extra $4,500 a year from his LIRA and continuing to increase his withdrawals every year by inflation. That would still be a sustainable long-term withdrawal,' said Rempel. Should a B.C. couple, both 45, sell their GICs to buy a bigger house? Is saving $500,000 in investment income enough for couple to meet their retirement goals? 'Since he is only withdrawing 3.2 per cent of his investments per year, while they are expected to grow about seven per cent per year (or possibly more) long-term, his $758,000 investments should grow to more than $1 million by age 75 and about $2 million at age 90,' Rempel said. 'In total, his growing portfolio and home value should be a nice estate to leave for his children and grandchildren. They also provide a very comfortable margin of safety, in case he needs more money in the future or has expensive health issues, or wants to move to a more expensive retirement home in the future.' *Names have been changed to protect privacy. Are you worried about having enough for retirement? Do you need to adjust your portfolio? Are you starting out or making a change and wondering how to build wealth? Are you trying to make ends meet? Drop us a line at with your contact info and the gist of your problem and we'll find some experts to help you out while writing a Family Finance story about it (we'll keep your name out of it, of course). Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
