Jack Pearson said:

---

This is the company

https://tcgservices.com/

---

It took FOREVER to get my wife's money out of there on her 403b. We moved it to vanguards 403b.

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Aggie Planner said:

---

62strat said:

---

Your Mom And Them said:

---

TRS formula is number of years of experience multiplied by 2.3. That provides the percentage of the average of five highest years of earnings for your pension.

EX:

30 years experience x 2.3= 69

Average of five highest years= $70,000

$70,000 x 69%= $48,300 per year of TRS pension

---

it's been a while since I looked, but I thought it was a factor of age and years of service

and if it's anything like PERA, they change the chart every handful of years, so you have know what chart you are on.

---

Years + Service credits is what qualifies you for the benefits. This is where rule of 80 comes into play. Once you reach, then you are eligible for full benefits from TRS.

Once you are eligible for full benefits, that is when the formula above comes into play.

---

Except now, even though you can hit the age + service number, you don't qualify for full benefits to draw until 62.

For example, if my wife stays working in TRS, she'll be at the 90 number at 56. So have full benefits "vesting" but won't be able to retire and pull those funds, without penalty, until 62.

---

Do you know when they put that requirement into effect?

If someone graduates college at 22 and becomes certified and begins teaching at 23, they'll hit rule of 80 at 51.5 years old. If they go for 30 years before retirement, they'll be 53 years old, fully vested, and unable to claim benefits for 9 years. That is insane.

After 30 years, some people burn out. So if you don't plan and contribute to a non-retirement investment account (403b/457 have a 10% penalty if you withdraw before 59.5) for those 30 years you're working and paying into the pension, you're stuck for another 9 years.

Being able to control your own future and be flexible about when you retire instead of being forced to work for 40 years (or at the mercy of TRS requirements) is a good reason to get serious about saving now.

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Aggie Planner said:

---

62strat said:

---

Your Mom And Them said:

---

TRS formula is number of years of experience multiplied by 2.3. That provides the percentage of the average of five highest years of earnings for your pension.

EX:

30 years experience x 2.3= 69

Average of five highest years= $70,000

$70,000 x 69%= $48,300 per year of TRS pension

---

it's been a while since I looked, but I thought it was a factor of age and years of service

and if it's anything like PERA, they change the chart every handful of years, so you have know what chart you are on.

---

Years + Service credits is what qualifies you for the benefits. This is where rule of 80 comes into play. Once you reach, then you are eligible for full benefits from TRS.

Once you are eligible for full benefits, that is when the formula above comes into play.

---

Except now, even though you can hit the age + service number, you don't qualify for full benefits to draw until 62.

For example, if my wife stays working in TRS, she'll be at the 90 number at 56. So have full benefits "vesting" but won't be able to retire and pull those funds, without penalty, until 62.

---

If she had 5 years of service by 8/31/2014 she is grandfathered into the Rule of 80, regardless of age.

Backyard Gator said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Aggie Planner said:

---

62strat said:

---

Your Mom And Them said:

---

TRS formula is number of years of experience multiplied by 2.3. That provides the percentage of the average of five highest years of earnings for your pension.

EX:

30 years experience x 2.3= 69

Average of five highest years= $70,000

$70,000 x 69%= $48,300 per year of TRS pension

---

it's been a while since I looked, but I thought it was a factor of age and years of service

and if it's anything like PERA, they change the chart every handful of years, so you have know what chart you are on.

---

Years + Service credits is what qualifies you for the benefits. This is where rule of 80 comes into play. Once you reach, then you are eligible for full benefits from TRS.

Once you are eligible for full benefits, that is when the formula above comes into play.

---

Except now, even though you can hit the age + service number, you don't qualify for full benefits to draw until 62.

For example, if my wife stays working in TRS, she'll be at the 90 number at 56. So have full benefits "vesting" but won't be able to retire and pull those funds, without penalty, until 62.

---

Do you know when they put that requirement into effect?

If someone graduates college at 22 and becomes certified and begins teaching at 23, they'll hit rule of 80 at 51.5 years old. If they go for 30 years before retirement, they'll be 53 years old, fully vested, and unable to claim benefits for 9 years. That is insane.

---

yeh that seems weird.

PERA (Colorado) doesn't have any sort of set age that you can retire with full benefits.. The only way to get the max payout is to have 35 y.o.s.
But you can retire any time you want, and your benefit is defined by your age plus years of service.
But starting at age 23, you'd have full payout by age 57.

Here is the chart.

In your example above, 30 years experience at 53 yo, you'd 49.2% of your highest 5 years... But every next year you work you're getting 6-8% more.. work another 5 years and you get full benefit of 87.5%

Based on that chart TRS will payout appx. $14,000/year less than Colorado assuming equal pay and equal service, if my wife retired at Rule of 80 in Texas (age 53).

If not grandfathered in to the old Rule of 80, my understanding is you reduce your annuity 5% for every year under 62 years old.

arrow said:

---

Based on that chart TRS will payout appx. $14,000/year less than Colorado assuming equal pay and equal service, if my wife retired at Rule of 80 in Texas (age 53).

If not grandfathered in to the old Rule of 80, my understanding is you reduce your annuity 5% for every year under 62 years old.

---

my wife is on the diagonal starting at 55/20.

It's interesting to see the increase year over year .. it's 14% for a few years, then 13.7% at age 59.. then all of a sudden it's 8.5% at age 62 then it drops to 3.7% at age 63 and drops again to 2.9% eventually.

Talk about diminishing returns.

I'm hoping I can convince her to go to 61... the last year to get 13.7% more benefit than the previous.

Yeah, I would definitely try to get my wife to work until the first square in the white on that Colorado chart. For us, that would also coincide nicely when we have access to the penalty free Roth IRA and 401k distributions. She might slap me if I mentioned 58 at this point in the school year!

South Platte said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Aggie Planner said:

---

62strat said:

---

Your Mom And Them said:

---

TRS formula is number of years of experience multiplied by 2.3. That provides the percentage of the average of five highest years of earnings for your pension.

EX:

30 years experience x 2.3= 69

Average of five highest years= $70,000

$70,000 x 69%= $48,300 per year of TRS pension

---

it's been a while since I looked, but I thought it was a factor of age and years of service

and if it's anything like PERA, they change the chart every handful of years, so you have know what chart you are on.

---

Years + Service credits is what qualifies you for the benefits. This is where rule of 80 comes into play. Once you reach, then you are eligible for full benefits from TRS.

Once you are eligible for full benefits, that is when the formula above comes into play.

---

Except now, even though you can hit the age + service number, you don't qualify for full benefits to draw until 62.

For example, if my wife stays working in TRS, she'll be at the 90 number at 56. So have full benefits "vesting" but won't be able to retire and pull those funds, without penalty, until 62.

---

If she had 5 years of service by 8/31/2014 she is grandfathered into the Rule of 80, regardless of age.

---

Correct. She did not. She's 36. Just missed it.

Backyard Gator said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Aggie Planner said:

---

62strat said:

---

Your Mom And Them said:

---

TRS formula is number of years of experience multiplied by 2.3. That provides the percentage of the average of five highest years of earnings for your pension.

EX:

30 years experience x 2.3= 69

Average of five highest years= $70,000

$70,000 x 69%= $48,300 per year of TRS pension

---

it's been a while since I looked, but I thought it was a factor of age and years of service

and if it's anything like PERA, they change the chart every handful of years, so you have know what chart you are on.

---

Years + Service credits is what qualifies you for the benefits. This is where rule of 80 comes into play. Once you reach, then you are eligible for full benefits from TRS.

Once you are eligible for full benefits, that is when the formula above comes into play.

---

Except now, even though you can hit the age + service number, you don't qualify for full benefits to draw until 62.

For example, if my wife stays working in TRS, she'll be at the 90 number at 56. So have full benefits "vesting" but won't be able to retire and pull those funds, without penalty, until 62.

---

Do you know when they put that requirement into effect?

If someone graduates college at 22 and becomes certified and begins teaching at 23, they'll hit rule of 80 at 51.5 years old. If they go for 30 years before retirement, they'll be 53 years old, fully vested, and unable to claim benefits for 9 years. That is insane.

After 30 years, some people burn out. So if you don't plan and contribute to a non-retirement investment account (403b/457 have a 10% penalty if you withdraw before 59.5) for those 30 years you're working and paying into the pension, you're stuck for another 9 years.

Being able to control your own future and be flexible about when you retire instead of being forced to work for 40 years (or at the mercy of TRS requirements) is a good reason to get serious about saving now.

---

Well, you could take it out but it's GREATLY reduced.

What you would do, and she and I have talked about is she gets to 55 or something and then takes a part time TRS gig. Still accrues years but keeps the highest years averaged. Now, you're giving up that 3% raise on the average but that's the piece you live with.

But yeah. It sucks. She doesn't get full benefits until 62. And on her career trajectory, it could be sizable.

I also am not sure, but depending on your situation, I think you can stop working, stop accruing and just wait til 62 then take the full benefits.

Some people likely need that money but I do feel like there's a path to getting what's owed. Similar to social security, the longer you wait to take it, the more they give you.

If she works the full 40 years (started at 22) she'll have 92% accrued.

Backyard Gator said:

---

After 30 years, some people burn out. So if you don't plan and contribute to a non-retirement investment account (403b/457 have a 10% penalty if you withdraw before 59.5) for those 30 years you're working and paying into the pension, you're stuck for another 9 years.

---

There is not a 10% penalty on 457b withdrawals under 59-1/2, but you have to have separated service from your employer for a withdrawal (outside of a hardship).

Looking at that chart, it's actually not too far off from Texas

For example, 30 years at age 52 (start right out of college. TRS would have 69% accrued.

Here it's like 52% payout. So this one also drives a large discount for earlier retirement.

arrow said:

---

Based on that chart TRS will payout appx. $14,000/year less than Colorado assuming equal pay and equal service, if my wife retired at Rule of 80 in Texas (age 53).

If not grandfathered in to the old Rule of 80, my understanding is you reduce your annuity 5% for every year under 62 years old.

---

How is TRS coming out less? My wife is on the same trajectory, can retire at 53 years old and 27 years of service = 80 which in TRS is roughly 62%. Per the Colorado chart that would only be 44.3% or are you saying your wife is not grandfathered in so you have to subtract 5% per year?

Yeah she's not grandfathered in. Started in 2012. So at 53 (when she hits rule of 80) she'd be looking at a 45% reduction (9x5%) based on my understanding of the current system.

arrow said:

---

Yeah she's not grandfathered in. Started in 2012. So at 53 (when she hits rule of 80) she'd be looking at a 45% reduction (9x5%) based on my understanding of the current system.

---

I will add.. just like you guys are referring to being grandfathered in and all that, PERA has multiple charts based on when you started.. this is just my wife's chart.

My aunt for example who started in the 90s, waaaay better chart. She did like 25 years and retired in late 50s and got much higher benefit than what this chart shows.

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

This is the company

https://tcgservices.com/

---

It took FOREVER to get my wife's money out of there on her 403b. We moved it to vanguards 403b.

---

Same- she lost about 15k in the market by the time they finally pulled it to send vanguard a check

TCGS is awful and fees are crazy high. Not sure why school districts partner up with these folks.

Set up a Roth IRA now to get through the 9 yr period. You can withdraw your contributions without penalty at any time, just have to leave the earnings in the acct until 59 1/2. 30 yrs of Roth maxing (hard to do, I get it) would be a nice pool of cash after leaving teaching.

JSKolache said:

---

Set up a Roth IRA now to get through the 9 yr period. You can withdraw your contributions without penalty at any time, just have to leave the earnings in the acct until 59 1/2. 30 yrs of Roth maxing (hard to do, I get it) would be a nice pool of cash after leaving teaching.

---

Yeah we're backdooring her max every year so 20+ or so more years of that and there will be a decent chunk of change.

goatchze said:

---

Milwaukees Best Light said:

---

JR2007 said:

---

Need to do this with my wife's. There shouldn't a penalty for rolling over, just note you'd incur taxes rolling into a Roth vs a 401k.

Been dreading do it because I suspect they'll make the process more difficult than necessary. I'll hang up and listen for others who've done it.

---

They make it incredibly difficult. To roll it over to a different institution you have to fax them a notarized form, then they snail mail you another form. I don't know what to do with the other form cause I am still waiting to receive it. 9 weeks and counting. I will start calling and bothering someone when I get back from spring break.

---

Keep us posted here, would like to learn from your experience.

We need to do the same for my wife. TRS makes it as confusing and difficult as possible. I wasted so much time looking for the form that you "must fill out". Finally, after a bunch of time wasted, I discovered that you have to fill out a form to get the form that you have to fill out. Completely insane.

---

Update: just found out that my original form was never actually faxed to TRS, so I have been waiting several months for them to respond with the second form that was never going to arrive. It will supposedly be faxed today, so start the clock.

We are trying to do an in-service rollover from Equitable/TCG now.

I have come to hate them.