this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2026
15 points (100.0% liked)
news
767 readers
1007 users here now
A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.
Rules:
- Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
- Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
- Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
- Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
- No link shorteners
- No entire article in the post body
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The easiest thing financially to do would be to take the annuity and set up a trust as the designated payee for the annuity, so that even if you die before collecting all of the money it will still be paid out to your descendants.
That said, the annuity is not inherently more money if you take the lump and then dont spend much of it per year and manage it properly. $800M could generate more in interest or other returns than the annuity payments would. The initial annuity payments are about $30M a year ratcheting up to $60-$70M a year towards the end of 30 years. Properly managed and well spent you could likely generate more than $30M in the first year off of $800M. Even if you stuck the $800M in a savings account with 4.5% interest that would be $36M returned in the first year. You could spend $6M and still beat the annuity payment, and it will keep growing each year probably returning more than the annuity payment would increase by. 4.5% is on the far low end of what you could feasibly get in returns from more complex wealth management strategies also, rather than shoving it all in a savings account
Realistically though, most people take the lump and then outspend themselves making lavish purchases and bad investments. At least the annuity protects you from that