Good morning. Last week I asked snowbirds where they’re heading this winter, and many of you wrote in with the same comment: “Anywhere but the U.S.” Still, many people told me the U.S. isn’t off the table. Let’s get into how many.

In the last newsletter, I shared some data showing that Canadians are locking in long-term Florida stays nearly a month earlier than in 2024 and paying a 70-per-cent premium to do so.

This is surprising, because last winter, the weak loonie and Canada-U.S. tensions kept lots of snowbirds at home, leaving many U.S. cities and RV parks without their faithful Canadian visitors.

That got me wondering: What about you, our loyal snowbird readers? Where are you actually planning to spend your winter this year?

Now we know.

We ran an online survey and heard from about 680 people (thank you to everyone who wrote in!). It’s still early to get the full picture of Canada’s winter migration, but our results offer a surprising sneak peek: At least a quarter of readers said they still plan to head south this season.

Florida, unsurprisingly, was at the top of the list. Nearly 16 per cent of respondents said they’ll be soaking up the sun there. Many of you mentioned that you still have property in Florida and long-time neighbours there.

But many non-U.S. destinations showed up on the list. Mexico actually came out as one of the leaders, with 17 per cent of snowbirds packing their bags for beaches there (and maybe margaritas).

A few other destinations popped up again and again in our survey: Portugal and Costa Rica both scored highly, and readers also mentioned Barbados, Arizona, the Dominican Republic, Thailand and Spain. Many readers also said they’ll be exploring Canada, mostly cities in British Columbia, such as Parksville and Victoria. May this be used as inspiration for those of you out there who have yet to book your winter trips.

So, while Florida may still be the snowbird capital, it’s clear that many of you are looking beyond the tried-and-true. Whether it’s chasing better value, exploring new cultures or trying to avoid a certain locale, this year’s migration map is quite varied. I’ll be following this as we get closer to the winter months.

Canadians’ lifespans are no longer increasing. After decades of steady gains, life expectancy has basically flatlined, whether you measure it from birth or from age 65. In fact, life expectancy from birth in 2023 was a bit lower than in 2012 and hasn’t budged from age 65 since 2016.

There are a few possible reasons: Fred Vettese, a former chief actuary of Morneau Shepell, writes that COVID-19, rising opioid deaths and the introduction of medical assistance in dying, which now accounts for about one in 20 deaths, are partly to blame. Slower longevity growth could make life annuities pricier than they should be and may reduce the future cost of Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security benefits, with potential implications for retirement planning and contribution rates.

Can Tom, 42, and Pat, 43, retire by 50 and still spend $200,000 a year?

The numbers: Tom runs a consulting business and invests surplus income in his holding company, which has about $2.86-million. Pat earns $100,000 a year as a realtor. Together, they have $460,000 in RRSPs, $105,000 in a TFSA, $30,000 in a non-registered account, plus a home and a rental property. Their mortgages total $312,500. They put $2,250 a month in RRSPs and $900 in their TFSAs.

The situation: They want to retire in eight years, travel, raise two young kids and spend $200,000 a year after tax without depleting their savings too quickly.

Key steps, from a financial planner: On their current path, Tom and Pat could spend about $180,000 a year after tax in retirement starting at 50. To hit their $200,000 goal, they would need to save an extra $100,000 annually in Tom’s company, leaving them with a $2-million surplus at age 95. Or, if they retire at 55 instead, their current savings would be enough. They should also rebalance Tom’s corporate portfolio, reducing bonds and leaning more on capital-gains-oriented investments, while holding fixed income in RRSPs. Moving life insurance into the corporation would allow premiums to be paid with pre-tax dollars and create a way to extract funds efficiently in terms of taxes.