top of page

By:

Sayli Gadakh

11 November 2025 at 2:53:14 pm

Why Rs 1 Crore May Not Be Enough for Retirement

For most middle-class Indians, Rs 1 crore is a retirement milestone — but it may not be enough Bharat, 35, has a stable job, a growing income and a clear plan for the future. Discussing retirement with a friend, he says, “If I have Rs 1 crore by the time I retire, I’ll be financially secure.” For many middle-class Indians, Rs 1 crore remains a major financial milestone. But Bharath is not retiring today. If he retires at 60, his target is 25 years away, and inflation could significantly...

Why Rs 1 Crore May Not Be Enough for Retirement

For most middle-class Indians, Rs 1 crore is a retirement milestone — but it may not be enough Bharat, 35, has a stable job, a growing income and a clear plan for the future. Discussing retirement with a friend, he says, “If I have Rs 1 crore by the time I retire, I’ll be financially secure.” For many middle-class Indians, Rs 1 crore remains a major financial milestone. But Bharath is not retiring today. If he retires at 60, his target is 25 years away, and inflation could significantly reduce its purchasing power. Many retirement plans fail because they focus on a future number without considering what it will buy. If inflation averages 6% over 25 years, something costing Rs 1 lakh today could cost roughly Rs 4.3 lakh when Bharat retires. Rs 1 crore could therefore support a very different standard of living. Longer Retirements Earlier generations often relied on pensions, provident funds, family support and savings. That model is changing. Many private-sector employees may have no traditional pension, while longer life expectancy means savings may need to last 20 or 30 years. If Bharat retires at 60 and lives to 90, his corpus could have to support him for three decades. Retirement planning must therefore focus on sustainable income, not simply accumulation. Bharat currently spends Rs 60,000 a month. He expects expenses to fall after retirement as his children become independent and his home loan is paid off. But healthcare, insurance, medicines, household help, travel and lifestyle costs could rise. At 6% inflation, Rs 60,000 today would equal about Rs 2.58 lakh a month in 25 years. The Rs 1 crore target suddenly looks less comfortable. Health And Tax Bharat may have employer-provided health insurance while working but could lose it after retirement, just as healthcare needs increase. His plan should include health insurance, emergency and contingency funds, medical expenses and possible long-term care. Simply investing more is not necessarily the answer. At 35, Bharath has a long investment horizon and may be able to take greater investment risk, depending on his circumstances and risk capacity. As retirement approaches, capital preservation and liquidity become more important. Tax planning is also crucial. Interest income, capital gains, pension income and withdrawals may have different tax implications. With India’s Income-tax Act, 2025 coming into effect from 1 April 2026, long-term plans should be reviewed against the applicable tax framework. The key question is not, “How much will my investment statement show?” but, “What will my corpus be worth after inflation and taxation?” Look Beyond Property Bharat owns a house worth Rs 2 crore, but that does not mean Rs 2 crore is available for retirement. A house provides security and may appreciate, but its value cannot easily fund monthly expenses without changing living arrangements or using a financial product to unlock it. Retirement planning must therefore distinguish between net worth and income-generating assets. Instead of choosing Rs 1 crore as a target, Bharath should work backwards, considering current and future expenses, retirement duration, inflation, healthcare, other goals, investment returns and taxes. The real question is: “How much will I need to maintain my desired lifestyle without depending on my children?” Start Early Bharat’s biggest advantage at 35 is time. Compounding over 25 years can produce a dramatically different outcome from investing for only 10 years. A middle-class family does not need to start with a huge investment. It needs discipline and consistency. As income rises, retirement contributions should rise too, rather than allowing salary increases to disappear into lifestyle expenses. A practical plan should estimate future expenses, account for inflation, maintain a separate emergency fund, provide adequate health and life insurance, diversify investments and consider tax implications. It should also be reviewed as income, inflation, tax rules and family responsibilities change. Bharat now asks, “What lifestyle do I want after retirement, and how much will I need to fund it?” He starts investing early, increases contributions with salary hikes, controls debt and reviews his corpus regularly. He may ultimately need considerably more than Rs 1 crore. More importantly, he understands why. For today’s middle class, retirement planning cannot be based on a number that simply sounds impressive. Rs 1 crore may have been a significant milestone for an earlier generation, but inflation, healthcare costs, longer life expectancy and taxation could dramatically change what it provides decades from now. Retirement security depends not just on the corpus, but on its purchasing power and sustainable income. The lesson is simple: don’t ask, “Will I have Rs 1 crore?” Ask, “Will my retirement savings fund the life I want?” A large number today may not be enough tomorrow. (The writer is a Chartered Accountant based in Thane. Views personal.)

Dog lovers differ on SC order

Mumbai: The Supreme Court’s Tuesday order on the euthanasia for the dogs that are rabid or are aggressive and dangerous has evoked a mixed reactions from animal lovers in Mumbai.


Pooja Sathe Gawande, a dog trainer, sees the order as a positive rule not just for the humans but also for the animal, who would otherwise go through a lot of pain. “The order is in the public interest for their health and safety. So the dogs that have rabies or are incurably ill, which means they cannot be cured at any private hospital or government hospital, should be euthanized,” she told ‘The Perfect Voice’.


They have also mentioned that each state and union territory needs to have at least one working animal birth control centre. First of all, they need to set that up and get the animal birth control going on,” she said.


Shirin Dhabhar, a canine behaviourist and trainer, agrees to euthanasia in the case of terminally ill or injured dogs who are in a lot of pain. She said, “For rabies, there is no cure, and it’s a very painful disease, so it is much kinder to let the animal go. Dogs who meet terrible accidents that break their spines, and if the dog cannot be repaired or has a poor quality of life, then we should put them down peacefully. But it has to be done humanely with the veterinarian.”


Sarika Nerurkar, a photographer who has taken pictures of animal rescuers and activists across the country, differs. She said, “To be very honest, this entire situation just leaves me with a lot of questions. Who decides which dogs are to be euthanised? How does someone decide if a dog is actually rabid? What are the checks and controls in place to make sure this power isn’t misused? Because these are still living beings we’re talking about. And then I keep wondering, where does their right to life go in all of this? What about the lives of animals that literally cannot speak, advocate, or fight for themselves?”


Nerurkar said, “I understand that public safety is important, of course it is, but it feels deeply unfair and heartbreaking when the solution starts becoming the elimination of the weakest and most defenseless beings in society. Especially in a country where so many strays survive only because ordinary people choose to feed them, care for them, vaccinate them, and protect them. For me, this feels less like a solution and more like fear being imposed on beings that have no voice in the matter. And that’s what makes this so sad.”


Silent Death

The Supreme Court order also talks about killing dogs that cause harm to humans due to severe aggression and behaviour issues. The animal lovers differ on this point too. Gawande said, “Enforcing and blankly saying that removing all the dogs from the premises of railway stations, hospitals, and other places is not practically possible. The government cannot take all the dogs and dump them somewhere. They are living things and not dead objects.”


Dhabhar believes there is a lot of grey area in the matter. “When it comes to aggressive dogs, there is a lot of ambiguity because behaviour is not necessarily black and white. The key question is who is determining that the dog is dangerous here. The dog can bite for reasons like fear, the animal can be in pain, or maybe it's the mother dog protecting the baby. This could be one of the reasons, but it doesn’t mean that the dog will bite repeatedly. So who decides whether they are aggressive or not?”


Another animal lover Sandhya Wagle said, “As far as aggression is concerned, it can be cured by medicines. Also, they are not aggressive on their own; they are made aggressive. Animals can be made aggressive by human influence. So if you make an animal chase or bite, or try to catch, they can do it. If there are breeds that are aggressive, they can  be calmed down by medicines.”


An animal lover Erum Ali Qureshi said, “The idea for removing stray dogs from their places is wrong as they can relocate healthy, sterilised dogs from their territory, which they have been protecting for years. When you do that, you create a vacuum and invite unvaccinated dogs into the ecosystem. If you say you will kill every dog that will come in place, after a few generations, the dog will become aggressive and so feral that you will not be able to catch them, as they will become defensive. Then they will bite people.”

Comments


bottom of page