Getting Your Financial Ducks In A Row Rotating Header Image

February, 2010:

Index Funds: The Oatmeal of the Investing World

WilfordbrimleyquakeradWe know it almost instinctively, from all the information we’ve seen about it: oatmeal is good for you.  For cryin’ out loud, Wilford Brimley made a living telling us “It’s the right thing to do, and a tasty way to do it.”  But in general, most folks look at oatmeal as a bland, tasteless, boring sort of food, and therefore choose much more exciting foods – often to our detriment.

There’s a similar story about index funds for investing:  it would be to the benefit of every investor to choose index funds as the core of his or her investment strategy.  In this case, the part of Wilford Brimley is being played by Burton Malkiel – venerable author of the classic book A Random Walk Down Wall Street.  And again most folks, especially those of us who deem ourselves too sophisticated for such a bland, tasteless, boring investment, choose to use much more exciting investment vehicles – often to our detriment as well.

According to Malkiel in his most recent book – The Elements of Investing – while people of modest means are hurt most by not saving regularly, wealthy folks suffer the most damage by trying to find the “home run” sort of investments pushed by actively managed funds and stock-picking gurus.  “If I took all the mutual funds that existed in the early 1970s and asked the question of how many really beat the market through 2009, you can count them on the fingers of one hand”, says Malkiel.

Benefits of Oatmeal

From reports by the American Cancer Society, the great benefits of oatmeal in your diet include the fact that it’s a source of both soluble and insoluble fibers.  These two fibers give us diversification across these food “asset classes” that provide the benefits of reducing bile acid toxicity, reducing LDL (the bad kind) cholesterol, slowing digestion and absorption of starch, all the while providing us with vitamin E, zinc, selenium, copper, iron, manganese, magnesium and protein.  It’s almost as if oatmeal provides us with all the good things we need, and canceling out all the bad – and the diversity of providing all these good things in one package makes oatmeal the perfect food!

An index fund (or a group of index funds covering all asset classes) provides the investor with similar benefits – diversification across all possible investments, providing the average “good” returns while canceling out the bad or negative returns.

It’s safe to say that a diet consisting solely of oatmeal probably wouldn’t be good for you, and no one is suggesting that.  A proper diet requires many other things that just aren’t present in oatmeal.  If, however, you did include all of those other things – fruit, dairy, and the like – in your oatmeal, you actually could do far worse than choosing a steady diet of your “super oatmeal” all the time.  It’s kind of like choosing more than one type of index fund for investing – except that we humans need variety in our diet to keep us satisfied.

So if you started your investing diet with a blend of two oatmeals – the aggregate bond market index and the total domestic stock market – and then tossed in a portion of some fruits and veggies:  the aggregate Europe, Australasia and Far East equity markets, a dollop of emerging equity markets, plus a pinch or two of global equities, then a portion of domestic and global real estate and commodities (for that yummy crunch!).  Now you’ve got yourself a super oatmeal for investing – providing everything you need to balance your investment tastes.  Plus, you don’t have to pay a restaurant (managed fund company) to provide you with a menu, nor do you have to pay extra for a chef (mutual fund manager).

The good thing is that the appetite of our investment accounts doesn’t really need the “filet mignon” or “lobster” sort of investments to maintain proper balance.  The steady diet of our “oatmeal” index funds, properly diversified, is plenty for investors of all walks of life.

Disclaimer: I don’t personally eat oatmeal, but I do eat an oat-based cold cereal for breakfast every morning – pretty much the same thing, only a little more convenient for me.  Liken it to the difference between a no-load index fund and an ETF. :)

Photo by Quaker Oats

Double, Double, Toil and Trouble

Avoiding Double Taxation on an Inherited IRA

double double toil and trouble by ArbronDid you know that if you don’t pay close attention, you could be paying tax a second time on an inherited IRA – if the original owner’s estate paid estate tax.  You won’t find much (if anything) about this at the IRS’ website… not really sure why, but nonetheless, it’s a little-known fact that you can avoid this double tax.

Following are a couple of examples that explain how the IRD deduction works, so that you can avoid the double taxation problem.

First Example

You have become the sole beneficiary of your father’s $400,000 IRA.  According to the records for the account, all of the contributions were deductible contributions (more on this later).

When your father passed away, his total estate was worth $1.3 million – the IRA that you will inherit, plus an additional $900,000 in other assets.  At the time of his death, the estate tax exemption was $1 million, leaving $300,000 taxable to the estate.  Without the IRA, the estate would have been completely non-taxed.  At the then-current 55% rate, your father’s estate has paid $165,000 in estate tax.

This creates your Income in Respect of a Decedent (IRD) ratio:  the tax attributable to the distribution divided by the size of the IRA.  Dividing $165,000 by $400,000 equals 41.25%.  This is an important number!

If you took the entire distribution all at once, you would have available the entire IRD deduction of $165,000.  However (and – there’s always a however in life, right?) what happens when you take the distribution over many years?

If you began withdrawing $20,000 per year from the account, each year you could deduct $8,250 (41.25%) from the distribution – reducing the taxable income to $11,750.  If you continued withdrawing that same $20,000 every year, the same deduction would be available to you – but only until you used up the original $165,000.  In this case, it would be 20 years.

If you took different-sized distributions, each distribution would be eligible for the 41.25% deduction, up to the point where the full $165,000 has been used up.

Of course, over time the IRA has the opportunity to grow, so you’ve likely got quite a bit left in the account.  Each distribution after the credit has been used up will be completely taxable.

Second Example

For a very quick look at a second example:

Same circumstances as before, except that the rest of the estate was worth $1.2 million, so that the overall estate is valued at $1.6 million when your inherited IRA is included.  Total estate tax paid is $330,000 (55% of $600,000).  Of that $330,000, the tax attributable to the IRA is $220,000.  So your IRD ratio is 55%, the same as the tax – $220,000 divided by $400,000.  In this example, every distribution that you take from the account receives a deduction of 55%, until the $220,000 has been used completely.

Photo by Arbron

Social Security Spousal Benefit for Divorcées

bankruptcy or divorce by kevindooleyRecently we talked about the spousal benefit for Social Security retirement benefits.  It is also important to note that similar benefits are available to divorced spouses.

A divorced spouse is eligible for a Social Security retirement benefit based upon the PIA (Primary Insurance Amount) of his or her ex-spouse under the following conditions:

  • he or she is at least 62 years of age
  • the couple was married for ten years or longer
  • he or she is not currently married
  • he or she is not eligible for a benefit (on his or her own record or another ex-spouse’s record) that would be greater than the benefit based on this particular ex-spouse’s record

The divorcée’s former spouse does not have to have applied for benefits, as long as the couple have been divorced for at least two years when he or she applies for the spousal benefit.  However, the former spouse must be eligible for benefits – that is, he or she (the former spouse) must be at least age 62.  Delaying application for spousal benefits beyond the former spouse’s age 62, up to FRA (Full Retirement Age) for the former spouse, will increase the amount of the spousal benefit.

As with the regular spousal benefit, if the divorcée reaches FRA and is eligible for a benefit on his or her own record, the divorcée can choose to receive only the divorced spousal benefit now and delay receiving retirement benefits in order to build delayed credits, increasing the benefit available on his or her own account.

Any benefits that are received by the divorcée have no impact on benefits to be received by the former spouse, any other ex-spouses of the former spouse, or the former spouse’s current spouse. Now that’s quite a sentence, isn’t it?

Photo by kevindooley

The Formula for Success

bioreactor by kaibara87Financial professionals sometimes get wrapped up in the overly-complex – retirement projections, Monte Carlo analysis, trust and estate planning, and complicated portfolio design.  It often comes to mind that we need to stop and remember what the most important concepts are in successful financial planning, and that can be boiled down to a very simple formula for success.

The reason this is important is because, as individuals, we are doing a poor job of creating success for ourselves.  Recent reports have shown that our overall savings rate (for Americans, anyhow) is essentially nil.  That is to say, we’re mortgaging our futures at a regular rate, month over month, with nothing being put back for the aggregate rainy days that are coming.

The Formula for Success

The basic, stripped down Formula for success is as follows (and don’t be surprised if this is boringly familiar):

Save 10% to 20% of everything that you earn, live debt-free, and invest your money in sensibly managed investments for the long term.

Following this simple Formula has provided many folks from all walks of life with a comfortable retirement, pretty much without regard to the ups and downs of the markets.  The Formula can work for anyone of any means – without the need for complicated projections, analyses, or any of the other fancy services that financial professionals provide.

That’s not to say that there is no value in those additional services – tax savings, estate protection, and portfolio optimization do provide powerful benefits, but not as much until your net worth has increased to a substantial size.  Following The Formula is the first step, the foundation of financial success.

What This Means

For the person just starting to put a real plan in motion, it really isn’t hard to get The Formula to work for you – the biggest roadblock is instilling the discipline into yourself to follow it.  It could be as simple as working together with your spouse, each of you holding the other accountable for maintaining the plan; in fact it’s essential that both of you are on the same page.  But often it is necessary to get some help.

Even though this process seems simple, it is at the earliest stages that guidance is essential to keep you on track.  It requires you to analyze your monthly expenses and income, consider your debt situation and any savings plans already in place, and then develop and work your plan to apply The Formula to your situation.  Guidance can be vital as you work through the process and can be critical to keeping you focused and on track.

If you don’t already have an advisor to help you to develop and work your plan, you should strongly consider getting one.  Many fee-only financial planners (but not all) can provide hourly service to help with just such a plan – you can search for this sort of advisor on the internet:  www.NAPFA.org and www.GarrettPlanningNetwork.com are the best places to start.  You could also go to my “How To Get Started” page to initiate a conversation your own situation.

The Point

So, the point of all this is – as Americans we have done a terrible job of preparing for our futures, but it’s never too late to start.  No matter where you are in the spectrum of potential financial success, putting The Formula into place (if you haven’t already) will improve your situation.  If enough of us do these simple things and stick to the plan, a brighter future will be in store for all of us.

Photo by kaibara87

Roth Conversion – What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

warning by jurvetsonIt is expected that in 2010 there will be more Roth IRA conversions than in any year in the past – maybe all years added together.  With all this converting and cavorting going on around IRAs and Roth IRAs, there are bound to be some problems arise.

One particular type of problem that could arise would specifically impact 2010 conversions – those conversions that qualify to be eligible for the special tax spreadout over the following two years.  That problem is the impact you’ll have when a significant sum is converted in 2010, the option for tax payment over 2011 and 2012 is chosen, but alas, the investments chosen go awry, terribly so, eroding your ability to pay the tax.

Specifically, this situation can cause a huge problem if the downturn on the investments occurs long after the conversion – long enough to be beyond the scope of the recharacterization possibility.  Below is an illustration of the situation I’m talking about.

Illustration

Here’s an example of the problem:  You have a significant sum in your IRA – let’s say $500,000, just for grins.  You have run the numbers and determined that it makes sense for you to convert this entire IRA to a Roth IRA in 2010, electing to spread the tax over 2011 and 2012, as you’re eligible to do.  You’ve chosen to do this because you expect that by retiring in late 2010, you will have a much lower taxable income in 2011 and 2012, thereby reducing the tax bite.

You estimate that your taxes will be $200,000 on the conversion, and since you don’t have that kind of scratch just sitting around in a savings account, you expect to pay that tax from the proceeds in your Roth account, $100,000 in 2011 and $100,000 in 2012.  Furthermore, you consider yourself a sharp cookie – you’ve decided to invest the entire amount of your Roth IRA in the hottest new mineral exploration company; you heard about it from a buddy at the club, and he’s always making money, or so he says.

By the October 15, 2011 (the last day that you could choose to recharactrize the conversion), your mineral exploration stock investment has grown 50% – now your Roth IRA is worth $750,000.  Things are going great!  Since the account has grown, you decide not to recharacterize the conversion, and you’ll just sit back and watch your stock grow.

Problems on the Horizon

Until… along about mid-March in 2012, the company you’ve bought into becomes a party of an environmental lawsuit, placing a restraining order against further exploration activities.  The lawsuit is not expected to have merit, it will just be a bump in the road – but the stock falls out of favor, dropping in value by 50%.  Your Roth IRA is now worth $375,000… and you have to pull out $100,000 to pay taxes in 30 days.  After doing so, the account is now worth $275,000.

Now you’ve decided that your hot tip wasn’t such a hot tip, but since you have faith in the company and truly believe that the lawsuit is just a bump in the road, you hang on.  And, in fact, in mid-June, the stock does come back, but nowhere near the 172% you’d have to gain to get back to the all-time high, and not even the 45% that you’d have to gain just to get back to your original $500,000.  More like about 20%, which brings your account balance up to $330,000.

these boots were made for throwing by Coyote2024More Footwear Decends

Just in time for the other shoe to drop:  in late October of 2012, the CEO of your mineral company is arrested for insider trading – and the stock takes another dive, losing 30%.  Your Roth IRA account is reduced to $231,000 – you decide the rollercoaster ride is over for you and you sell out, putting all your money in the money market at a 1.5% return.  When it comes time to pay the other half of the tax in April of 2013, you’ve achieved a bit of a return on the money market holdings, so that your account is now worth approximately $233,000 – but you’ve got to pull out the tax payment.  After you pay your taxes, your nest egg is now worth $133,000.  You’d planned on having at least $300,000 at this point. and now what you have left will be tough to get by on.

What Can We Learn?

What could have been done to avoid this?  Presumably you had weighed the risks and the plan met your needs, as long as the aforementioned problems hadn’t occurred.  This comes down to the long-time planning adage of not putting all your eggs in one basket… you should never try for the “home run” sorts of returns with your entire nest egg.  I’d say you should give up on taking your buddy’s stock tips as well – especially with regard to investing more than you can afford to lose in any one issue as was illustrated.

Of course, something similar could have happened in a diversified account; we have only to look at late 2008 and early 2009 for an example of an across-the-board downturn.  But the likelihood of a repeat of such a downturn is very low, and diversification across many asset classes can provide a buffer against that possibility.

In addition to diversification across asset classes, it makes great sense to diversify across tax treatment as well.  In your savings plan you should have some money invested in all three types of tax treatment: capital gains taxable, tax-deferred (as in an IRA), and tax-free (as in a Roth IRA).  Of course if you have the ability to have all of your money in a tax-free account (as the example did) that would be great, but as you can see, getting the money to the account could be problematic.

Photo #1 by jurvetson
Photo #2 by Coyote2024