Getting Your Financial Ducks In A Row Rotating Header Image

Are You Protected?

Home destroyed by Hurricane Elena

Home destroyed by Hurricane Elena (Photo credit: State Library and Archives of Florida)

I recently received a call from a friend of mine asking questions about his newly acquired rental property. He had just moved from a duplex where he owned the entire duplex and lived on one side. Having purchased a home and finding a new tenant to replace where he was living, he was surprised and upset when his insurance on the duplex nearly doubled.

After some debate he decided to reduce the replacement cost of the building that the insurance company had placed on the building from $500,000 to $250,000. This, of course, sent red flags flying in every direction in my brain.

His first question to me was why his insurance nearly doubled. The reason was that since he was no longer a tenant in his own duplex the insurance company assesses that as more risky and adjusts the premium accordingly. He further commented that the replacement cost was just too high and that he hadn’t paid nearly $500,000 for it and even $250,000 seemed high.

This is what I explained to him. When an insurance company assesses the cost to rebuild your home, a number of factors go into that assessment. They will look at the price and kind of materials to rebuild, labor, style of the home, basement or not, landscaping, number of bedrooms, bathrooms, and more. When the home was first built, almost always the materials and labor were cheaper and chances are the home was built (if in the city) in conjunction with several homes in the subdivision. Big trucks, cranes, etc. could be used to build the home. Now it may take several workers with wheelbarrows to do the same thing so as not to infringe on the neighbor’s rose bushes.

In addition, insurance doesn’t care what you paid for the home, just what it costs to rebuild it. If the duplex was purchased for $125,000 in 1973, that $125,000 had much more purchasing power than it does today in 2013.

This leads to the heart of this story – the coinsurance clause.

Many insurance policies contain a clause that states that your home needs to be insured to at least 80%of its reconstruction cost. This means that in the duplex above, the home needs to be insured for at least $400,000. As long as a building is insured for at least 80% of the reconstruction cost then the insurance company will pay the full replacement cost of the home.

If not, a formula is used and you can guess it’s not to the insured’s advantage. For the duplex above, let’s say we had a $100,000 loss from a fire. In this case the policy would use the formula which is what the duplex is insured for ($250,000) divided by what it at least has to be insured for ($400,000) multiplied by the amount of the loss ($100,000).

So: ($250,000 / $400,000) x $100,000 = $62,500.

In this case, the insured would only get $62,500 for a $100,000 loss! This example also ignores any deductible which would bring that amount even lower.

Before we got off the phone my friend was now very concerned he was under-insured. He promised to look at his policy and get back to me to see if the coinsurance clause applied to him.

I highly suggest our readers consider doing the same.

Enhanced by Zemanta

5 Essential Financial Planning Steps for Your 30s and 40s

(jb note: the article below is from my friend Roger Wohlner, who blogs at The Chicago Financial Planner.)

Finance

Many of the calls that I receive are from folks in their 50s or 60s who are either within sight of retirement or already retired.  Many of these callers are pretty well-prepared for retirement and are seeking my help to fine-tune their situation and/or to help them through this next phase of life.  This type of financial readiness doesn’t just happen it takes planning and preparation.  Here are 5 essential financial planning steps for those of you in your 30s and 40s to help you reach your retirement goals and more importantly to help you achieve financial independence.

Get started 

If for whatever reason you haven’t done much of anything to ensure your financial future it’s time to get going.  Today is the best day to get started, tomorrow is the second best day, and so on.  If you are in your 30s or 40s and haven’t begun to save for your retirement, if you have a family and don’t have a basic will or any life insurance, if you have debt or spending issues it’s time to get started on a path to secure your financial future.

Protect your family 

I can’t tell you how many phone calls I’ve received from a 30 or 40 something professional (always a male) with young kids and a stay at home spouse.  Typically the caller is all excited about investing or perhaps about buying income property.  Both are great ideas.  However when I ask whether he has any life insurance in place or even a basic will naming a guardian for his young children the answer is something like “… we’ve talked about that…”  My response is to implore him to stop talking about it and get it done.  I generally follow-up the phone call with a list of estate planning attorneys for them to consider.

My point is this, if you are in your 30s or 40s and have a family you need to ensure their financial security.  Term life insurance is very cheap in this age range assuming that you are in good health.  Until you’ve accumulated sufficient assets to provide for your family in the event of your death, life insurance is a great way to build an estate quickly.

It is vital that parents of minor children at least have a will in place that names a legal guardian for their children in the event of their death.

While we are on this subject make sure that all beneficiary designations on retirement accounts, annuities, and insurance policies are up to date and specify the correct beneficiary.  There is no better way to say “I love you” to a spouse than to have you life insurance go to an ex-spouse or somebody else because you forgot to update the policy’s beneficiary designation.

Even if you are single at the very least you will want to give some thought as to where your money and assets would go if you were to die and take the appropriate actions to ensure this would happen.

Save for retirement 

There is still time to accumulate assets for retirement.  Time in fact is one of your greatest assets here.  Contribute to your 401(k) or similar retirement plan.  Contribute to an IRA.

In many cases you may be starting a family or looking to fund college during these years.  While there may be conflicting demands for your money, save as much as you can for retirement.  As you get to your 50s, 60s, and beyond you’ll be glad you did.

If you are single this is all the more reason to ramp up your retirement savings, assuming you never marry it’s all on you to save for a comfortable retirement.

Financial planning is vital 

Many folks get serious about financial planning in their 50s and 60s as they approach retirement.  There’s nothing wrong with this.  However having a plan in place in your 30s or 40s gives you a head start.  Are you on track to beat the odds in the “retirement gamble?”  Better yet what will it take to help you achieve financial independence?

Make sure the basics are covered.  Get your spending in check and pay down your debts.  If you haven’t done so already, adopt the basic fiscal habits needed to live within your means.

If you work with a financial advisor become knowledgeable.  Take an interest in your situation.  This doesn’t mean that you need to be a financial expert, but a bit of knowledge combined with your own good common sense will help shield you from fraud or just plain bad advice.  If your financial advisor recommends what seems to be costly, proprietary (to his/her employer) financial products trust your gut and look for advice elsewhere.  My very biased view is that you should seek the help of a fee-only financial advisor.  Check out NAPFA’s guide to help you in finding the right advisor for your needs. 

Combine and consolidate 

By this time you’ve likely worked for several employers.  If you are like many people you haven’t paid as much attention to your old 401(k) accounts as you should have.

This is a good stage of your life to do something with these old retirement accounts.  Combine them into a consolidated IRA account.  Roll them into your current employer’s plan.  Do something with these accounts, don’t ignore this valuable retirement asset.

Invest like a grown-up 

There’s nothing wrong with allocating a portion of your investment assets to taking some”flyers” on a stock you like, or an ETF that invests in a hot sector of the market,  play money in other words.

The vast majority of you investments should be allocated in a fashion that dovetails with your financial plan.  Have an allocation plan, stick with it, rebalance your holdings periodically, and adjust your allocation as you age or if your situation warrants.

This investing plan should take into account all of your investments including IRAs, company retirement plans, taxable investments, and so on.  If you are married this should include both of your accounts.

For most people mutual funds and ETFs generally make the most sense.  There is nothing wrong with individual stocks, but they require a level of expertise and research that most investors don’t have.

The planning, saving, and investing that you do in your 30s and 40s will pay major dividends down the road, as you seek a comfortable retirement and financial independence.  Don’t waste time, get started today.  Don’t become part of the retirement savings crisis in the U.S.

Please contact me at 847-506-9827 for a free 30-minute consultation to discuss all of your investing and financial planning questions. Check out our Financial Planning and Investment Advice for Individuals page to learn more about our services.   

Please check out our Resources page for some additional links that might be beneficial to you.  

Photo credit:  Flickr

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why Diversify?

Diversity

Diversity (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Remember Enron? I think we all do. Enron was once a powerhouse company that saw its empire crumble and took the wealth of many of its employees with it. Why was that the case? Many of Enron’s employees had their 401(k) retirement savings in Enron stock. This was the classic example of having all of your eggs in one basket and zero diversification.

Let’s say that the employees had half of their retirement in Enron stock and half in a mutual fund. Enron tanks but their mutual fund stays afloat. This means that they lost, but only lost half of their retirement, all else being equal.

Imagine if they had only a quarter of their retirement in Enron and the remaining 75% in three separate mutual funds. Enron’s demise is only responsible for a fourth of their retirement evaporating. This could go on and on.

The point is that when you choose to diversify you’re spreading your risk among a number of different companies. That way if one goes belly-up you’re not left with nothing.

Mutual funds are an excellent way to diversify among an asset class. For example, if you purchased a total stock market index fund you’d have nearly the entire US Stock Market in your portfolio which amounts to approximately 4,100 different stocks.

That’s great diversification but we can do better. The US equity market is only one area. We can diversify into domestic bonds, international stocks, international bonds, real estate, and so on. This is called diversifying among asset class. The point is that you want to spread your risk and diversify as much as possible so one market or asset class doesn’t ruin your entire portfolio.

A term we use often in the industry is correlation. This simply means how one particular security moves in relation to another. If I own two large cap growth funds they’re pretty closely correlated; meaning that if large cap companies fall both of these funds are going to fall very similarly.

If I own a large cap fund and a bond fund, then if large cap stocks fall, the bonds may rise or may stay the same or even fall slightly. This is because they are a different asset class and move differently than equities. Keep adding different assets to the mix and you have a potential portfolio that can withstand the dip and turns of the market.

Even the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett diversifies. Granted he may have all of his eggs in one basket, Berkshire Hathaway, but own Berkshire Hathaway stock and you’ll get exposure to insurance, bricks, candy, cutlery and underwear to name a few. Admittedly, not many people have $175,000 to buy just one share of BRK stock, but the point is that even Mr. Buffett diversifies.

Diversify. It works.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Education Expense Tax Tips

Title page to Locke's Some Thoughts Concerning...

Title page to Locke’s Some Thoughts Concerning Education (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

One way to help ease the bite of the cost of a college education is to use all available tax rules to your advantage.  There are several items you can use, including 529 plans, Coverdell ESAs, and various credits for tuition and fee payments.

The IRS recently released their Summertime Tax Tip 2013-19: Back-to-School Tax Tips for Students and Parents, providing a valuable overview of a couple of important credits and deductions.  The actual text of the Tip follows:

Back-to-School Tax Tips for Students and Parents

Going to college can be a stressful time for students and parents. The IRS offers these tips about education tax benefits that can help offset some college costs and maybe relieve some of that stress.

  • American Opportunity Tax Credit.  This credit can be up to $2,500 per eligible student. The AOTC is available for the first four years of post secondary education. Forty percent of the credit is refundable. That means that you may be able to receive up to $1,000 of the credit as a refund, even if you don’t owe any taxes. Qualified expenses include tuition and fees, course related books, supplies and equipment. A recent law extended the AOTC through the end of Dec. 2017.
  • Lifetime Learning Credit.   With the LLC, you may be able to claim up to $2,000 for qualified education expenses on your federal tax return. There is no limit on the number of years you can claim this credit for an eligible student.You can claim only one type of education credit per student on your federal tax return each year. If you pay college expenses for more than one student in the same year, you can claim credits on a per-student, per-year basis. For example, you can claim the AOTC for one student and the LLC for the other student.You can use the IRS’s Interactive Tax Assistant tool to help determine if you’re eligible for these credits. The tool is available at IRS.gov.
  • Student loan interest deduction.  Other than home mortgage interest, you generally can’t deduct the interest you pay. However, you may be able to deduct interest you pay on a qualified student loan. The deduction can reduce your taxable income by up to $2,500. You don’t need to itemize deductions to claim it.

These education benefits are subject to income limitations and may be reduced or eliminated depending on your income.

For more information, visit the Tax Benefits for Education Information Center at IRS.gov. Also, check Publication 970, Tax Benefits for Education. The booklet’s also available at IRS.gov or by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676).
Additional IRS Resources:

Enhanced by Zemanta

Book Review: Asset Allocation-Balancing Financial Risk

Asset Allocation

This was a re-read for me, with the recent publishing of the fifth edition of this very important book.  Roger Gibson has updated his excellent work with the results of his strategies during the Great Recession, up to date as of late 2012.

Advisors have much to learn from Mr. Gibson’s tome regarding the optimal methods for allocating your investment assets. Throughout the first portion of the book, the concepts of market-timing and superior asset selection are summarily debunked, and the benefits of market index investment and diversification are shown to be optimal.  The author uses real-world data to underpin his findings.  The result is the explanation that, with known investment time horizons, an optimal mix of investments can be determined that will produce superior long-term risk-adjusted results.

Much is written in the book, which is directed primarily to investment advisors, about the mind-set of the investor himself or herself.  The point is that, even though as an advisor you develop and implement the best possible investment allocation, if the investor is reluctant to stick with the allocation plan through thick and thin, the benefits of the allocation are lost.

It is important to ensure that the advisor understands where the investor stands on the concepts of market timing and superior investment selection.  Mr. Gibson displays this as a matrix as follows:

Is Successful Market Timing Possible?
YES NO
Is Superior Security Selection Possible? YES Quadrant 1 Quadrant 2
NO Quadrant 3 Quadrant 4
Source: Roger C. Gibson, 1995

Folks who fall into Quadrant 1 believe that it is possible to choose the best time to enter and exit the market (e.g., buy low, sell high), and that it is possible to choose specific securities that will result in superior returns.  This means that one day the investor wakes up and looks at his charts, graphs, and company reports and magically, he’s able to tell the future.  He is capable (in his mind) of choosing just the right investment at just the right time, and furthermore he is capable of knowing when to sell that investment to avoid a downturn.  Without going into the backing data, hopefully you can see that these folks, while they do exist, their results aren’t as anticipated – if the results were clearly superior, obviously all investable funds would eventually be placed with such a manager. No one has that kind of result.

Quadrant 2 devotees only believe that it is possible to choose superior securities, but that choosing the entry and exit times is not predictable. This investor buys his chosen superior investments and holds them for long periods of time, a true “buy and hold” investor.

Those with a Quadrant 3 worldview are of the belief that superior investment selection is not possible, therefore these investors choose to invest in index mutual funds or other methods of owning a broad basket of securities across various asset classes.  However, Q3 folks believe it is possible to determine when is the best time to enter a holding in a particular asset class and when to exit the holding.  This investor is constantly choosing between the asset class that he believes is in favor versus the asset class he believes is out of favor.  Long-term results have shown that this sort of market timing is similarly unsuccessful as the Q1 worldview.  Again, had this ever been the case, the results would speak for themselves.

This leaves us with Quadrant 4 – giving in to the fact that superior asset selection is not predictable, and timing is not possible.  This means that we choose index-type broad market investments, and we hold to the investment allocation over long periods of time.  This is the only long-term successful method of investment allocation, proven time and again with real world results.

This of course doesn’t mean to just simply determine the asset classes across which your investments should be allocated and split your investments evenly across all chosen asset classes.  Time horizon for the investment activity must be known, as the shorter the time horizon, the less risk the portfolio can endure.

In addition, the investor’s appetite for (and tolerance of) risk must be determined.  This determination is made by considering the amount of loss that the investor can emotionally withstand – and using knowledge of the risk profile of various mixes of investments to match up with the risk appetite.  Naturally this risk appetite is countered by the requirement for returns from the investment – in order to achieve increased returns, generally risk must be increased.

In addition, once the asset class allocations are chosen based on the time horizon, return requirement, and risk appetite of the investor, as investment results occur over time the investment allocation must be re-balanced regularly.  This is necessary to maintain the same risk/return profile that was originally selected.  As well, over time the time horizon becomes necessarily shorter, so the original asset allocation must be re-aligned to fit the new horizon.

The above is only a brief overview of what I found to be the most important take-aways from this critical book.  I highly recommend this book for any advisor who is looking to develop long-lasting superior risk-adjusted returns for his clients.  Individual investors can benefit from the book as well, although the much of the book is devoted to working with clients to develop allocation plans.

The above book review is part of a series of reviews that I am doing in an arrangement with McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing, where MH sends me books with the only requirement being that I read the book and write a review – like it or not.  If you find the information in this review useful, let me (and McGraw-Hill) know!

Book Review: The 7Twelve Portfolio

Diversification - Investing

Diversification – Investing (Photo credit: 401(K) 2013)

The 7Twelve Portfolio is an excellent concept for financial planners and novice investors alike. The book is very well written and easy to comprehend as Dr. Israelsen keeps the concepts simple and analogies easy to follow. The crux of the book is regarding diversification and Dr. Israelsen uses the analogy for making salsa as a reference. For example, you don’t have salsa of you just have diced tomatoes and it really doesn’t improve if you simply add some onions and salt. It improves a little bit, but still isn’t salsa.

The same is true for diversification. You’re not diversified if you own one stock or bond in your portfolio and have all of your holdings in that one asset. The benefits of diversification begin when you start adding additional ingredients to the mix. This starts to lower risk and help maximize return. This is a concept us nerdy planners call correlation. The less assets are correlated the better. That means when one asset class falls a different asset class may rise or even stay the same.

With enough ingredients in our salsa of investments we get a portfolio that’s well diversified and less susceptible to extreme gyrations in the market. It also provides a portfolio that generates better returns than one would think simply because we got the ingredient mix correct.

Think of it this way: you absolutely love dessert. But too much of a good thing isn’t always the best idea, right? If you just ate dessert all the time, your blood sugar would spike and then you’d crash later in the day. What you want is a balanced meal that keeps your energy relatively even throughout the day. With investing, if you only have one or two investments, you’ll reach extreme highs and then you may crash later as well. Having the right mix of assets keeps your portfolio balanced and better prepared to handle “market indigestion”.

Overall if you’re looking for a good book that reinforces the diversification discussion (and you like salsa) the 7Twelve Portfolio is a good, short read that will give some valued insight on proper diversification and asset allocation.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Social Security Spousal Benefit at or After FRA

Actress Alice Terry

Actress Alice Terry (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some time ago I wrote an article on the Social Security Spousal Benefit Before FRA, and an astute reader (thanks, SD!) pointed out the obvious to me: I hadn’t written the complementary piece on calculating the spousal benefit at or after FRA.  So let’s get right to it!

When you wait until Full Retirement Age to file for spousal benefits, there is no reduction of that portion of your benefits.  In other words, the spousal benefit will be based on 50% of your spouse’s PIA minus your own PIA, and then this amount will be added to whatever retirement benefit that you’re receiving on your own record.  This additional benefit can’t increase your total benefit to a point greater than 50% of your spouse’s PIA.

Here are some examples:

Started own benefits early

Alice and Terry are both age 66.  Alice started her own benefit early, at age 62.  Her PIA is $800, and Terry’s PIA is $2,000.  Since she filed early, Alice’s monthly benefit is reduced to $600, 75%, of her PIA.  Now at age 66 (FRA for both of them) Terry files and suspends, allowing Alice to file for spousal benefits.  The calculation is as follows:

50% of Terry’s PIA ($1,000) minus Alice’s PIA ($800) equals $200

Therefore, when Alice files for spousal benefits, she will receive an additional $200 on her monthly check, for a total of $800.

Started own benefits at FRA

If Alice had delayed filing for her own benefit until she was at FRA, her own benefit would be $800.  If Terry has filed for his own benefit or filed and suspended, Alice can now file for the spousal benefit.  The calculation is as follows:

50% of Terry’s PIA ($1,000) minus Alice’s PIA ($800) equals $200

This $200 is then added to Alice’s own retirement benefit, so her total benefit amount is now $1,000.  This is equal to 50% of Terry’s benefit, so there is no further reduction.

Started own benefits after FRA

If Alice was two years older than Terry, for example, Alice could have delayed starting her own benefit to an age later than FRA, and therefore her benefit would be increased by Delayed Retirement Credits of 8% per year.  If she filed for her own benefit at age 68, her own benefit would now be $928, an increase of 16%.  When Terry reaches FRA and files for his own benefit (or files and suspends), she is now eligible for the spousal benefit.  The calculation is as follows:

50% of Terry’s PIA ($1,000) minus Alice’s PIA ($800) equals $200

Since adding the spousal offset to Alice’s own benefit would result in a total monthly benefit greater than 50% of Terry’s PIA, the overall increase for the spousal benefit would be reduced to $72, so that Alice’s total monthly benefit would not be greater than half of Terry’s PIA, the maximum benefit due to spousal increase.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Good Reason to File and Suspend: Back Benefits

Man wearaing suspenders

Man wearaing suspenders (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Note: with the passage of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 into law, File & Suspend and Restricted Application have been effectively eliminated for anyone born in 1954 or later. If born before 1954 there are some options still available, but these are limited as well. Please see the article The Death of File & Suspend and Restricted Application for more details. In particular, the provision discussed below is no longer available to anyone.

We’ve discussed the file and suspend option in the past as it relates to enabling your spouse or dependents to begin receiving benefits based on your record while you delay filing to accrue the delay credits.  But there’s another reason that you might want to file and suspend at Full Retirement Age (FRA) – and this one has little to do with a spouse, even single folks can take advantage of this.

When you file and suspend, what you have done is to establish a filing date notation on your record. By establishing a filing date notation, as mentioned before, your spouse and dependents can file for benefits based upon your record.  In addition, since there is a filing date on your record, you are eligible to change your mind about delaying your filing to a later date and receive your benefits retroactively from that point to the point when you “unsuspend” your filing.  Then from that point forward you will receive your benefits monthly as if you had filed (and not suspended) on the original date.

An important point is that you cannot file and suspend until you have reached Full Retirement Age.  This option is not allowed prior to FRA.

Why would you want to do this?

There may be more reasons, but the one that immediately comes to mind is if you have a reason to believe that your lifespan will be much shorter than the crossover age, typically around age 80.  After the crossover point, your lifetime benefits from delaying your retirement become more than if you had filed earlier.

Commonly when the decision is made to delay benefits past FRA, you are assuming that it will be beneficial for you in the long run – in other words, you anticipate that you’ll live beyond the crossover age.

For example, you could file and suspend at age 66 (FRA) and then later, at age 68 you are diagnosed with a significant health problem that will likely shorten your life.  Instead of waiting until age 70 to file for your benefits, or unsuspending your benefits at your current age, you could ask to unsuspend your benefits as of the date that you originally filed at FRA (age 66).  You would then be eligible to receive back-benefits from the point of the original filing in a lump sum, and then you’d receive benefits each month going forward at the rate you would have received at age 66 (plus COLAs).

If you’re single and delaying your benefits past Full Retirement Age, I can’t think of any reason why you wouldn’t want to do this.  There’s always the possibility that you will have a change in your outlook (heaven forbid).  If that were the case, the back-benefits could come in really handy, not to mention that you could receive ongoing benefits from that point on.

On the other hand, if you’re married you need to consider if there’s a possibility that it might be beneficial to receive spousal benefits based on your spouse’s record.  If so, then you wouldn’t want to file and suspend, because this would substantially reduce or eliminate any spousal benefit that you would be eligible for.  Keep in mind as well that if you unsuspend your benefit, your surviving spouse and dependents’ benefits will be based on the lower benefit level (when you originally filed).

For example, Tom and Joy are age 66 and 62 respectively.  Tom’s expected age 66 benefit is $1,800 per month, and Joy’s is $800.  Joy intends to begin receiving her own benefits right away at age 62, and as such her benefit will be reduced to $600, or 75%.  Tom has a choice now: he could file and suspend, or he could file a restricted application for spousal benefits only.

If Tom files and suspends, Joy will be eligible for reduced spousal benefits of an additional $70 on top of her reduced retirement benefit, for a total of $670 per month.  However, if Tom were to file a restricted application for spousal benefits only, he would be eligible for $400 per month.  So this way, Tom and Joy are receiving a total of $1,000 per month.  In this case Tom would not want to file and suspend his benefits at FRA – unless he’s concerned about the possibility of a shortened lifespan.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Airplane Analogy

Safety Instructions...

Safety Instructions… (Photo credit: Ranieri Ribeiro)

Many parents face the decision during their working years to try to fund both retirement and college education. Some can adequately do both while others are forced to do the best they can with what money they can save.

Sometimes parents can get caught up in wanting to save as much as they can for their children’s college education and forgo the need to save for or save more for retirement.

When this situation presents itself, I have given my clients my airplane analogy. It goes something like this:

Have you ever flown on an airplane before? If you have you know that once you’re scrunched in and belted and the plane makes its way from the gate the flight attendants break radio silence and start with their routine flight instructions. After you’re taught where the exit rows are and how to use your seat as a floatation device they inevitably change the conversation to cabin pressure.

Should the aircraft experience a decrease in cabin pressure oxygen masks will fall from the overhead compartments. Grab the mask and fully extend the cord to allow the release of oxygen.

The next words are crucial to your survival.

Place the mask over your face and tighten the straps on the side. Once your mask is secured then attend to your child or help the person next to you.

Why would they say that? Because if you pass out at 35,000 feet you’re of no use to anyone.

A similar comparison can be made for those parents saving for both retirement and college. If the focus is solely or mostly on college savings, there may be little if any money accumulated for retirement. In addition, there are plenty of financial aid opportunities available for college. The options for financial aid in retirement are slim.

I’m not saying don’t save for your child’s education. It is very important and a priority for many parents. What I am saying is make sure your retirement savings are being added to as well. Otherwise the reward for all of that money saved for college may be a degree – and two future roommates for the graduate!

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

3 Reasons to use the new safe harbor home office deduction and two reasons not to

home office

home office (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

Home office workers! In case you hadn’t heard about it, the IRS made some changes to the way the home office deduction works for 2013.  Essentially, you are now allowed to deduct a flat $5 per square foot of dedicated office space, with a maximum of 300 square feet.  But this new “safe harbor” option isn’t for everyone.  Listed below are three reasons this may be good for you, and a couple of reasons that you might want to use the old method.

3 Reasons It’s a Good Thing

Depreciation recapture not needed any longer – if you are just starting out taking the home office deduction, you can forget about this concept of “depreciation recapture”.  This is a required add-back (actually basis reduction) when you sell your home.  If you took the old-style home office deduction, including depreciation of your home office space, you’ll still need to keep records of the depreciation that you claimed in earlier years and recapture that depreciation when you sell your home.  (Note: you’ll also need to maintain these records even if you start taking the safe harbor amount, since you might switch back to the old method, as well.  More on that later.)

Less record keeping – In the past when calculating the home office deduction, you needed to gather together your utility bills, mortgage interest, real estate taxes, repair bills, etc., in order to determine the amount that is attributable to the home office.  Under the safe harbor rule, this isn’t necessary.

No loss of mortgage exp deduction – In addition to the above, under the old method, any amount for real estate taxes and mortgage interest that are claimed under the home office deduction had to be subtracted from those expenses for use on your Schedule A – this is no longer required if using the safe harbor $5 rule.

2 Reasons You May Want to Stick With the Old Rule

Office or dedicated space is larger than 300 square feet – You’re limited to 300 square feet under this new provision.  For many home office deducters, this will be plenty, but there are likely many exceptions.  If your office includes a dedicated waiting area, for example, this could easily go beyond the 300 square foot maximum.

Carry overs from prior years are lost/no carryover allowed – if your home office expenses are greater than your gross income less business expenses and you’re using the new safe harbor method, there is no carryover of the excess to future years.  Using the old method, the excess could be carried over.  In addition, if you switch to the safe harbor method, any prior year carryover is lost.

(Here’s a bonus, but it’s not for the faint of heart!) If you later switch to the old method you have to account for the prior depreciation (only as basis for depreciation). This over-complicates the depreciation calculation, as you must skip the years when depreciation isn’t charged to determine basis for the current year, but account for those years when determining which year’s depreciation to deduct.

General

Choice can be changed each year – Using the safe harbor rule in one year doesn’t lock you into that choice for the future.  You can switch back & forth every year if you wish… but keep in mind that this is going to complicate your depreciation calculations quite a bit.  Also, once you’ve filed a return with one choice or the other, you cannot go back and amend the return to change the method of home office deduction – it’s an irrevocable choice.

If you have more than one home and you intend to take the home office deduction for offices in each home, you are limited to using the safe harbor for only one of the offices in any particular year.  You can still use the old method on your other home offices in that year. You’re not required to use the safe harbor rule for any of the offices.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Book Review: A Random Walk Down Wall Street

A Random Walk Down Wall Street

A Random Walk Down Wall Street (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Right from the start this book will be an excellent read for both financial advisors as well as their clients. Dr. Malkiel provides academic insight on the reasons why passive management works and some great commentary on the use of index funds as part of someone’s overall portfolio.

This was the second time I read this book and certainly not the last. It’s great reinforcement on why we invest our clients’ money the way we do and provides solid academic evidence that doing anything to the contrary is counterproductive, more expensive and simply playing a loser’s game.

Some of the bigger takeaways from the book are Dr. Malkiel’s thoughts and research on the different part of the Efficient Market Hypothesis or EMH. The EMH consists of three parts – the strong form, the semi-strong form and the weak form. The EMH essential admits that markets are efficient – meaning that current prices of stocks reflect all available information and prices adjust instantly to any changes in that information.

The weak form of the EMH rejects technical analysis as a way for beating the market and getting superior returns. Technical analysis can best be described as using past information to exploit future stock picks. Examples of exploiting such information are through charting, which is analyzing a stock based on its pattern of movement on a chart. Other examples given are those of anomalies that investors try to exploit such as the January Effect and the Dogs of the Dow.

The semi-strong form of the EMH says that analyzing a company’s financials, managers, and quarterly and annual reports will not help an investor or manager find stocks that will beat the market overall, thus bot technical and fundamental analysis of companies is futile.

The strong form of the EMH goes even further by stating that even inside information (think Martha Stewart and ImClone) won’t lead investors to superior returns over the market. So technical and fundamental analysis along with insider information are useless.

Admittedly, we know that anomalies exist and there are going to be differences here and there. Even Dr. Malkiel admits this – which is why it’s called a hypothesis and not a law. But the point to remember here is that even though markets have anomalies they are generally efficient and to the extent markets are inefficient, we won’t be the ones to beat them.

Think of it this way: if hundreds of Wall Street professionals and analysts can’t get it right, what makes us think we can?

So don’t try to beat the market; buy the market.

And that’s the meat and potatoes of this book.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Be Careful When Using Your Social Security Statement for Planning

The Statement

The Statement (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Recently I received an interesting email from a reader (thanks, JRT!) that illustrates one of the problems with interpreting your statement from Social Security on a regular basis.  Part of the email follows:

I am just reaching 66 and have been self employed for many years.  I have worked continuously for 30+ years reaching $100,000 or so per year  but have been slipping into retirement and last years income dropped to $70000. SS has already reduced my monthly payment estimate.  It appears that if I postpone beginning taking my SS retirement I will lose in the long term because each year I have reduced income before retiring my SS distribution will be less. For instance if I defer to 70 and have 4 years with zero income won’t I be hurting myself???

In the situation described above, what the reader is describing is the amounts he is seeing on statements from Social Security.  When he was (for example) 64 years old, he saw a projected benefit at age 70 approaching the maximum benefit.  Then when he got his new projection a year later, after he had reduced his income for the most recently-reported year, the amount was less.  It appears that he’s losing benefits by delaying – right?

Not really.

The problem is with the way that the SS calculates your projected benefit.  They always assume two things that will tend to cause problems:

  1. Your most recently-reported wages will continue at that same rate until you retire.
  2. You will continue working until you file for SS benefits.

Jeff’s Statement at Age 64

So let’s work this out in an example.  FYI, I’ve done all of this work using the Social Security “Any PIA” online calculator.  The reader (let’s call him Jeff) was born in 1949, so in 2013 he is 64 years of age.  He has earned the Social Security maximum earnings from 1978 to the present.  When he receives his estimate for benefits at age 70, the projected amount of his benefit is $3,452.  (Note: When I plugged in the numbers for 2013 and 2014-beyond, I used the current max amount of earnings, $113,700, to reflect what SS does for the statement.)

If I go back and change the retirement age to 66, the benefit calculates to $2,579.  It’s safe to assume that if the situation was exactly as I described, Jeff would have received a statement showing him that information when he was 64 years of age.

Jeff’s Statement at Age 65

To estimate what would happen to Jeff’s estimated benefits the next year when he gets his statement, I changed his birthdate to 1948, and – since he indicated he is now earning less, I showed that instead of the maximum amount for 2012, 2013, and 2014-beyond, he actually projects to earn $70,000.  Now, his projected benefit at age 70 is $3,394 – since the future projected income is less than was projected a year earlier.  The projected age 66 benefit is now $2,571, also less than before, but by a smaller margin since fewer years are impacted.

Jeff hasn’t “lost” benefits – because the projected amount was only that, a projection.  Since the reality is that he received less in earnings than was originally projected, his accurately-projected benefit is now less.  In other words, the only way Jeff could have achieved the projected benefit is if he continued to work at the same income level ($113,700) as was projected for him.

Jeff’s Statement at Age 66

Taking Jeff’s last statement into account now – what happens if he stops working at age 66 and has four zero years?  To display this, I again dropped his birthdate back by a year, so that it indicates he is age 66 this year.  The past three years (including 2013) he has received earnings of $70,000 – but for future years, he will receive zero income.  Now the calculator shows a projected age 70 benefit of $3,306, which is likely to be very accurate – the only difference would be the annual COLAs that are applied (if any) between now and when Jeff reaches age 70.

Conclusion

So – as you can see, it can be dangerous to assume that the projected benefits on your Social Security statement are completely accurate for your situation, unless you actually will earn the same income between now and the date you begin receiving benefits.  In the case of Jeff, since his income is reducing and potentially going to zero for his last four years before age 70, the projected benefit from a couple of years prior was overstated.  The overstatement in this case was roughly $150 per month.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tips When Renting Out Your Vacation Home

English: Rental cabins near the Great Smoky Mo...

English: Rental cabins near the Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Sevier County, Tennessee. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you have a vacation home that you only use during for brief vacations throughout the year, you might have entertained the thought of renting out the home to defray some of your expenses.  Using a property for mixed purposes – that is, partly as personal and partly as a rental (business use) – can lead to some complications with regard to your income taxes.

This is due to the fact that the income earned from renting out the property is likely to be taxable income, which you will need to report on your income tax return.  Of course, you’re allowed to deduct the expenses that are related to the production of income, and then you’re only taxed on the net income after the deductions.

The IRS recently published their Summertime Tax Tip 2013-08, which provides some of the guidelines to keep in mind if you’re going to rent out your vacation home.  The complete text of the Tip follows:

Renting Your Vacation Home

A vacation home can be a house, apartment, condominium, mobile home, or boat.  If you own a vacation home that you rent to others, you generally must report the rental income on your federal income tax return.  But you may not have to report that income if the rental period is short.

In most cases, you can deduct expenses of renting your property.  Your deduction may be limited if you also use the home as a residence.

Here are some tips from the IRS about this type of rental property.

  • You usually report rental income and deductible rental expenses on Schedule E, Supplemental Income and Loss.You may also be subject to paying Net Investment Income Tax on your rental income.
  • If you personally use your property and sometimes rent it to others, special rules apply.  You must divide your expenses between the rental use and personal use.  The number of days for each purpose determines how you divide your costs.Report deductible expenses for personal use on Schedule A, Itemized Deductions. These may include costs such as mortgage interest, property taxes, and casualty losses.
  • If the property is “used as a home”, your rental expense deduction is limited. This means your deduction for rental expenses can’t be more than the rent you received. For more about this rule, see Publication 527, Residential Rental Property (Including Rental of Vacation Homes).
  • If the property is “used as a home” and you rent it out fewer than 15 days per year, you do not have to report the rental income.

Get Publication 527 for more details on this topic.  It is available at www.irs.gov or by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676).

Enhanced by Zemanta

What a Mutual Fund Manager Won’t Tell You

English: A small monkey. Singapore.Most people reading this article will have some experience with mutual funds. Whether part of your IRA, 401(k), or other savings vehicle mutual funds play a key role in helping people achieve their savings goals with access to a wide variety of companies and diversification along with professional management.

By professional management we mean an individual or team of managers that run the day-to-day activities of the fund such as buying and selling of stocks and bonds as well as running financial analyses of the different companies whose stock they are looking at adding to or selling from the fund.

Mutual funds and their managers vary and from the macro level you essentially have two types of managers – active and passive. Active management means that the managers of the fund actively trade securities in hopes of achieving higher than market returns or outperforming their respective benchmark, such as the S&P 500. Passive manager have more of a buy and hold mentality and will rarely trade unless it is absolutely necessary or if they are index fund manager and a specific company had been added to or removed from an index such as the S&P 500.

What they won’t tell you is that many fund managers will often play monkey see monkey do. Fund managers will mimic what their counterparts are doing and buy and sell the same funds. Rarely will you see a manager go out on a limb – there’s too much to lose such as a well-paying job, and a sizeable bonus.

Studies have shown that managers will “hug” their respective benchmarks for job security – meaning that rather than try to beat their benchmark by a wide margin, they will stay within a few percentage points, plus or minus in order to still meet their goals. A manager the consistently beats the market by a wide margin will be expected to do the same year after year – a feat impossible to do over the long run and in the short run, mostly due to luck.

Admittedly, there will be some managers that will beat the market. You’ll see them announce their victories in the different financial press showing stellar returns and how their fund beat the market. Read the fine print. In most cases they will be announcing their returns before expenses, called gross returns. Look at net returns, after expenses, and the same managers have now underperformed the market or their benchmark. And if they’ve been lucky enough to really beat the market by a wide margin, in most cases the next year the fund is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

In the long run your best bet is to simply buy and hold the market through passive management and index funds. Your expenses are less and you’re not paying someone to do something they can’t.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Financial Record Storage and Safekeeping

A tornado near Seymour, Texas

A tornado near Seymour, Texas (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

We’ve all got reams of papers, paystubs, receipts, sticky notes and possibly even old matchbook covers with important financial information stored on them.  It’s important to keep some of these documents safe, in order to provide proof of purchase, documentation for deductions, and the like.  You never know when a significant event could occur in your home that could put these documents at risk.  Fire, flooding, tornadoes, blizzards, and three-year-olds can emerge out of nowhere and could possibly destroy your important documents.  We’ve discussed how long to keep these documents in the past.  Recently the IRS published their Summertime Tax Tip 2013-04, which details some recommendations for safe storage of your documents.  The text of the Tip follows.

Keep Tax and Financial Records Safe in Case of a Natural Disaster

Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and other natural disasters are more common in the summer. The IRS encourages you to take a few simple steps to protect your tax and financial records in case a disaster strikes.

Here are five tips from the IRS to help you protect your important records:

  1. Backup Records Electronically.  Keep an extra set of electronic records in a safe place away from where you store the originals. You can use an external hard drive, CD or DVD to store the most important records. You can take these with you to keep your copies safe. You may want to store items such as bank statements, tax returns and insurance policies.
  2. Document Valuables.  Take pictures or videotape the contents of your home or place of business. These may help you prove the value of your lost items for insurance claims and casualty loss deductions. Publication 584, Casualty, Disaster and Theft Loss Workbook, can help you determine your loss if a disaster strikes.
  3. Update Emergency Plans.  Review your emergency plans every year. You may need to update them if your personal or business situation changes.
  4. Get Copies of Tax Returns or Transcripts.  Visit IRS.gov to get Form 4506, Request for Copy of Tax Return, to replace lost or destroyed tax returns. If you just need information from your return, you can order a transcript online.
  5. Count on the IRS.  The IRS has a Disaster Hotline to help people with tax issues after a disaster. Call the IRS at 1-866-562-5227 to speak with a specialist trained to handle disaster-related tax issues.

In the event of a disaster, the IRS stands ready to help. Visit IRS.gov to get more information about IRS disaster assistance. Click on the “Disaster Relief” link in the lower left corner of the home page. You can also get forms and publications anytime at IRS.gov or order them by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676).

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Few Things for a Single Person to Consider When Planning Social Security Filing

Single man

Single man (Photo credit: @Doug88888)

The decision of when to begin receiving Social Security benefits can be a bit daunting, because there are many things to take into account when making this decision.

The basic concept of the lifetime value of benefits taken at various ages is the most common thing to consider, when this is really not as important as you might think.  This is especially true for single person – since the benefit reduction and increase factors are designed to achieve a similar lifetime result for the average lifespan.

In other words, if you are an average person with an average lifespan, it won’t make much difference at what age you file for benefits, as you’ll receive approximately the same amount by the end of your average life, whenever you begin receiving the benefits.

However.

Another factor that you need to keep in mind is how Social Security benefits are treated, tax-wise.  At a maximum, your Social Security benefit will be taxed as 85% – for every dollar in Social Security benefits you receive, you’ll only owe income tax on 85 cents at most.  At the other end of the spectrum, you may not be taxed at all on your Social Security benefits, depending on your total overall income.

For example, Jane, age 62, is retiring.  She has a modest pension of $10,000 with a cost-of-living adjustment annually, and her annual expenses are $40,000 per year.  Jane has an IRA worth approximately $300,000, and she has a Social Security PIA (benefit at age 66, her Full Retirement Age) of $2,000 per month.

Jane could take her Social Security benefit now, at age 62, at a reduced amount of $1,500 or $18,000 per year.  If she did this and she’s receiving the $10,000 pension, she’d also need to withdraw approximately $15,000 from her IRA to make up the difference.  When she has the income as described, she will incur income tax of approximately $2,478.  This is the approximate amount of tax she’d have on her income for her life.

Another way to arrange Jane’s income would be for her to hold off on taking the Social Security benefits until later, and take more from her IRA each year to make up the difference.  This would require withdrawals of approximately $35,000 per year from the IRA.  Along with the pension income, this would result in annual taxes for Jane of roughly $4,800.

The good part is that, when Jane reaches FRA, age 66, she could start receiving Social Security benefits at the rate of $2,000 or $24,000 per year.  At that point she could reduce her IRA withdrawal to approximately $6,000 per year – and because of the way Social Security is taxed, at this stage she would only have tax of $600 per year.  None of her Social Security would be taxed, and this would remain the same for the rest of her life.

Had she delayed even further, to age 70 to begin receiving Social Security benefits, her total benefit would now be $31,680 due to the delay credits.  At this point she would not need IRA withdrawals any longer, and she would have no income tax at all for the rest of her life.

Let’s shake up the details a bit more, with Joe’s situation: at age 62, he has annual expenses of $60,000, and a PIA of $30,000 per year – meaning he could receive $30,000 per year ($2,500 per month) if he files at age 66.  Joe has an IRA worth $1 million, and no pension.

If Joe starts Social Security benefits at age 62, his benefit will be reduced to 75%, or $22,500.  In order to achieve his $60,000 income requirement, he’d need to withdraw roughly $47,000 from his IRA, and his total income tax would be approximately $9,960 – and he’d have a similar tax for the rest of his life.

If Joe instead delays to age 66, his FRA, to begin receiving Social Security benefits, he’d need to take roughly $70,000 from his IRA for those four years, and his tax is approximately $10,928 for those years.  At age 66 he’ll have $30,000 in Social Security benefits, which he would need to augment with IRA withdrawals of approximately $37,000.  Tax on this income would be down to $7,253, which would be about the same for the rest of his life.

Delaying to age 70 would have an even more profound impact: At this stage Joe would be eligible for $39,600 in Social Security benefits, so he’d only need to withdraw roughly $24,000 per year from his IRA, and the total tax on this income would be down to $3,353 for the rest of his life.  The dramatic decrease in tax is due to the fact that, at this income level, less than 50% of Joe’s Social Security benefits are taxed.

Other sources

It should be noted here that in the all of the examples for both Jane and Joe, there is always a possibility that their IRAs might run out of money in their lifetimes with these long-term IRA withdrawal rates.  This is far less likely in the cases where they depend on a larger amount of Social Security benefits for income by delaying benefits to later ages.

The examples below don’t make assumptions about rate of return on the IRA assets, as we have also not made any assumptions about Cost-of-Living Adjustments or inflation – all to keep the figures simple to follow.

For the first example with Jane starting SS benefits at age 62 and withdrawing $15,000 per year, assuming that she lives to age 81 she’d need $285,000 in the IRA to start with.  If she delays to age 66 to start benefits, her IRA would need to have approximately $230,000 to support her need of $35,000 for four years and then $6,000 for the remaining 15 years to age 81.  Delaying to age 70, she’d need a total of $280,000 from her IRA to withdraw $35,000 for 8 years.

If she lives beyond age 81, in the first case she’s only got $15,000 left, and she needs to withdraw $15,000 each year to cover her expenses, or only one year.  In the second case she has $70,000 left in her IRA, from which she needs to withdraw $6,000 each year, so it will last a little less than 12 years.  In the last case, Jane has $20,000 left in the IRA, but she doesn’t need to withdraw anything at all – so in other words, her income is arranged to last for the rest of her life, with no limitation, plus no income tax!

For Joe – in the first case he’d need $893,000 from his IRA to get him to age 81.  The second, he needs $835,000 – four years at $70,000 and 15 years at $37,000.  In the last situation, Joe needs $560,000 for the first 8 years, and then $264,000 for the eleven years to age 81, for a total withdrawal of $824,000.

If he lives past age 81, he’s got $107,000 in the first case, from which he needs to withdraw $15,000 per year, leaving him with just over 7 years of withdrawals.  In the second case, with $165,000 remaining in the IRA and an annual withdrawal of $37,000, leaving him with just over four years of withdrawals.  In the last case, he has $176,000 and needs to withdraw $24,000 annually, or just over 7 years.

So in Joe’s case, he either needs to reduce his expenses or count on the fact that he’ll only live to age 88 (or 85).  At any rate, his best outcome would occur by delaying to age 70 – because a larger amount of his required income is guaranteed since it’s Social Security benefits, rather than the finite IRA account which could run out during his lifetime.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Holy Priceless Collection of Etruscan Snoods

Snood dog

Snood dog (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Pretty weird title right? It actually comes from the classic Batman TV series starring Adam West and Burt Ward. Burt Ward’s character, Robin was notorious for his exclamations categorizing different objects or dilemmas as righteous.

How does this relate to financial planning? We all have our snoods that we collect or have value to us. When we purchase renters or homeowners insurance, we often assume that our personal property is covered under the specified limits on the policy. Normally this is 50% of the home’s insured value.

But it pays to read the fine print. Most policies will only allow for coverage for certain items and only for specific limits. For example, a typical home insurance policy will cover jewelry only up to $1,000 total – for all of the jewelry you own. In order to have coverage for a specific item of jewelry such as a wedding ring, engagement ring, or necklace an endorsement is required.

Think of an endorsement as a “mini insurance policy” specifically for the item covered. For a wedding ring, it would be a policy within your existing homeowners or renters policy that covers only the ring, subject to its own deductible and often much more broad types of coverage. This means that in a normal home policy without an endorsement one could lose their ring, have the stone fall out, etc. This is known as mysterious disappearance and is generally not covered under the basic home policy.

With an endorsement, the ring could be lost, or a stone could fall out and the endorsement will likely cover that loss – subject to the endorsements deductible which is typically less that the home policy deductible.

The same is true for other items such as art, coins, trading cards, silverware, furs, antiques, firearms, and yes, priceless collections of Etruscan snoods. I have even had friends need a specific endorsement for the grand piano in their living room.

Most insurance carriers will require an independent appraisal to endorse high-ticket items like jewelry, antiques, coins, etc.

Check your policy and make sure your snoods are covered. If not, contact your insurance carrier and see what needs to be done to get them added. Your premiums will undoubtedly increase, but you’ll have peace of mind knowing your snoods are covered.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What is WEP?

Social secruity

Social secruity (Photo credit: SalFalko)

WEP, in Social Security parlance, is the Windfall Elimination Provision.  So, if that’s all you wanted to know, you’re good to go.

You wanted more though, right?  Okay, here we go:

WEP is the provision of the Social Security rules that provides for reduction of your Social Security benefit when you are receiving a pension from a job that was not covered by Social Security.  Usually these jobs are government-related, including state and federal government employees, teachers, and the like.  In addition, pensions from work done in other countries would also fit into this category, as long as the work was not covered by US Social Security.

How it Works

When your Social Security benefit is calculated, if you’ll recall from this earlier article on benefit calculation, your Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) factor is divided into three portions, bounded by bend points.  The first bend point is multiplied by 90% – but if WEP applies, the 90% multiplier is reduced by as much as 50%.  The reduction amount can be reduced or eliminated by two additional factors – the amount of your pension from non-covered work, and the number of years of substantial earnings you’ve accrued in your career in jobs covered by Social Security.

If your benefit is fully impacted by WEP, this means that for 2013 your Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) will be reduced by 50% of the first bend point, which is $791 – so the maximum reduction via WEP in 2013 is $395.50.

The reductions apply to your own PIA which then applies to your own retirement benefit, as well as to any beneficiary or spousal benefits that are calculated on your PIA.  If you’re receiving a Spousal or Survivor Benefit based on someone else’s record, WEP does not apply.  Additionally, if the pension you’re receiving is from someone else’s work – as in, if you’re receiving a survivor’s pension based upon your spouse’s government-related job – WEP does not apply to your Social Security benefits.

Now let’s review the ways that the WEP reduction can be reduced or eliminated from the maximum 50%.

Substantial Earnings

When you have worked in a Social Security-covered job for more than 20 years and the earnings are considered “substantial” by Social Security definition, these earnings can begin to reduce the WEP reduction factor from the maximum.  For each year greater than 20 that you’ve had substantial earnings, the 50% factor is reduced by 5%.  So if you have had substantial earnings for 30 or more years, the WEP reduction factor is completely eliminated.

Amount of Your non-SS Pension

The other way that WEP impact can be reduced from the maximum is based on the amount of your pension from the non-Social Security-covered job.  The total dollar amount of WEP reduction is limited to 50% of the total dollars being received from the non-SS-covered job.  So if your pension from this non-SS-covered job is less than $791 (in 2013), then the reduction for WEP will not be at the maximum.

Let’s say your pension from non-SS-covered work is $400 per month.  As a result of the maximum cap, your Primary Insurance Amount will only be reduced by $200 (50% of your pension amount).

Enhanced by Zemanta

Stretching an IRA When There Are Non-Individual Beneficiaries

Ira and Charlie

Ira and Charlie (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As we’ve discussed here previously, one of the requirements to enable an inherited IRA to be “stretched” over the lives of the beneficiaries is that all of the beneficiaries must be individuals.  That is to say, none of the beneficiaries can be something other than a person, such as a trust (specifically a trust that is not a see-through trust), a charity, or an estate.  If even one beneficiary is not a person, then all of the beneficiaries must take distribution within five years.

But there’s a way around this, and it has to do with the timing of distributions.

When an IRA owner dies, there is a key date to know: September 30 of the year following the year of death of the owner.  On that date, the beneficiaries are “set” for the IRA, and if available, the Designated Beneficiary is named.  It is on this date that the applicable distribution period is defined for the beneficiaries of the IRA.  If all of the beneficiaries are persons (not some other entity as described above) and the IRA is not split into separate inherited IRAs for each beneficiary, the oldest beneficiary becomes the Designated Beneficiary.  It is the lifetime of the Designated Beneficiary which will determine the applicable distribution period for all beneficiaries.  However, if the IRA is split up into separate inherited IRAs for each beneficiary, then all beneficiaries are Designated Beneficiaries, and each separate inherited IRA’s beneficiary will be eligible to use the distribution period referencing his or her own age.

However – as mentioned above, if one or more beneficiary(ies) on September 30 of the year following the year of death of the original owner is a non-person entity, then all beneficiaries must take distribution of their portion of the IRA within 5 years.  The date is the key: if distribution of the non-person entity’s portion is completed prior to September 30 of the year following the hear of the death of the original owner, then as of that date there would be only “person” beneficiaries.  This would allow for the remaining individuals to split up the IRA into separate inherited IRAs and take distribution over their individual lifetimes, per the IRS’ tables.

For example…

John died at the age of 68 in June of 2012, leaving his IRA and other assets primarily to his two children, Chuck and Sally.  However, he also wanted to make sure that his alma mater, Enormous State University, received 1/3 of his IRA, worth $1 million at his death.

If John’s executor does nothing with the IRA assets prior to September 30, 2013, Chuck, Sally, and ESU will have to take distribution of $333,333 each before the end of 2018.  This could amount to a considerable tax burden for Chuck and Sally (ESU wouldn’t have to pay taxes as an educational institution), since each would have to withdraw as much as $66,667 each of the five years. It should be noted that the distribution doesn’t have to be evenly split over the five years as long as the account is fully distributed by the end of five years.

On the other hand, if John’s executor were to distribute the 1/3 share to ESU before September 30, 2013, then ESU is no longer a beneficiary of the IRA on the Beneficiary Designation Date.  With that fact in place, the IRA has only “individual” beneficiaries, and so the account can be split evenly between inherited IRAs for Chuck and Sally, and then Chuck and Sally can stretch the IRA distributions over their own lifetimes. per the IRS tables.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Fees

Expenses

Expenses (Photo credit: Phillie Casablanca)

What you see is what you get – or what you don’t see is what you get. As you start or continue to invest and save for college, retirement, weddings, vacations, and other goals it’s important to know the underlying fees and charges of the products and funds that you’re in. Very often these fees are buried in the minutia of a thick prospectus or in the fine print of your account statement.

Fees are necessary, but excessive fees aren’t. You should be getting what you pay for – but that can be hard if you don’t know what you’re paying.

Let’s take mutual funds for example. On one end you have fees and expenses going to the fund and the manager to try to do the best with your money – which is to earn a decent return (positive or negative) and hopefully beat their benchmark. This is typically a more expensive approach when the manager is trying beat their benchmark as there is more buying and selling of the stock and bonds in his or her fund.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have a passively managed fund or an index fund. These are typically less expensive as the manager doesn’t have to do a ton of work – after all, their fund is essentially mirroring the index – like the S&P 500 or the Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index.

So what determines a fair fee? For active and passively managed funds, anything less than one percent is going to be a good start. Think of it this way: if you have $100,000 invested in a fund charging one percent in expenses, that’s $1,000 annually going to the fund company. Half a percent is going to be $500 annually and a quarter percent is $250 and so on. This is on top of how the fund performed. So if the fund lost seven percent, you effectively lost eight percent. If you’ve gained nine percent, your net is eight percent.

Added to the fund expenses are the fees and charges your broker or adviser may charge. Front-end load or commissions are charged by commissioned advisers. These can range from around five percent to one percent depending on the fund for new dollars that come in. There are also 12b-1 fees (often referred to as trails) that are tacked on commissioned funds and these are usually around a quarter percent annually.

Fee-only advisers will charge from a quarter percent to up to two percent in addition to the fund expenses. They may also offer a range of services provided that include the management fees you’re paying such as tax returns, financial planning, and budgeting.

Read your statements, asks lots of questions and make sure you know exactly how much you’re paying.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta