JoeTaxpayer

A regular reader of my blog kindly pointed me to an article in Smart Money titled “401(k) Debit Cards Can Put Retirement at Risk” in which we are introduced to a debit-card like product which taps your 401(k) instead of your checking account. Although I wrote back in May’s “401(k) Loan bad for your (financial) health?” that loans were not absolutely bad, it depended on many factors, I think that such easy access is the flip side of the coin, almost certainly a bad thing. There are times I walk the fine line between wanting ‘big brother’ to establish just enough regulations to protect people from their own irresponsibility and wanting no such laws at all, caveat emptor still applying. Here, I’ll make the distinction between a one-time 401(k) loan used to help with the purchase of a first home, bridge the gap of income for an unemployed spouse, or a refinance of credit card debt combined with a change in lifestyle. Of course, paying off the cards with the loan, then charging up the cards again is no better than using a 401(k) debit card in the first place.

As the post title suggests, my feeling on this product is that it gives the consumer just enough rope to hang themselves.
Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: 401(k) loan, Credit, credit card, Finance, income, money, Retirement

Regular readers know how I feel about variable annuities, but have little issue with the immediate annuity. Now, one issue that would hit us if you wished to put an immediate annuity inside an IRA is the calculation of RMDs and taking RMDs that may exceed the cash available within the IRA.

IRS Regulation section 1.401 (a) (9)-6 offers a solution.

If an immediate annuity is qualified and based on a payout scheme that is not intended to exceed your life expectancy the annual payout satisfies the RMD requirement even if it is less than would otherwise
be required. Perhaps a bit of an obscure issue, but one you may run into at retirement.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: annuity, immediate annuity, IRA, irs, irs regulation, Retirement, RMD, variable annuities

I’ve seen remarks across the blogosphere that the recent FDIC advertisements are a bad sign. I’m not convinced. I think there are many who have no idea how the FDIC protection works, what its limits are, and how to get more coverage. First, here is one of the ads they are running:

The important thing to understand is that non-retirement accounts are insured up to $100K. If you have more cash than this, you should consider splitting it up among more than one bank. In the case of a failure, you may have to wait some time to access your money, so even if you are below the limit, using 2 or 3 banks is a good idea. See the FDIC Website for more details.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: banks, failure, fdic, money, Retirement, retirement account

I recently read a post “Why I love Roth IRAs” in which the author ignores much of the math going in and coming out. Now, I love Roths myself, but only when used to take most advantage of the tax rates involved. Let me explain. From my feature article earlier this year titled “Can you save too much, pre-tax?” we see that a couple with $447,500 in their 401(k) or Traditional, Pre-Tax IRA, can take withdrawals and remain in the 0% bracket. This is due to the combination of standard deductions and exemptions. The next $401,250 will support withdrawals at the 10% rate.
If you have a defined benefit pension (a traditional pension) the numbers certainly will shift, and you need to take this income into account. Pensions are getting more scarce and those who frequently changed jobs are likely to have never vested into any one plan.
So, now I’ll ask, what percent of retirees are likely to have saved this sum, a total $848,750 from the numbers above? I cite an article from AARP titled 2004-05 Boomers which offers a forecast. One chart in this report offers that for those born in 1956-65, their mean (this means average, important distinction from median, middle) wealth is forecast to be $839K. But reading on, we find that after subtracting non-retirement wealth and present value of Social Security benefits, we are looking at a retirement account balance of just $140K. It turns out the 4th quintile (this is the second 20% from the top) is forecast to have $906K, this scales to about $151K in retirement accounts. Even the top quintile (top 20%) will average $2028K total wealth, with maybe $350K-$400K in retirement accounts. So it’s only the upper portion of that group (in addition to those with fat traditional pensions) that need to consider the Roth while working. For the rest of us, we will likely be in the 10% or if fortunate, the 15% bracket upon retiring.
I’ll close with this thought - each family has their own set of numbers. This is why if you write in to a web site or magazine and ask “Is Roth good for me?”, it’s impossible to answer without knowing many details. We know more the closer you are to retirement, but only have a series of clues the further away you are. Another blog “The Finance Buff” offers a view similar to mine. I remain surprised at how many wave the Roth flag without some level of analysis. For those who have access to a Roth 401(k) and Roth IRA, it would be a shame to load those up and find that they missed out on the tax savings that pretax savings could have provided.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: 401(k), Finance, income, IRA, Retirement, retirement account, roth ira, saving, Savings, Social Security, tax, tax rates, traditional pension, wealth

Regular readers know where I stand on Variable Annuities, and I though thought I’d share this quote from a Suze Orman interview on CNN Money which caught my eye;

“I hate them with a passion - a passion! - especially in a retirement account like an IRA. Variable annuities have all these extra fees and tax issues and penalties, but - oh, that’s okay! - because they give you a tax deferral. But a retirement account is already tax-deferred without all those fees. It’s absolutely ridiculous. I think variable annuities exist for one reason only: to make money for the financial advisers who sell them.”

I’ve had some disagreements with some of her advice, but lately I’m finding more of her quotes that are right on target.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: CNN, cnn money, IRA, money, Retirement, retirement account, Suze Orman, tax deferral, variable annuities

Consumer Reports recently offered an article titled “Your Debt; 8 Benchmarks For Borrowing“, which, for the most part, I liked and will consider adding to a List of Rules I’m assembling. Among the warning signs;

• 28% - Monthly Mortgage (including property tax and insurance) should not exceed this number. Really? That’s exactly what I suggested in my post Mortgage 101, so I’m in full agreement there.
• 80% - The first mortgage should not exceed this level. A lower debt to equity ratio is better. Interesting, I made the same comment in Mortgage 101, but that was more to benefit the bank, not the borrower. I’ll maintain that if the payments are still within the guidelines, there’s nothing magic about 80%.
• 6 - month’s worth of income as emergency money. I wrote about this as well, a couple weeks back in my controversial Emergency Funds post. This may be a worthy goal, and right for many, but not at the top of my list. I have been aggressive in retirement savings, well above average, managed the mortgage with serial refinancing to capture a low rate and an amortization that will end the mortgage well before retirement, and funded college in full for a child who is only 10, yet I’ve ignored this rule.

The CR article goes on with guidelines that are still worth reading if not following right to the letter.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: amortization, debt, emergency fund, Finance, income, Investing, Retirement, saving

There’s an attraction to the interactive sites suggesting you plug in your age, sex, etc, and see details related to your category peers. From CNN/Money I found;

Yes, I am 45-54. The site also offers median net worth based on your income. Click on the image to be taken to the site to see where you stand. Keep in mind, net worth figures generally include the value of one’s home and median is not the same as average. Median means half the population considered is higher, half lower.
Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: cnn money, Finance, Home, income, Investing, median, money, net worth, Retirement

A great political / finance cartoon from last week’s Denver Post, it really speaks for itself.

Enjoy the weekend,
Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: Finance, interest, Investing, money, Retirement, stocks, Taxes, wealth

There is a ‘rule of thumb’ out there that one should save 3-6 months salary (net, I assume) and from the near 16,000 Google returns on “emergency fund” “rule of thumb”, it would seem this is a hot topic among financial concerns. At Master Your Card, Kristy on Monday discussed the importance of the emergency fund, and while I agree with her that you shouldn’t put those funds into stocks, which may or may not be down at the very time you need the funds, I am concerned about the priority most attribute to the fund.

You see, most financial rules, are just that, generalizations that may apply to many/most of the readers of such advice. It’s easy, however, to offer examples where the rule(s) need some modification once the rest of the situation is understood.

For emergency funds, first, does your company have, and do they provide any matching contributions, to a 401(k)? If so, this is my highest priority. Some companies match as much as the first 6% of an employees’ salary deposited into their 401(k). On $50,000/yr, that’s $3,000 the company will match against your $3,000 deposit. In the 25% tax bracket, your net cost is only $2,250. Let me spell this out carefully - you are out of pocket $2,250, but now have $6000 in your 401(k)! Do you see why this is my top priority? Should you fund an emergency fund first, or take $2,250 and turn it into $6,000? If you lost your job, and had to take it out next year, you will likely drop to the 15% bracket, and after the 10% penalty for withdrawal, you still take out $4500. A side benefit, also subject to dispute, is that with $6,000 in the 401(k), you now have the ability to borrow $3000 back out, at 7-8%, and use that loan to knock down the high interest credit card debt. Yes, there are those who advise against the 401(k) loan, but in this scenario, it can be part of a kick start to both your retirement savings and debt reduction plan.

From a completely different perspective is an article on MSN titled “The $0 emergency fund“. I think that may be taking it a bit too far.
Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: 401(k), 401(k) loan, emergency fund, Retirement, Savings

Earlier this week, I talked a bit about the Social Security replacement rate, how much a single person could expect to receive at their normal retirement age. As we discuss trying to make up the difference to enjoy a post retirement income which replaces working income by close to 80% we run into the Social Security tax trap, the fact that for a single person, when half your benefit plus other taxable income exceeds $25,000, the benefits become taxable. So I updated the table a bit.

Now we can see the amount of (taxable) income we can have before we hit the range where SS benefits are taxable. We also can see the amount of money needed to generate that income (using the 4% withdrawal rate we’ve discussed in the past). Note: The column “$25K-1/2 Benefit” is increased by $8950, the sum of the standard deduction and exemption for a single person. Of course if you have high enough deductions to file schedule A this will increase further. So, getting back to the discussion of pretax and post tax savings, we are closing in on the gross numbers you can save, pretax, with little risk of either hitting a higher tax bracket at retirement or running into the range where Social Security benefits are taxable. In the next few weeks, I will offer more analysis, along with observation on this scenario for couples.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: Finance, Investing, money, Retirement, Savings, Social Security