Financial Advice Quoted on Retirement Savings
March 17, 2011 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
I recently had the opportunity to contribute to an article for Classical Singer magazine about the complexities of financial planning for musicians. Greg Waxberg wrote the article called “Filling in the Financial Gaps” and brought together advice from many financial planners on issues with budgeting, retirement planning, health insurance and more.
I shared a retirement savings strategy that works well when your income may be variable from month to month and year to year. This strategy is applicable to those with variable incomes in professional music careers, but also applies to anyone whose income varies. This could include self-employed, sales people with much compensation tied to commissions, and others.
Ideally, you should carve out a baseline retirement savings amount each month that fits within the minimum income you tend to receive. If your income is so variable as to make that impossible, you should set an annual savings goal for the year. When you have large compensation months, you direct 100% of it to achieving this goal until you hit it each year. After meeting your goal, you can split any overages between additional retirement savings and more discretionary items. This approach allows you to stay on track for meeting your financial goals even when your income varies tremendously. It also creates a reward for yourself of achieving your goals by allowing yourself a discretionary spending splurge after the goal is met.
February Personal Finance Newsletter
February 14, 2011 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
The February personal finance newsletter is now available. In addition to the investing market update, the topics are:
- Extension of tax-free charitable contribution option from IRAs for those over 70 1/2
- New cost basis reporting rules (important for those with taxable investment accounts)
- Summary of the health care law provisions going into effect this year
Click here to read the newsletter.
Social Security Workshop at Keller Public Library
August 11, 2010 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
I am conducting a free workshop on social security planning strategies at the Keller Public Library on Tuesday, August 17 at 6:30 pm. The session will cover what baby boomers need to know to maximize their retirement income. Attendees will learn:
- 5 factors to consider when deciding when to apply for benefits
- Why you should always check your earnings record for accuracy
- How to coordinate benefits with your spouse
- How to minimize taxes on Social Security benefits
- How to coordinate Social Security with your other sources of retirement income
Seating is limited, so please RSVP to library@cityofkeller.com to ensure your space.
Should you pay off the mortgage?
May 18, 2010 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · 1 Comment
One of the best financially freeing moments in life is the day you compare your savings and mortgage principal balances and realize that you could pay off your mortgage if you wanted to. If you’re at that point, congratulations! If you’re not there yet, keep saving; it can come sooner than you think.
Of course, immediately following the discovery of being able to pay off the mortgage comes a question: should I? Here’s how you decide:
First, consider what you would do with the money if you didn’t pay off the mortgage.
Would it sit in savings, be invested for long-term retirement goals, or something else? Based on your plans if you didn’t pay off the mortgage, you can estimate a rate of return you expect to receive. From this rate of return, you’ll need to subtract taxes paid on the earnings (15% if capital gains, your income tax rate if regular interest).
Second, figure out what your mortgage is costing you.
Look at your interest rate, calculate the annual interest expense, and subtract any income tax savings you’re receiving. Be sure to avoid over-estimating the benefits of tax savings. For example, if your mortgage interest is $5,000 and you have another $8,000 of itemized deductions, your total itemized deductions are $13,000. If you’re married filing jointly, the standard deduction is $11,400 this year. So the mortgage interest is only increasing your deductions by $1,600. If you’re in the 28% tax bracket, this equates to a $448 tax savings.
Third, compare your answer in step 1 with your answer in step 2.
If it’s costing you more to keep your mortgage than you would earn with the money invested or in the bank, then you should generally pay off the mortgage. If you can get a greater return on your investments than what your mortgage is costing you, then you should generally keep the money invested and wait to pay off the mortgage.
Of course there are exceptions and other considerations including:
If you would be taking the pay-off money out of a pre-tax IRA or deferred compensation in a lump sum, take a really close look at the tax consequences of that lump sum withdrawal! They can often totally cancel out any savings on the mortgage interest.
If you would be using “retirement” savings funds to pay off the mortgage, you really need to look at your retirement projections and ensure that they still work with the funds withdrawn. If your projections rely on you beginning to save what you’re currently paying on the mortgage, know yourself. Will you stick with this savings program? If not, probably best to just keep your retirement funds intact and continue paying the mortgage.
If paying off the mortgage would take your emergency funds dangerously low or short-change funds for other important goals, it’s likely not a good idea.
Making your decision
While it seems like a fairly straight-forward question, when you think about the whole picture, you realize there are lots of what-ifs and options to consider. The important thing is to take time to do your homework, complete the analysis, and seek professional assistance if needed.
Even if the process reveals you’re better off with the mortgage, you might still want to go ahead and pay it off because of the peace-of-mind benefit that comes from not having any debt. If that’s the case, by going through the process thoughtfully and thoroughly, you will know what you’re giving up financially for that peace of mind so you can make an informed decision about whether it’s worth it to you.
And if the process does show that you would be better off getting rid of that mortgage, you can move forward with confidence.
Of course, everyone’s situation is different. While the process described above addresses many considerations, you may have some issues not addressed here or that are unique to you. Make sure you fully consider your own situation before making any decision.
Keller Public Library Free Retirement Workshop
March 29, 2010 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
Your Retirement Savings Game Plan
Free Workshop at Keller Public Library on Tuesday, April 20 at 6:30 pm.
Designed for individuals and couples who are pre-retirement, we will cover how much you need to save for retirement and the best types of accounts to use for different situations for investment options and tax efficiency. We will also go through some worksheets to determine if you are on track with your current level of retirement savings. Space is limited and registration is encouraged to ensure your space. RSVP to tchiv@cityofkeller.com.Non-Deductible IRA Contributions: Good Idea?
March 25, 2010 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
If your income is over the limit for deductible and Roth IRA contributions, you are faced with a dilemma each year: should you contribute to a non-deductible IRA? Making a non-deductible contribution shouldn’t be an automatic decision. It could be beneficial, or investing the same amount of money in a taxable account could be a superior choice.
Like most decisions in personal finance, there’s not one right answer for everyone.
Non-Deductible IRA contribution benefits:
- Your earnings grow on a tax-deferred basis. This means that you can reinvest all of your dividends and capital gains without paying taxes on them as you go. You are also free to buy, sell, and rebalance investments in your account without tracking each investment’s cost basis, gain, or loss for income tax purposes.
- There’s a psychological benefit to putting money in a retirement account for many people – you may be less likely to tap into the funds if you know there would be penalties.
- Non-deductible contributions create Roth conversion opportunities with less tax owed than if the entire conversion were pre-tax.
Non-deductible IRA contribution drawbacks:
- Your earnings when withdrawn will be taxed at regular income tax rates rather than capital gains tax rates. Right now capital gains rates are 15% for those in the 25% and higher tax brackets and are scheduled to go to 20% next year. So if you’re instead paying 35% or higher income tax on the withdrawals, that’s a big hit.
- Loss of flexibility – if you withdrawal the funds before 59 ½, you will be subject to penalties unless you qualify for an exception.
So how do you decide if it makes sense for you?
First – Consider what your tax bracket is pre-retirement and what it will likely be in retirement.
To do this, you or your financial planner will need to consider your likely sources of income in retirement and their tax status. You also need to make some assumptions about future tax rates — of course no one has a crystal ball, so an educated guess is the best you can do with this aspect.
- If you think your tax bracket will be the same, higher, or just slightly lower in retirement, then non-deductible contributions are likely not a good move for you (unless one of the other benefits applies).
- If your tax bracket will be a lot lower in retirement – like moving from 28% to 15%, then non-deductible contributions should definitely be considered.
After you’ve answered the first question, then you should consider possible Roth IRA conversion opportunities. If you don’t have other assets in traditional or roll-over IRAs, you can make non-deductible contributions and convert them to Roth IRAs with only taxes owed on the growth between contribution and conversion. This can be a very beneficial technique to get assets into a Roth IRA even when your income exceeds the Roth contribution limits. There are very specific rules for conversions, so it’s important to consult with your financial or tax advisor to make sure you follow them correctly.
Lastly, if your decision still isn’t clear, consider the loss of flexibility. Depending on your money personality, this can be a positive or a negative. The positive is less temptation to tap into retirement funds early. The negative is the penalties for doing so. You need to know yourself and know whether the loss of flexibility is good or bad for your situation.
Bottom line, don’t put your non-deductible IRA contribution on auto-pilot. It’s important to do the analysis because your decision can affect how quickly your assets grow and how much income you have in retirement.
Getting the Most of Employer Matching
January 19, 2010 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
Many employers have reduced or eliminated matching in the past several years. If you’re fortunate enough to still have a match, you want to take full advantage of this potentially significant boost to your retirement plans. Every dollar your employer contributes toward your retirement is a dollar you don’t have to.
To make the most of employer matching, you need to answer two questions:
- What’s the formula?
- How does my employer handle “maxing out” — reaching the federal limits of $16,500 for 401(k) plans for those under 50, and $22,000 for those 50+ — before the end of the year?
The first part – understanding the formula — is usually the easy part. Once you know the formula, you need to contribute at least as much as they match if at all possible. A common formula is 100% up to 3% and then 50% on the next 2% — so you would need to contribute a minimum of 5% to get the full match. Other times, employers match up to 6%, 10% or more, so your contributions to make the most of the match are higher.
The next part – answering the max out question — can get more complex. Sometimes the most aggressive and well-intentioned savers actually hurt themselves by completing their full contribution before the end of the year. Companies have several choices in how they approach calculating your match, and it all really depends on your plan’s summary plan description. Here are some of the ways it’s handled:
- If you don’t make a contribution in a particular pay period, no match for that pay period. This way can result in forfeited matching contributions if you don’t spread your deferrals out over the whole year.
- The employer spreads your “earned” match out over the entire year regardless of how early in the year you max out your contributions. This way never results in forfeited matching.
- Employer stops matching when your contributions max out, but then “trues up” their match early the following year.
As you can see, front-loading your contributions doesn’t hurt you in the second and third scenarios, but can reduce your match significantly in the first scenario. To find out how your company handles it, read your plan description or make a call to your 401(k) provider or benefits departments. Then make sure you time your contributions to comply with your company’s practices on awarding the full match. It’s also a good idea to monitor your paycheck stubs and retirement plan account statements to ensure that matches are happening correctly.
With saving enough for retirement an increasingly big challenge, it’s important to take full advantage of every bit of help we can get.
Pension Max: Is it right for you?
December 15, 2009 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
If you’re near retirement and have a pension, you may be considering a pension max strategy. With all the variables involved, it can be challenging to determine if it’s really in your best interest.
First – what is pension max?
Pension max is used by married couples to increase their net retirement income while still protecting the surviving spouse’s income in the event the pension recipient dies first. Basically, the pension recipient elects a single life pension instead of one with a survivor benefit for their spouse. This results in a higher monthly pension benefit. Then the pension recipient purchases life insurance to allow the surviving spouse to replace the pension income in the event that the pension recipient dies first. In some situations, this approach can result in a higher net retirement income if the cost of the needed life insurance is less than the increased pension benefits.
Pension max always results in more premiums for the insurance company, but doesn’t always result in more income for you. How do you decide if it’s in your best interest?
First — at the risk of stating the obvious — if you’re not married, there’s no reason to consider it. Depending on your estate goals and health, there may be other strategies that make sense.
Second – the health and age of the pension recipient matters a great deal. If the pension recipient is in excellent health and can likely qualify for preferred life insurance rates, pension max has a lot better chance of being a good idea.
Third – you need to determine how much and what kind of life insurance is needed to replace the income. As the pension recipient gets older, less life insurance death benefit will be required to replace the pension income. Usually some combination of tiered term-life policies and a small amount of permanent insurance fit the bill.
Fourth – the surviving spouse should have an idea of how they will use the life insurance death benefit to replace the pension income. For many, a single-premium immediate annuity makes the most sense, however other draw-down investment scenarios can also be considered.
Fifth – you need to consider taxes in your calculations on both the life insurance benefit and the increased pension benefit.
- Life insurance death benefits are generally not subject to income taxes. With an unlimited marital exemption, the estate tax will not be an issue when the first spouse dies. However, depending on the overall size of the estate and the death benefit, it could be an issue when the second spouse dies.
- The increased pension benefit will be subject to income taxes. So when you’re comparing the net effect on your income, you need to calculate how much your pension will be worth after taxes because you will be paying the life insurance premiums with after-tax dollars. This is an easy area to ignore, but depending on your tax bracket the effect of taxes can make or break the plan.
Sixth – consider the convenience factor. If there’s just a very small financial benefit to using a pension max strategy in your situation, it may still make sense to forego it. You need to weigh the simplicity of just taking the pension against the extra effort of going through life insurance underwriting and paying the premiums ongoing.
If you’re seriously considering using a pension max strategy, it’s a good idea to have an uninterested third party talk through the analysis with you. A fee-only financial advisor who doesn’t have a big insurance commission at stake based on your decision will be able to offer objective advice. And even though you spend some money on the advice, it may help you save much more over the long term and at very least feel confident that you made the right decision based on your unique situation.
Funding early retirement
October 26, 2009 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
Most are familiar with the magic ages of 59 ½ when you can start withdrawing from retirement savings without paying the 10% IRS penalty and 62 when you can start taking social security. But sometimes retirement comes before these ages either voluntarily or involuntarily, and you may need income. In those situations, many are not aware that you still have options to tap your retirement savings without penalties.
The first option is available if you are at least age 55 and you stop working for your employer. If your employment terminates during or after the year you turn 55, you are eligible to start drawing funds from that employer’s 401(k) without penalty. If you have multiple retirement accounts, this exception doesn’t apply to all of them. It only applies to those employer retirement accounts where you “separate from service” after turning 55. If you roll the employer plan funds into an IRA, the exception also no longer applies. For qualified public safety employees who take a distribution from a government defined benefit plan, this exception kicks in at age 50.
Another option is called “substantially equal period payments” or 72(t) distributions. You can start taking funds from your retirement accounts (401(k), IRA, 403(b), etc.) at any age with this option, although it doesn’t apply to any employer retirement plans when you’re still working for that employer. To use this option, you are required to begin taking a “substantially equal” amount each year and continue without variation for at least 5 years or until you reach age 59 ½ (whichever comes later). You have a choice of 3 different calculation methods of your payment. Once you start, you are committed to using the same method for the duration of the payments, with the exception of one adjustment allowed from two of the methods to the third one.
The IRS is quite picky about the precise calculations of 72(t) distributions and imposes steep penalties for any mistakes. An error in one year can cause back-penalties on all previous distributions taken. So you really need to consult a professional to have your distributions calculated. And once you start, you absolutely have to stick with the program.
With either of these options, it’s important to look at the big picture of your overall retirement funding. Starting to withdraw from your savings too early can result in a significantly reduced standard of living later on, or it may be just fine in your situation.
Of course, you will still owe taxes on any distributions taken from tax-deferred accounts, and it’s a good idea to plan for those taxes when considering these strategies.
Partial Roth Conversion Strategy
October 13, 2009 by Jean Keener, CFP, CRPC, CFDS · Leave a Comment
When people find out how much tax they would have to pay to convert their IRA from traditional to Roth, it’s often times a conversion show stopper. Even if all the analysis shows that conversion would be clearly beneficial to their after-tax retirement income levels or provide estate planning benefits, there’s a gigantic psychological hurdle with writing a check to the IRS sooner rather than later. However, the conversion decision can become more attractive when you realize it’s not an all or nothing decision. You can choose to convert just part of your traditional IRA balance.
How do you decide how much to convert?
One reasonable way of determining how much to convert is doing enough to take you to the top of your current tax bracket without going into the next one. You might also determine how much of a tax bill you would be willing to pay, and then calculate the conversion amount based on that. For most, one of these two options will create the most appealing results.
There is a third option in the “fancy financial footwork” category.
This third option will result in far too much paperwork for many individuals to want to deal with it, especially for a smaller traditional IRA balance. But if you have a larger IRA – say $50,000 or more – the extra work might be worth the tax savings. Conversion is not an irrevocable decision until you get to the tax filing deadline of the next year (October 15 for most people). This 21-month window from January 2010 until the deadline to “recharacterize” the conversion creates a Roth Segregation Opportunity, pioneered by David Marotta of Marotta Wealth Management in Virginia and written up in a recent Financial Planning Magazine article.
Using the Roth Segregation Strategy, you convert your entire traditional IRA balance in January 2010. Let’s say the balance is $100,000 for easy math. Instead of putting the entire conversion in one account, you put $20,000 in each of 5 accounts. Each of these 5 accounts is invested in a different equity asset class – you might do 20% large cap growth, 20% large cap value, 20% small cap, 20% developed international, and 20% emerging markets. Then, around the beginning of October 2011, you assess which of these asset classes has performed the best. You keep the converted IRA with the best performance and recharacterize each of the other 4 back to traditional IRAs. This limits your tax liability (payable on 2011 and 2012 tax returns) to just the taxes on the $20,000. Of course, if multiple asset classes performed extremely well, you might choose to keep more of the conversions. Or if they all declined in value, you would likely recharacterize them all.
This strategy is not a simple one. It requires a lot of analysis and rigorous tracking of the paperwork to ensure that everything is completed properly. You would also want to ensure that going with such an aggressive equity allocation in your IRA over the 21-month period made sense within the larger context of your portfolio, time horizon, and risk tolerance. And for those that plan to do a full conversion vs. a partial, there’s no benefit to setting up all the different accounts.
But for those of you who relish a little financial creativity and don’t mind complexity, this can be a pretty cool opportunity to analyze and implement – and unique to the 2010 opportunity to spread taxes over 2011 and 2012.