The first step is understanding that divorce is emotionally difficult to negotiate for both sides. It is even more challenging if the two sides start from different vantage points. Just remember how you felt the last time you dealt with someone with a completely different perspective. For example, think of the last time you tried to persuade your toddler to eat his or her vegetables. You and your spouse cannot have all your questions answered in one workshop or a dozen. Divorce is way too complex for that. But you will both learn something. And most importantly, you will both hear the same information and may learn the same thing. And that can form the basis for a productive negotiation and path forward.
Aware of the potential impact of the cost of LTC, Jill wanted to know if she should purchase a long-term care insurance policy or put her assets in a Medicaid trust. She reasoned that with the first option, the insurance policy would cover her costs up to the coverage limit. However, Jill balked at the cost of the policy. With the Medicaid trust option, all of her expenses would be potentially paid for by Medicaid, but she would have to put all of her assets into an irrevocable trust. She found that unattractive as well.
Caught between two unattractive options, Jill decided that she needed clarity so she could make a decision based on facts and not emotions. She thought she would check in with a fiduciary fee-only Certified Financial Planner professional. Jill found a planner easily enough. She was a little shocked at the cost of a consultation. She was not used to paying directly for financial advice. For example, she never paid her insurance sales representative, Jason, any money, at least directly. After taking a big breath, she agreed to the cost, scheduled a Zoom consultation, and asked her daughter Kim to join.
LTC is unpredictable
Oddly, she was comforted when her planner confirmed that it is difficult to predict the cost of LTC. First, it was not certain that she would need it: about 30% of us end up not needing it. Because Long Term Care can range anywhere from a few hours of home care a day to years in an assisted living facility or a nursing home, it was not easy to calculate how much it might eventually cost.
After thinking a little, Kim suggested that Jill needed to understand what her resources were. Jill owned her own home with about $600,000 in equity using the Zillow valuation as a benchmark. She also had somewhat over $900,000 in retirement assets and other financial assets worth about $150,000. Jill had always thought that if she did not have LTCi, she would have to use her assets to pay for the cost. She was concerned that there would not be enough and that she may not be able to leave anything for Kim and her brother. Kim rolled her eyes slightly.
The planner pointed out that Jill was making a reasonable income. That took her by surprise because somehow, it had escaped her mind that her resources also included her income. Jill received about $35,000 annually in Social Security and $25,000 from the QDRO of her ex-husband’s pension. Also, she had her own pension that paid about $10,000. In total, she had a little over $70,000 in income. Realizing that, Jill smiled.
What about the house?
It dawned on Jill that if she had to move into assisted living, many of her current expenses would go away. That would liberate cash flow to pay for the assisted living facility costs. She realized suddenly that she might also be able to sell her house, cut the related expenses, and use the proceeds. Kim confirmed that she and her brother would not want to keep the house after Jill passed away.
Jill thought about how she might feel about selling the house. She remembered that her aunt went to assisted living, thinking that she would need the house to come back to. Jill knew that she might change her mind and, like her aunt, refuse to sell. But for now, it was an assumption she was willing to make.
Jill could afford LTC
Based on her current income, she could afford to move into assisted living at current rates. Not that she wanted to!
The planner also pointed out that Jill’s income and costs would likely diverge because of inflation, with expenses growing faster than income. Although Social Security has an annual Cost of Living Adjustment, Jill’s pensions did not. At the same time, the cost of assisted living regularly increases, sometimes faster than inflation. However, at first blush, it looked like she could pull through when the time came.
Kim asked how to deal with the increasing cost of living and whether it made sense to continue Jill’s very conservative investment allocation. Excellent question! The planner explained that Jill’s money needed to continue working for her. If she kept it too conservative, her nest egg would lose ground against inflation. To address her safety concerns, Jill would need to differentiate between money that she would need in the relatively short term and money that she would not need for a while. Jill could keep the first pot in a conservative allocation to insulate it from market fluctuations. She could reach for more return with the second pot, thus balancing the need for safety and growth.
The planner made a point to insist that this was all preliminary, that he needed to go fire up his spreadsheets to give Jill a more definite answer. However, Jill and Kim were excited because they could see that Jill could probably afford long-term care, leave something for her children, and maybe even spend a little more on herself. Kim was relieved because she could feel the fear of her expected financial burden dissipate.
Jill and Kim came back a week later to see what their planner had cooked up. He showed them potential cost projections depending on how long Jill might need long-term care. He showed them a range of projections that would capture many of the possibilities. They decided together the range of options that would make Jill feel comfortable.
He also showed them how changing her investment plan would allow her to be secure and potentially increase her assets, thereby aligning better with her Life Plan. Jill felt a little concerned. She asked what if all these projections and assumptions were wrong and all the money went “poof.” However, being one step removed from her Mom’s emotions, Kim saw the logic.
Finally, the planner suggested that Jill should consider purchasing a hybrid life insurance policy that would convert into a long-term care policy if needed. Should the need arise, the insurance policy could serve as a cushion and cover some long-term care costs. If not required, Kim and her brother would benefit from a death benefit free of income tax. The thought of a “death benefit” made Kim a little uncomfortable. However, Jill felt better about using some insurance in her plan. The planner reminded them that he would not get a commission if Jill purchased the policy as a fee-only fiduciary.
Jill trusted the planner. She was grateful for the clarity that he provided. Most importantly, Jill felt more confident about the future. She decided to take the weekend to think about it.
On the following Monday, Jill called the planner and asked if he would continue planning for her. She wanted her modified investment plan implemented. Jill knew that it had to be updated regularly and that she would need help with that. She also needed help aligning her taxes and estate plan to her new perspective. Jill was pleased that her new financial plan fitted better with her Life Plan.
Jill came to our office for post-divorce financial planning. At 60 years young with two grown children, she wanted to know whether she would make it through retirement without running out of assets. A former stay-at-home Mom and current yoga instructor, Jill did not have a professional career. Her work-life consisted of a series of part-time jobs scheduled around her children’s.
Jill traded her interest in her ex-husband Jack’s 401(k) for half of a brokerage account, her IRA, and the marital home. Their lawyers decided that Jack’s 401(k) should be discounted by 25%. That would account for the fact that the 401(k)’s pretax assets would be taxed by Uncle Sam and her State tax authority upon distribution.
Adjustments to the Value of a 401k
That sounds reasonable on the surface. But was a 25% discount appropriate for Jill? After making some retirement income projections, it became clear that Jill would likely always be in a lower federal tax bracket than 25%. Had Jill consulted a Divorce Financial Planner at the time of her divorce, he or she would probably have advised against agreeing to a 25% discount to the value of the 401(k).
Jill and Jack also agreed that she would keep half of her interest in Jack’s defined-benefit pension that he earned as a pediatrician with a large hospital. When they agreed to divide the pension, Jack was unclear about the value of the pension. He thought that it was probably “not worth much anyway.” Neither lawyer disagreed.
After some research, I found that Jill would end up receiving a little over $33,000 a year from the QDRO of Jack’s pension. This is significant for a retiree with a projected spending requirement of less than $5,000 a month!
Since Jack and Jill planned to retire in the same year, she would be able to start receiving her payments at the same time as Jack. Also, Jack had agreed to select a distribution option with a survivor’s benefit for Jill.
That would allow her to continue receiving payments when Jack passed away. Jill was aware that women tend to outlive men. So, she was relieved that the survivor benefit was there.
In her case, Jill’s share of the pension was 50% of the marital portion. Was it the best outcome for Jill? It is hard to re-assess a case after the fact. However, had she and Jack known the value of the pension, they might have decided for a different division that may have better served their respective interests. Jill may have decided that she wanted more of the 401(k), and Jack could have decided that he wanted to keep more of the pension. Or possibly Jill may have considered taking a lump-sum buyout of her claim to Jack’s pension. Whatever the case, Jill and Jack would have had the explicit information to decide consciously rather than taking the default path.
The news that Jack’s QDRO’d defined benefit pension had value was serendipity for Jill. Increasing her projected retirement income with the pension payments meaningfully increased her chances to live through retirement without running out of assets. But it is possible that a better understanding of the pension division and other financial issues at the time of divorce could have resulted in an even more favorable outcome for Jill.
Bitcoin is used for its comparative advantages over other forms of currency and transaction methods. One major attraction of Bitcoin is that it is comparatively anonymous. That has drawn criticism from certain sectors (i.e., the US government). Websites, most infamously Silk Road (which was closed by the FBI in October 2013), can use Bitcoin as a safe currency when dealing with illegal transactions (e.g., drugs, arms). There are continuing concerns that as Bitcoin becomes more liquid and, volumes start increasing, it will become a target for money-launderers. Other comparative advantages that stand out are simply the fact that it is digital – giving it greater flexibility of usage – and freedom from conventional political pressure or externalities. This second point derives from Bitcoin’s decentralization, making market influences by a central bank (e.g., printing money) or a government (e.g., the expansion of the money supply) irrelevant. Furthermore, at least from the financial side, the greatest attraction is that Bitcoin is essentially frictionless: there are virtually no transaction fees, making cross-border transactions a principal driver of future growth and monetization.
Today, Bitcoin continues to have limited usage. Many services allow individuals to obtain Bitcoins through an intermediary or directly on the market. While large retailers do not accept Bitcoin, there are several services for the purchase of gift cards, for example, providing an indirect method of accessing the retail market. Other websites and small-scale retailers also offer goods and services that can be paid with bitcoin. Notably, it is possible to buy Bitcoin directly through Robin Hood.
4. Every Bitcoin has two sides.
Bitcoin suffers from a number of problems, many of which mirror the currency’s positives. The most significant concern people have and the largest hurdle for Bitcoin and digital currencies, in general, is the lack of regulation and consumer protection. Simply put, what people don’t know, they don’t trust. While government and central bank actions can be debated, these institutions provide the authority to back currencies. Similarly, fees for companies such as MasterCard are used to ensure users. The result of the lack of regulation, among other reasons, is a volatile and relatively illiquid currency. Consumer confidence would go a long way to solving many of Bitcoin’s problems, with regulation, a potential platform, market penetration, and less speculation key factors in controlling this.
From a technical perspective, digital currencies and especially Bitcoin have encountered difficulties of scalability and monetization, with deflation a potential concern given the technical limit of 21 million Bitcoins. While perhaps merely growing pains, the currency has not gained any meaningful traction concerning scale and monetization, unlike its price growth as demonstrated in the graph above. Significantly, the pricing of bitcoin in the graph above is in dollars.
(This post is based on research work by Patrick Chen. Insight Financial Strategists LLC does not provide Bitcoin advice or services).
We often review our tax situation at the end of the year because it is important! However, making a tax plan and carrying out this strategy may prove to be more critical than ever to your finances. 2020 is a historic year due to the pandemic, the resulting economic crisis, massive stimulus, and the presidential election settling into an administration change.
You can potentially increase your tax savings (and minimize the federal income tax) in 2020 with the following six tax tips.
1. Review your IRA and 401(k) contributions
If you are not maxed out, consider contributing more. Many are expecting that taxes may go up in 2021 with the Biden administration. The Biden-Harris campaign took great pain to specify that the increased taxes they were planning were targeted to high earners. They emphasized that they were planning to spare lower earners. However, pundits have largely decided that we should expect increased taxes across the board. Of course, this is very hard to predict.
2. Take advantage of coronavirus -related distributions and waived RMDs in 2020
Under the CARES Act, people under 59½ who are “qualified individuals” may take up to $100,000 of coronavirus-related distributions (CRDs) from retirement plans. CRDs are exempt from the 10% early distribution penalty, and there is the option to spread the resulting taxable income over a three-year period.
The CARES Act passed earlier in 2020 waived RMDs for this year. The waiver applies to RMDs from retirement accounts, including IRAs, company plans, inherited IRAs, inherited Roth IRAs, and plan beneficiaries. If you have taken your RMDs already, you can still repay them if they are otherwise eligible for a rollover, which means that repayments must be made within 60 days of the distribution and are subject to the once-per-year rollover rule.
However, if you happen to be a “qualified individual,” you don’t need to be concerned about the 60-day repayment deadline since you have three years to redeposit the distribution. However, for some people, it may make sense to take distributions anyway to take advantage of lower tax brackets and to maximize the value of the lower tax bracket in light of the expected increases. Any part of these tax savings not used will be lost forever, so you or your Certified Financial Planner professional or tax planner should perform an analysis to decide what makes the most sense for you.
Because RMDs cannot be converted in a typical year, 2020 presents a one-time opportunity to optimize lifetime taxes. Perform this conversion before December 31 so that they will count towards the 2020 tax year.
Do you believe instead that your tax rate is likely to decrease? Then a Roth conversion would be increasing your lifetime taxes. So, don’t convert.
Sure or not, have a conversation with your Certified Financial Planner professional to help figure out your long term strategy.
6. Utilize the net unrealized appreciation strategy
For people who happen to have highly appreciated company stock within their 401(k), Net Unrealized Appreciation (NUA) can be a lucrative tax-planning tool. NUA allows an individual to transfer company stock out of the 401(k) and pay ordinary income tax on the value of the shares at the time of purchase (not the total value of the shares). The difference between the stock’s cost basis and the market value —the NUA— isn’t taxable until the shares are eventually sold. Then, they can be taxed at the lower long-term capital gains rates.
Although the NUA strategy can be enticing, please remember that not counting a few exceptions, the employee’s entire retirement account should basically be emptied within one calendar year. Hence, to use this strategy, make sure that the lump sum distribution happens before December 31.
Also, gifts for direct payments for tuition andmedical expenses for loved ones are unlimited and tax-free. There is no limit for these gifts, and they can be made for anyone. They too do not reduce the lifetime gift/estate exemption.
Lastly, the IRS has stated that there will be no claw back to the lifetime gift tax exemption ($11,580,000 per individual in 2020) if these exemptions are used this year, even if it is later reduced, as it is expected to be after Joe Biden is inaugurated as President. Therefore, you may want to use the lifetime exemption now or possibly lose it.
Failing to plan is planning to fail!
For many, these tax strategies could be a silver lining in an otherwise dreadful year. It is widely assumed that the new administration will push for higher taxes. So reviewing your tax situation is essential.
Make a plan and take action that will make a difference.
When the Social Security Act passed in 1935, it included benefits for workers, but not for their spouses. At the time, women who did not work outside of the home could not qualify for Social Security retirement benefits. A sweeping series of amendments enacted in 1939 extended Social Security to spouses and minor children. Wives who had not earned a social security retirement benefit or whose retirement benefit was less than 50% of their husbands qualified for the first time.
Catching up with a changing society, another reform extended Social Security retirement benefits to divorced wives in the cases when the divorce happened after a marriage longer than 20 years. The word “spouse” replaced the word “wife” in the 1970s, allowing husbands to collect retirement benefits on their ex-wives record.
Later, the length of marriage required to qualify for benefits after a divorce was reduced to 10 years. When SCOTUS legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, survivor and divorce benefits extended to same-sex couples.
This short history of Social Security shows how it has evolved over time. Ex-wives and ex-husbands can now all receive retirement benefits based on an ex’s work record. However, qualifying conditions must be met.
The rules can be confusing and difficult to keep track of, especially for those who have had more than one marriage and divorce or those whose ex-spouse has died.
Let us take the case of Jack and Jill, who are divorced. Jack’s PIA is $2,800. In this example, Jill does not qualify for a retirement benefit on her own record. She files for her divorced-spouse benefit at her full retirement age of 66. She will qualify to receive 50% of Jim’s Primary Insurance Amount, $1,400, as her divorced-spouse benefit.
The earlier you claim your benefits, the less you will get, consistent with other Social Security benefits. Conversely, you will receive more if you claim when you are older. To maximize Social Security benefits, you will need to delay them until 70 years of age.
It’s worth noting that when Jill’s own benefit is more than 50% of Jack’s, she will receive her Social Security retirement. She will not receive her benefit amount as well as 50% of Jack’s!
Sometimes people wonder how their age difference with their ex-spouse can affect their benefits. The good news is that the ex-spouse’s age when they claim is not relevant. As long as Jill claims at full retirement age, she will receive her maximum benefit independently of the timing of Jack’s claim.
A person who claims his or her benefits based on a former spouse’s record must be single at the time. So unfair, you say? If Jill, in our example, has remarried, generally she could get 50% of Jack’s benefits, or her own, if her own is greater than 50% of their Jack’s.
Jack may be married or unmarried. It makes no difference. If Jack happens to be (re)married, Jill and the current wife could both get the 50% benefit from Jack’s record. For that matter, they can both get upgraded to the full benefit at full retirement age.
Suppose Jill, who receives the 50% benefit, remarries. In that case, her 50% benefit from Jack’s record stops, unless Jill’s new spouse also gets a divorced spouse benefit. That’s except if the remarriage occurs after age 60.
Sometimes people are not sure when they actually got divorced. People often mark their court appearance date as the divorce date. In most states, however, the real divorce date is later than the court appearance. For example, in Massachusetts, it is 90 or 120 days later, depending on the type of filing.
More Marriages and Divorces
People sometimes ask: what if you had two or more ten-year marriages?
For example, let’s suppose that Sheryl was married to Patrick for 20 years and John for 12. Sheryl has now divorced for the second time and has remained single for more than two years since her last divorce from John.
Patrick’s PIA is $2,600, and John’s PIA is $2,400. Let’s suppose again that Sheryl doesn’t qualify for a retirement benefit based on her own record. However, she is at full retirement age (66 or 67, depending on the birth year).
When Sheryl files, she can receive half of Patrick’s PIA because it is higher than John’s. And, no, she cannot get both Patrick’s and John’s retirement benefits!
If Sheryl divorced less than two years before, she must wait until her last ex, Patrick, in this case, has filed for his benefit. The worker on whose record the retirement benefit is claimed, Patrick, must have reached 62 years of age.
If they divorced more than two years before, Patrick’s filing status is irrelevant to Sheryl’s claim. Unless Sheryl tells him, Patrick will never know if his ex has claimed.
Let’s go over the case of Mike and Marie. They were married for more than ten years and divorced for more than two. Mike and Marie are both 62 years old. She has not remarried. Because she is single, Marie qualifies for a divorced-spouse retirement benefit based on Mike’s record, whether or not Mike has filed. It’s worth keeping in mind that the earlier someone claims, the less they get!
If Mike has passed away, Marie receives a divorced-spouse survivor benefit based on Mike’s record, if she is currently unmarried or, if remarried, remarried after age 60.
In addition, Marie’s benefit will be 100% of Mike’s Primary Insurance Amount (PIA), the amount that Mike would have received at full retirement age (66 or 67). In the case of Mike dying, Marie’s retirement benefits are capped to full retirement age.
What if the same two people have married, divorced, remarried, and divorced again? In that case, the length of the two marriages can be added together (including the time in between) to reach the ten years qualifying minimum. That is if the second marriage (the remarriage) happens before the end of the calendar year following the divorce!!
We can make sense of this chaos. Say Mike and Marie were married seven years from May 2002 to August 2009. They remarried in December 2010 and re-divorced in November 2013, for three years. The total for the two marriages is ten years. Mike and Marie meet the 10-year requirement because their second marriage happened before the end of the calendar year after the first divorce. If instead Mike and Marie had remarried in January 2011, the ten-year clock would have been reset to zero.
What if Jill, the person applying for the divorced-spouse retirement benefit, also worked for an employer not participating in the Social Security system? For example, many state and municipal governments are exempt from the Social Security system. If Jill worked for a local government, she could qualify for a pension from her employer. Then, her divorced-spouse Social Security benefit would be reduced by 2/3 of the amount of her pension because of the Government Pension Offset rule. Depending on the size of her pension, Jill’s Social Security benefit may be zero.
How would that work? Jill currently receives a $3,000 monthly pension from a police department in Texas. She has divorced from Jack after a marriage that was longer than ten years. Jack’s PIA is $2,800. Jill’s divorced-spouse benefit of $1,400 would be reduced by $2,000 (2/3 of $3,000), which reduces the benefit amount to zero.
If Jack dies, Jill becomes eligible for a divorced-spouse survivor benefit. After the GPO reduction she will receive $800 ($2,800 – $2,000 equals $800).
Suppose the spouse with benefit also qualifies for a pension from an entity that doesn’t pay into social security. In that case, the Windfall Elimination Program kicks in. That reduces the spouse with benefit’s payments, and the ex-spouse’s benefit adjusts downward as well.
When you don’t have the ex’s Social Security number, you may need more information, such as his birth date and previous addresses. In this case, the Social Security Administration won’t make the process easy.
LTC can be a stressful subject to discuss, especially when costs are addressed. The reality is that Long Term Care is expensive. According to Genworth, a prominent provider of Long Term Care insurance, the median national cost of a stay at an assisted living facility is $48,000 annually in 2018. The total long term care costs, over someone’s lifetime, ends up being much larger depending on where and how long a person will be needing it.
For example, the median cost of assisted living in New Jersey in 2018 was $72,780, according to Genworth. If someone were to stay at an assisted living facility for three years, the cost would be in excess of $200,000. Nursing home care could be even more expensive.
Even insurance companies have difficulty ascertaining the cost. Large long term care insurance companies such as John Hancock have left the field and no longer offer LTC policies to the general public. Others, including Genworth and Mass Mutual, have been struggling with State Insurance Commissions to increase premiums. Recently, Genworth was approved to increase premiums by 58% in 22 States.
According to the Federal Government, Long Term Care is the range of services and support you will need to meet health and personal care needs over a long period of time when you are unable to provide it for yourself. LTC is not medical care, but rather assistance with the basic personal tasks of everyday life.
We have plenty of statistics on how LTC affects us as a whole, but very few on how it will affect us individually. Are we going to be part of the 70%, or can we avoid it and be part of the 30%. We just don’t have a very good way to predict how much long term care we will need, when we will need it, and how much it will cost. This is precisely why long term care planning is necessary as part of normal financial or retirement planning.
Who Pays for Long Term Care?
People often assume that Medicare or Medigap (the supplemental coverage for Medicare), or even regular health insurance will cover the cost of their Long Term Care facilities.
Unfortunately, that is incorrect. Medicare is set up to cover only direct medical expenses, such as doctor and hospital visits, tests, and medicine. When it comes to issues of old age care, Medicare is not involved.
In general, most people without a plan who need Long Term Care will pay for it out of their own assets. Once there is no money left, Medicaid will usually take over. This approach works best for people who have enough assets to cover the other foreseeable circumstances in their future.
It is good to know that Medicaid is there, should we need it. However, planning for Medicaid to take over is a backup plan at best.
How do I protect my assets from nursing homes?
A close alternative to spending your own money and then letting Medicaid take over is actually to plan for Medicaid to take over. That involves creating a trust in which to put your assets so they can be protected in the event that long term care is needed. When that happens, the assets remain safely in the trust, and Medicaid pays for your long term care. You should keep in mind that Medicaid is taxpayer-funded, and as with other government programs, it is periodically under stress for funding. In other words, it is not easy to predict with certainty that such a plan would work, especially if it is much in the future.
Long Term Care Insurance
For others, purchasing a long term care insurance policy may be a better alternative. In exchange for the premiums, the insurance company commits to pay the amount contracted for. Effectively, the policy covers a significant percentage of the uncertainty generated by long term care. That amount can vary to take into account your own circumstances.
From a tax viewpoint, it is worth noting that some of the premiums for most standard LTC policies available today may be deductible from taxable income within the limits specified by the IRS, especially for business owners. Also, up to certain limits, benefits are not taxed as income. Take this favorable tax treatment as a sign that Uncle Sam would like to encourage you to be covered (and not use Medicaid)!
The challenge with LTC insurance is that insurance companies have miscalculated the premiums required to cover their costs. As a result, premium increases, including the one mentioned earlier from Genworth, have shocked pre-retirees and retirees alike, resulting in a considerable debate about whether to drop LTC insurance policies altogether.
The financial impact of premium increases is real. It is a painful hit on a sore subject. And as with any price increase like that, the impulse is just to cancel.
However, canceling would be a mistake for many people. The cost of LTC must be covered somehow, and if not through insurance, it is usually through your own assets. However, it does provide an opportunity to reconsider the issue with your financial planner. Most people affected by price increases bought their policy many years ago. It would be beneficial to re-analyze the LTC need and the benefits of the policy. You may find out that you are over-insured, or underinsured. And then you can figure out a way forward on how to right-size your coverage.
Long Term Care insurance helps pay for long term care expenses, helps preserve your assets and your legacy. Also, a portion of the premium is potentially tax-deductible. So why are so many people resistant to traditional Long Term Care insurance?
First, as we mentioned before, it is expensive. Although, it is worth noting that the cumulative cost of LTC insurance premiums is often less than the cost of Long Term Care itself!
Second, the possibility that the insurance policy may not be used, as in the case of death happening suddenly, is enough to stop many people from acquiring Long Term Care insurance. In this paradigm, the thought of paying premiums for years, and not collecting a benefit would make the insurance a waste.
Don’t Waste the Premiums
To counter this objection, the insurance industry has created products that allow you to “not waste the premiums.” These products allow you to purchase an annuity or a life insurance policy with a special “rider” that allows their conversion to an LTC policy should the need arise.
These products allow you to get Long Term Care coverage if needed, and allow repurposing the funds in case the Long Term Care benefit is not used. The details of these products are beyond the scope 0of this post. Suffice it to say, that these alternatives can provide a lot of flexibility, at a cost, in a financial plan. For people who have significant assets that are not needed for their retirement plan, these alternatives may be worth considering.
The answer is different for everyone. Being a financial planner and number geek, I believe that the answer for many resides in comparing the costs and the benefits. For most people that will result in keeping your insurance. If you are not sure, schedule a call with me, and we can review.
LTC can be a significant expense. As such, it needs to be factored into your overall retirement plan. The four approaches discussed (pay out of assets, Medicaid planning, traditional long term care insurance, and “not waste the premium” alternatives) all offer different benefits and should be matched to the right circumstance and individual preference.
If you fail to plan, you plan to fail. That was the subject of a presentation I made at Sun Life Financial in Wellesley. This may sound like an old cliché, but it illustrates an essential aspect of personal finance: a financial plan is critical.
Regardless of age, marital status, or income, it is essential that you have a personal financial plan. Creating a strategy for financial success is easier than it sounds; you just need to know where to start. The eight financial management strategies below can serve as a roadmap for straightening out your finances and building a better financial future.
1. Develop a Budget
There are many reasons to create a budget. First, a budget builds the foundation for all your other financial actions . Second, it allows you to pinpoint problem areas and correct them. Third, you will learn to differentiate between your needs and your wants. Lastly, having a financial plan to cover expenses planned and laid out will give you peace of mind. Once done, be sure to stick with it!
2. Build an Emergency Fund
As part of your budget, you will also need to plan for an emergency fund. As current events remind us, we cannot anticipate the unexpected. We just know that the need for an emergency fund will come sooner or later . To cover yourself in case of an emergency (i.e., unemployment, injury, car repair, etc.), you need an emergency fund to cover three to six months of living expenses.
An emergency fund does not happen overnight. It needs to be part of your budget and financial plan. It also needs to be in a separate account, maybe a savings account. Or some in savings and some more in a CD. The bottom line is that it needs to be out of sight and out of mind to be there when needed.
3. Stretch Your Dollars
Now that you know what you need and what you want be resourceful and be strategic when you spend on what you want. For instance, re-evaluate your daily Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks habit if you have one. Can it be weekly instead of daily? If you eat out for lunch every day, could you pack lunch some days? Do you need a full cable subscription?
One of the most important steps to a successful financial plan is paying back your debts, especially the bad ones. Because debt will only increase if you do not actively work to pay it off, you should include a significant amount of money for debt repayment in your budget.
The fact is that paying off debt is a drag, and sometimes it is difficult to see the end of the tunnel. One way to accelerate the process of paying debt down is to pay strategically . When you pay more than your minimum payments, don’t spread it around all your debts. Concentrate your over-payment on a single debt, the one that’s closest to being paid off. It will make that payment go away faster. And when it’s gone, you can direct the liberated cash flow to the next one, and so on.
Set aside a portion of your paycheck each month to “pay yourself first” and invest in a savings or retirement account. Take advantage of the tax deferral option that comes with many retirement plans, such as 401(k) or IRAs. If you have just completed your budget, and you don’t know how to do it all, tax-deferred retirement accounts help you reduce taxes now . Also, think of the matching funds that many employers offer to contribute to your 401(k). They are actually part of your compensation. Don’t leave the match. Please take it.
In my line of work, people often tell me that they will never retire. The reality is that everyone will retire someday. It is up to you to make sure that you have financial strategies for a successful retirement.
8. Check Your Insurance Plans
Lastly, review your insurance coverage. Meet with your Certified Financial Planner professional and make sure that your policies match the goals in your financial plan. Insurance is a form of emergency fund planning . At times, you will have events that a regular emergency fund won’t be able to cover. Then you will be happy to have property or health or disability or long term care, or even life insurance.
If you have any questions or require additional assistance, contact a Certified Financial Planner. He or she can help you identify your goals and create a financial plan to meet them successfully.
Starting your financial plan is an easy step. The hard part is implementing and moving to the next step. Don’t do it alone, and let me know if I can help.
Financial planners often work with averages. But the reality is that each bear market will be different from the norm. At the time that I write this, the depth of this particular drawdown does not even rank with the worst in history. Sure, it may still get worse, but that’s where we are today.
We may not want to hear about how things will get better, because the situation with the Covid-19 pandemic and its resulting prescription of social isolation and market downdrafts is scary. But, eventually, things will get better.
Keep in mind that things may get worse before they get better. The count of people with the virus will almost certainly increase. If you don’t have a source yet, you can keep up with it over here. But eventually, the Coronavirus epidemic will run out of steam. We will get back to our places of work. Kids will go back to school. Financial markets will right themselves out. We will revert to standard toilet paper buying habits. We will start going out to eat again. Life will become normal again.
Financially, the question is not just how bad will things get, but how long it will take for our nest eggs to rebuild, so we can put our lives back on tr
Hence, it could take us a while before we make it back to the previous market peak. However, we may want to look at the data differently. This graph shows that, historically, we have needed to achieve a return of 46.9% to recover from a bear market . According to Franklin Templeton calculations, these numbers can look daunting. However, they have been achieved and exceeded after every past downturn. While there is no guarantee, these numbers suggest that there will be strong returns once we have reached the bottom of the market. I like to think of this as an opportunity.
With the time that it takes for investments to grow and get your money back, there is time to take advantage of higher expected returns. For those who have resources available, this means that there is time to deploy your money at lower prices than has been possible in recent months.
Those of us who have diversified portfolios and are not in a position to make new investments, the opportunity is to rebalance to benefit from a faster upswing.
We know from history that every US stock market downturn was followed by new peaks at some point following.
Could this time be different?
Of course, that too is possible.
I like to think that the future will be better. We will still wake up in the morning looking to improve ourselves, make our lives better, and achieve our goals. We are still going to invent new technologies, fight global warming, and struggle for a more equitable society.
We are living through difficult times right now. Losses in our brokerage and retirement accounts are not helping. But we will get through this. Please reach out to me if you have specific questions or concerns.
Roth IRA accounts are well known for providing tax-free growth and retirement income within specific parameters. The catch is that contributions must be made with earned income that has been taxed already. In other words, Roth accounts aren’t exactly tax-free, they are merely taxed differently.
On the other hand, Traditional IRA retirement accounts are funded with pretax dollars, thereby reducing taxable income in the year of contribution. Then, distributions from Traditional IRA retirement accounts are taxed as income.
The Roth IRA is not tax-free, it is merely taxed differently
However, the tax benefit remains the most prominent factor in the Roth vs. Traditional IRA decision. To make the decision that helps you pay fewer lifetime taxes requires an analysis of current vs. future taxes. That will usually require you to enlist professional help. After all, you would not want to choose to contribute to a Roth to pay fewer taxes and end up paying more taxes instead!
As everyone’s circumstances will be different, it would be beneficial to check with a Certified Financial Planner® or a tax professional to plan a strategy that will minimize lifetime taxes, taking into account future income and projected taxes.
Check out our other posts on Retirement Accounts issues: