Thinking about young adults as they think about their careers, manage cash flow, decisions on spending and savings, Cornerstone would like to offer insight and tools to help you help them create the conditions for a promising financial future.

We often hear from clients in the planning process, “Wish we had started earlier.” Regardless of the forecast of their plan (ex. they will have to make adjustments to make their plan work. Or, their financial plan looks promising. A few changes will make it stronger). Regardless, many express regrets for not starting earlier, or wish for a do-over.

With many sheltered at home, this could be an excellent opportunity to help others by sharing perspective and resources.

Below you will find a narrative about saving early and letting time strengthen investments. Also attached, you will find two graphs that make a case for getting started by savings at a young age. To help you prepare for this conversation, we are happy to talk with you. And if you let us know what other types of financial discussions you would like to have with America’s youth, perhaps we have a chart or narrative that can help you.

Please feel free to pass this along to anyone you think may find this helpful.

Rich Arzaga, CFP®

(Download) The Benefits of Saving and Investing Early Chart

(Download) Related: Investing in a Roth at different life stages Chart

Narrative: Saving Early & Letting Time Work for You

The earlier you start pursuing financial goals, the better your outcome may be.

As a young investor, you have a powerful ally on your side: time. When you start investing in your twenties or thirties for retirement, you can put it to work for you.

The effect of compounding is huge. Many people underestimate it, so it is worth illustrating. Let’s take a look using a hypothetical 5% rate of return.

How does it work?  A simplified example goes like this: Let’s take a look using a hypothetical $100 invested and a 5% rate of return. After a year, you earn 5% interest, or $5. Another year, another 5%, which adds $5.25 this time. In the third year, your 5% interest earned amounts to $5.51, bringing your balance to $115.76. The more money you deposit, the higher that 5% returns. So, if you were to deposit $100 every month into that same account, you’d make a hypothetical $836.63 in compound interest from $6,100 in deposits over five years. That compounding continues, even if you stop making deposits. All you need to do is let that money stay put.1

The earlier you start, the greater the compounding potential. If you start saving and investing for retirement in your twenties, you may gain an advantage over someone who waits to save and invest until his or her thirties.

Even if you start early & then stop, you may out-save those who begin later. What if you contribute $5,000 to a retirement account yearly starting at age 25 and then stop at age 35 – no new money going into the account for the next 30 years. That is hardly ideal. Yet, should it happen, you still might come out ahead of someone who begins saving for retirement later.

Are you wary of investing? If you were born in the late eighties to early nineties, you are old enough to remember the market volatility in the early 2000s and the credit crisis of 2007-09. Recent events, in the wake of the coronavirus, might bring back memories of that time. All this may have given you a negative view of equities, shaped during your formative years; these events are clear examples of how risk plays a part in this type of investment.

The reality, though, is that many people preparing for retirement need to build wealth in a way that has the potential to outpace inflation. You will retire on the compounded earnings those invested assets are positioned to achieve.

Content in this material is for general information only and not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results, All indices are unmanaged and may not be I invested into directly.

Tracking# 1-976752

Please feel free to forward to anyone who may find this helpful. In particular, people over age 70 1/2 and or family members of these same people who assist them in financial matters.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act signed into law last week offers relief to those who are required to withdraw a minimum amount from IRA and other retirement accounts. Effective with this bill, all 2020 Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) are suspended, including inherited (beneficiary) IRAs. Consideration should be given to whether to take advantage of this suspension. For example, if the effects of the pandemic drop you into a lower tax bracket, it might make sense to take the RMD (and perhaps a bit more than the minimum) out of the account in 2020.

That much is clear. Here is where it gets tricky:

If you have already taken your 2020 RMD, as it looks right now, you will have to include this withdrawal in your 2020 gross income and pay taxes on it. That said, in the year following the 2008 financial crisis, this same initial ruling prohibiting redeposits was later reversed. Also, not all tax experts agree on this redeposit rule. For right now, the best practice is to consult your tax advisor for their opinion.

If you have taken RMD for 2020, you still have some options that might work for you:

You have up to 60 days to return a distribution to an IRA or deposit it in another qualified retirement account without owing taxes on it.

You also might decide to convert the amount into a Roth IRA. Since you are paying the taxes anyway, but if you don’t need the money for current year expenses, you can use a Roth to generate tax-free growth.

The CARES Act offers other temporary changes to retirement account deposits and withdrawals. We intend to provide clarity on some of these changes in future updates.

Please call us with any questions about your retirement accounts, taxable investments, or other financial matters. Right now, we are walking through history. There is no need to walk alone.

This information is not intended to ne a substitute for specific individualized tax advice. We suggest that you discuss your specific tax issues with a qualified tax advisor.

Traditional IRA account owners should consider the tax ramifications, age and income restrictions in regards to executing a conversion from a traditional IRA to Roth IRA. The converted amount is generally subject to income taxation.

Tracking# 1-975182

Many middle-class Americans are financially unprepared for retirement—and that is leading to an array of social tensions

This is an interesting article, and a potential “need-to-know” for those planning to move when they retire. According to this Wall Street Journal article, an unexpected problem could surface when you move from your pre-retirement “work” home into your ideal retirement home… in a community occupied by long-time residence.

As you make your new house a home, you and other transfers to the community may want to “upgrade” the community and improve services. While you might find the cost of these enhancements to be of high value, it is possible that the long-time residence will not see the same opportunity. In fact, you could be in for a fight. Not because long time residence don’t want changes to their community. But because they simply cannot afford these enhancements. For many, their hand-to-mouth retirement lifestyle cannot absorb anything beyond the fixed costs already difficult to manage. So, it is really a conflict of economics.

There are no take-aways from this article, no lesson except to be aware of a potential problem. My assessment is, it is a good idea to get to know the profile, or psychographics, of the neighborhood you are thinking about retiring to. Are you moving into a community or city with residence who generally share your economic profile? In the case of the article, the residence are tied together by a retirement community association. More likely for most a retirement community does not apply. But this same conflict can surface in communities where you are likely to be dependent on a majority vote or the resources needed to accomplish the same objective.

~ Rich Arzaga, CFP®

By Jennifer Levitz | Photographs by Rachel Bujalski

SANTA ROSA, Calif.—On a Saturday morning in retirement paradise, Ken Heyman stepped out to his front porch and found a brown paper bag. Inside was the chopped-off head of a rat.

Mr. Heyman was acting president of the homeowners’ association at Oakmont Village, an enclave in Northern California’s wine country for people age 55 and over. For months, the community had battled over the unlikeliest of topics: pickleball, a game that is a mix of tennis, badminton and ping pong. Some residents wanted to build a pickleball court complex that would cost at least $300,000. Others didn’t, saying they didn’t want to see their dues go up.

Residents shouted at each other at town-hall gatherings. One confrontation got so heated that a resident called the police. The governing board appointed a security guard to keep order at meetings.

pickleball

Photo: Oakmont residents play pickleball—a game that’s like a gentler version of tennis, played with a paddle and a plastic ball with holes on a badminton-sized court. 

For many, of course, the issue wasn’t really about pickleball. It was about a divide that had opened between wealthier residents who moved to the village more recently and the less well-off, who said clubhouse updates, new fees and expensive amenities would be budget-busters.

Mr. Heyman’s predecessor as president was a leader of the anti-pickleball faction. She felt she had been chased out of office by pickleball partisans. On the paper bag was a note.

“You’re next,” it read, according to a police report.

Around 10,000 baby boomers are turning 65 every day, and the same number will continue doing so for years. Some are on solid financial ground after a lifetime of planning and the fortune of well-timed home purchases and stock investments.

Most of the rest are unprepared. Fifty-four percent of households with middle incomes—ranging from around $48,000 to $95,000 a year—don’t have enough saved to maintain their quality of living in retirement, according to the Boston College Center for Retirement Research. Some of those who saved were hit by unforeseen health-care costs. Others took on debt for education. Yet more made investment mistakes or lost their savings in the 2008 financial crisis.

savings

Those wildly different circumstances are leading to hard-to-resolve social tensions, which are playing out every day at retirement communities across the country. In Oakmont, the issue was pickleball.

Founded in 1963, Oakmont Village was long an option for the middle class that benefited from California’s rising real-estate values. They could move into attached duplexes or triplexes or wood-sided single-family ranch-style homes and enjoy three swimming pools, a lawn-bowling green, honor-system lending library and the 130-plus clubs and activities.

Living near one another is an increasingly popular option for retirees. The population of the U.S.’s 442 federally designated “retirement destination counties” rose 2% last year, compared with the national average of 0.7%, according to Census Bureau figures. Retirement communities often provide social connections that can fray when people leave the workplace, live alone or have families spread across the country.

Steve Spanier, the current president of Oakmont’s homeowners’ board, said the mountain-view community started “moving more upscale” in recent years when retiring baby boomers in San Francisco and Silicon Valley discovered it on weekend wine-tasting trips to Sonoma County. Coming from places where real-estate prices are especially high, they began buying and gutting homes. The community has about 4,700 residents.

The community now splits neatly into two camps. Some believe it should only “fix things that break,” he says. “Then there are people like the people who are starting to move in. They have a lot of money and want to live the lifestyle to which they’ve become accustomed and they want to do it here,” he says. “People are having more trouble getting along.”

The October wildfires that tore through Northern California’s wine country last year fleetingly eased the divisions, says Mr. Spanier. The fires forced Oakmonters to temporarily evacuate and destroyed two of the village’s roughly 3,200 homes. The fitness center sold “Oakmont Strong” T-shirts, and the mood mellowed for a bit.

“It got better for a period of time,” he says, “then that feeling of unity created by the fire left.”

Homes in the resident-owned Oakmont Village fetch between $350,000 for smaller dwellings up to about $1.2 million for ranch-style homes that have been remodeled by wealthy newcomers. A few years ago, million-dollar sales were unheard of.

stretch

After retiring in 2015, Iris Harrell sold her part of the remodeling company she founded in Mountain View, Calif., and says she is “never going to have to worry about money.” She and her wife, Ann Benson, sold their home in Silicon Valley for $3.8 million and bought a hillside ranch-style home in Oakmont for about $800,000, she says.

They raised the roof to allow for windows tall enough for a view of the top of nearby Hood Mountain. So they can age at home, they installed an elevator and added 1,300 square feet of space, including a spacious wing that could house a live-in caretaker. Ms. Harrell now calls the wing “the best guest suite in Oakmont.”

“We’re spoiled and we know it, but it just worked out for us,” says the fit 71-year-old.

She became the chairwoman of Oakmont’s building construction committee and set about trying to also refurbish the 55-year-old community.

“You can’t be premier and look like the 1960s,” Ms. Harrell says. “It’s not making the statement we want.”

She says that retirees moving in—“post Google-ites” she calls them—are willing to pay for better amenities and that Oakmont’s future shouldn’t be dictated by the “small minority” who aren’t willing. She suggested those pinched for money should look into a reverse mortgage.

Oakmont resident Gary O’Shaughnessy, who lives in a unit of a triplex down the hill from Ms. Harrell’s house, calls that suggestion “insensitive.”

“That attitude I can’t live with,” he says.

A former school-bus driver for disabled children, Mr. O’Shaughnessy says a diagnosis of Parkinson’s led him to retire in his 60s, earlier than planned.

While he was working, he rented a house in Santa Rosa. He bought his place in Oakmont for $280,000 in 2010 with help from an inheritance from his mother and $50,000 from his own retirement account. He is single and 71 and has $40,000 in savings. His monthly income is around $2,000, from Social Security and a small pension.

He says he typically walks dogs seven days a week to “make ends meet”; his bills include a mortgage, supplemental medical insurance and more than $300 in monthly dues at Oakmont.

Everyone in the resident-owned community pays $67 a month per person to the main Oakmont association, up from $58 last year. Households pay another $220 a month, on average, to various sub-neighborhood associations for services such as water or landscaping.

Mr. O’Shaughnessy started attending meetings and signing petitions as plans, backed by Ms. Harrell and others, proceeded for a roughly $300,000 tournament-quality pickleball complex with tiered spectator seating.

“There was a big fight and it kind of divided the community,” he says. “The people who have money just want to throw it around, but there are a lot of people on fixed incomes.”

A 2015 survey sponsored by the Oakmont association found that 48% of residents said they were very or somewhat concerned about their current financial needs. That figure rose to 57% for those under age 66.

Overall, 52% were “not at all concerned.”

“We are an extremely wealthy community,” resident Vince Taylor, a former software-company owner, said, during an open forum at an association meeting in March 2017. “We shouldn’t be acting like a poverty community.”

Mr. Taylor, who is 81 and retired, says he has more than $1 million in his retirement savings and lives off investment earnings without touching the principal.

His public comments provoked discussion on Nextdoor, an online neighborhood social-networking service. A discussion titled “Disparity of wealth in Oakmont” drew nearly 80 comments.

One Oakmont resident suggested retirees with tight budgets get jobs. Another, Bob Starkey, a 69-year-old renter and retired museum director, wrote that illness had depleted his savings and that he lived with anxiety his car might die.

“Please remember that pensions have become a thing of the past,” wrote Margaret Babin, a retired home-day-care operator who is 62 and is selling her collection of French Quimper pottery on eBay to pay for extras.

“At some events, I feel out of place even though I shouldn’t, because I’m doing OK,” she says, noting that she sees more fancy cars in the community. “The separation seems to be getting wider and wider.”

By early 2017, she and other frustrated residents had organized behind a slate of candidates who aimed to win a majority on the homeowners’ board and halt the pickleball project, which had been approved by Oakmont leaders but not yet built.

On the morning of April 3, a phone call woke up Ms. Babin. “I just couldn’t believe what I was hearing,” she recalls.

One day before the votes would be tallied in the election, a bulldozer was breaking ground on the pickleball complex. Supporters and detractors rushed over. One resident called the Santa Rosa Police Department at 7:24 a.m. to report a “verbal disturbance” at Oakmont.

“There is a heated argument going on at this time,” the police report said. An officer who went to the scene wrote that there were “two warring factions over a pickleball court.”

The next day, the candidates opposing the pickleball complex were victorious. Construction stopped.

“We face some of the same challenges as the rest of our state and our country,” Ellen Leznik, the new president, said at a public association meeting days later. “One such challenge is the disparity of wealth in our membership.”

Some pickleball proponents rose to defend themselves.

“We’re not the mean, vicious and entitled people our opponents and Nextdoor critics would have you believe,” one speaker said.

Oakmont eventually converted two existing tennis courts into six pickleball courts at a fraction of the cost. The new board ushered in a tone of frugality and oversight that some saw as heavy-handed. Rhetoric at public meetings grew so hostile that the board brought in a security guard to keep order.

“Why don’t we just wait till we’re all dead?” an Oakmont man who favored the pickleball complex declared at one meeting. “Guess what? Oakmont is our last stop. The train ends here. This is the Hotel California.”

Ms. Leznik, a 60-year-old former lawyer who retired early because of a disability, resigned less than four months after she became president, in July 2017. She says she had heart palpitations from the stress.

That left her ally, Mr. Heyman, as acting president.

The next month, at 9:15 a.m. on Aug. 12, the police again got a call from Oakmont, this time from Mr. Heyman, who is 61 and still works in corporate communications.

On Mr. Heyman’s porch sat “a bag containing the chopped off head of a rat,” according to the police report.

“It freaked me out,” says Mr. Heyman. He says he has “no doubt” the rat served as retribution for killing the pickleball project and for the disputes that followed.

At an association meeting soon after, another board member likened “the battle being waged at Oakmont” to “Armageddon.”

Mr. Heyman left the board and later moved out of Oakmont.

“There were clearly sides. One side felt that we’re an active-adult community and it’s our responsibility to provide activities and facilities to the membership,” says Oakmont resident Al Medeiros, 71, who now sits on the board. He counts himself in that group, which he says had been “vilified.”

“The other side seemed to think that well, we’re poor, so we really need to make sure our dues don’t go up and we should just provide the minimum,” he says.

In February, the board discussed remodeling a dated auditorium where hundreds of events, from dances to movies to meetings, take place every year. Some residents talked about constructing a new center and repurposing the old one into a state-of-the-art gym.

The board is also weighing a divisive request from the private golf club that borders many homes in the retirement community. The club is asking all Oakmont residents, golfers or not, to pitch in to help the club meet economic challenges. Someone suggested $5 a person every month.

Mr. Spanier, the new board president, says it “could potentially make pickleball look like a tiny issue.”

oakmont

Oakmont Village, with views of Hood Mountain, includes roughly 3,200 homes.

#RetirementHome #Retirement #WealthGap #FinancialBehavior #FinancialPlanning #PersonalAdvice #Real Estate

This article was prepared by a third party for information purposes only. It is not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual.

By Dave Winkler

The Social Security Administration announced a 2.8% cost of living adjustment (COLA) that will benefit 63 million recipients starting January 20191. This adjustment marks the second consecutive year of COLA growth of two percent or greater. In 2017, the increase was 2.0%2. In 2015 and 2016, COLA increases were 0.0% and 0.3%, respectively.

Beneficiaries include Americans who qualify for Social Security benefits, qualified current, divorced, or surviving spouses, disabled workers, and eligible dependents and family members.

At Cornerstone, clients who currently receive Social Security income benefits view this monthly check as helpful, but not the primary source of covering retirement expenses. For many clients, although they tend to qualify for the higher benefit due to higher income during earning years, benefits represents less than 20% of income needed to maintain their chosen standard of living.

Notifications of the 2.8% COLA will be sent to recipients by mail in early December. For the first time, Social Security recipients may also view these notices at www.socialsecurity.gov/myaccount.

  1. https://www.ssa.gov/cola/
  2. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html

By Cornerstone Wealth Management

Before it is too late, let’s clear up some important misconceptions. While some retirement clichés have been around for decades, others have recently joined their ranks. Let’s explore seven popular retirement myths.

  1. “When I’m retired, I won’t need to invest anymore.” Many see retirement as an end of a journey, a finish line to a long career. In reality, retirement can be the start of a new phase of life that could last for decades. By not maintain positions in equities (stocks or mutual funds), it is possible to lose ground to purchasing power as even moderate inflation has the potential to devalue the money you’ve saved. Depending on your situation, a good rule of thumb may be to keep saving money, keep earning income, keep invested, even in retirement.
  2. “My taxes will be lower when I retire.” Not necessarily. While earning less or no income could put you in a lower tax bracket, you could also lose some of the tax breaks you enjoyed during your working years. In addition, local, state and federal taxes will almost certainly rise over time. In addition, you could pay taxes on funds withdrawn from IRAs and other qualified retirement plans. This could include a portion of your Social Security benefits. Although your earned income may decrease, you may end up losing a meaningfully larger percentage of it to taxes after you retire.1
  3. “I don’t have enough saved. I’ll have to work the rest of my life. If your retirement resources are falling short of what you might need in later years, working longer may be the most practical solution. This will allow you to use earned income to cover expenses for a longer period, and shorten the number of years you would need to otherwise cover when you stop work. Meanwhile, you may be able to make larger, catch-up contributions to IRAs after 50, and remember that you have savings potential in workplace retirement plans. If you are 50 or older this in 2018, you can put as much as $24,500 into a 401(k) plan. Some participants in 403(b) or 457(b) plans are also allowed that step-up. And during this time, you can downsize and reduce debts and expenses to effectively give you more retirement money. You can also stay invested longer (see #1 above).2 The bottom line is, don’t give up, and fight the good fight.
  4. “Medicare will take care of my long term care expenses.” Not true, and among the most costly of these myths. Medicare may (this is not guaranteed) pay for up to 100 days of your long-term care expenses. If you need months or years of long-term care and do not own a long term care policy or own a policy and don’t have adequate coverage, you may have to pay for it out of pocket. According to Genworth Financial’s Annual Cost of Care Survey, the average yearly cost of a semi-private room in a nursing home is $235 a day ($85,775 per year).3,4 In Northern California, the cost will likely be higher.
  5. “I should help my kids with college costs.” That’s a nice thought, an expensive idea, and for many not a good idea. Unlike student financial assistance, there is no such program as retiree “financial assistance.” Your student can work, save, and or borrow to pay to cover their cost of college. S/he will have decades to pay loans back. In contrast, you can’t go to the bank and get a “retirement loan.” Moreover, if you outlive your money your kids may end up taking you in and you may be a financial burden to them, which for many is a parent’s worst nightmare. Putting your financial requirements above theirs may be fair and smart as you approach retirement.
  6. “I’ll live on less in retirement.” We all have an image in our minds of a retired couple in their seventies or eighties living modestly, hardly eating out, and relying on senior discounts. In the later phase of retirement, couples often choose to live on less, sometimes out of necessity. However, the initial phase may be a different story. For many, the first few years of retirement mean traveling, new adventures, and “living it up” a little – all of which may mean new retirees may actually “live on more” out of the retirement gate.
  7. “No one really retires anymore.” It may be true that many baby boomers will probably keep working to some degree. Some people love to work and want to work as long as they can. What if you can’t, though? What if your employer shocks you and suddenly lets you go? What if your health does not permit you to work as much as you would like, or even at all? You could retire more abruptly than you believe you will. This is why even people who expect to work into their later years should have a solid retirement plan.

There is no “generic” retirement experience, and therefore, there is no one-size-fits-all retirement plan. Each individual, couple, or family should have a strategy tailored to their particular money situation and life and financial objectives.

If you or someone you know would like to get coaching on the most appropriate approach to planning for retirement, we welcome your call.

#retirementmyths #financialmyths #retirementfail #FinancialBehavior #FinancialPlanning #PersonalAdvice #RetirementIncome  #RetirementPlanning

This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc. and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 – money.usnews.com/money/retirement/iras/articles/2017-04-03/5-new-taxes-to-watch-out-for-in-retirement [4/3/18]
2 – fool.com/retirement/2017/10/29/what-are-the-maximum-401k-contribution-limits-for.aspx [3/6/18]
3 – medicare.gov/coverage/skilled-nursing-facility-care.html [9/13/18]
4 – fool.com/retirement/2018/05/24/the-1-retirement-expense-were-still-not-preparing.aspx [5/24/18]

For some, the recent tax reforms indicate, yes. For others, not so fast.

By Cornerstone Wealth Management

Can federal income tax rates get lower than they are today? Given the national debt and the outlook for Social Security and Medicare, it is hard to imagine that rates go much lower. In fact, it is more likely that federal income taxes get higher, as the tax cuts created by the 2017 reforms are scheduled to sunset when 2025 ends.

Additionally, the Feds are now using a different yardstick, the “chained Consumer Price Index,” to measure cost-of-living adjustments in the federal tax code. As a result, you could inadvertently find yourself in a higher marginal tax bracket over time, even if tax rates do not change. Due to this, it is possible that today’s tax breaks could eventually be worth less.1

As a result of tax reform, we are occasionally asked if this is a good time to convert a traditional IRA to a Roth. A conversion to a Roth IRA is a taxable event. If the account balance in your IRA is large, the taxable income linked to the conversion could be sizable, and you could end up in a higher tax bracket in the conversion year. For some, that literally may be a small price to pay.2

The jump in your taxable income for such a conversion may be a headache – but like many headaches, is likely to be short-lived. Consider the long term advantages that could come from converting a traditional IRA balance into a Roth IRA. A “big picture” comprehensive financial plan can help you estimate the short and long term merits of this transaction, even before you decide to pull the trigger.

Generally, you can take tax-free withdrawals from a Roth IRA once the Roth IRA has been in existence for five years and you are age 59½ or older. For those who retire well before age 65, tax-free and penalty-free Roth IRA income could be very nice.3

You can also contribute to a Roth IRA regardless of your age, provided you earn income and your income level is not so high as to bar these inflows. In contrast, a traditional IRA does not permit contributions after age 70½ and requires annual withdrawals once you reach that age.2

Lastly, a Roth IRA is can be a good estate planning strategy. If IRS rules are followed, Roth IRA beneficiaries may end up with a tax free inheritance.3

A Roth IRA conversion does not have to be “all or nothing.” Some traditional IRA account holders elect to convert just part of their traditional IRA to a Roth, while others choose to convert the entire balance over multiple years, the better to manage the taxable income stemming from the conversions.2

Important change: you can no longer undo a Roth conversion. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act did away with Roth “recharacterizations” – that is, turning a Roth IRA back to a traditional one. This do-over is no longer allowed.2

Talk to a tax or financial professional as you explore your decision. While this may seem like a good time to consider a Roth conversion, we have seem working with our clients that this move is not suitable for everyone. Especially during years of high earned income. The resulting tax hit may seem to outweigh the potential long-run advantages.

If you or someone you know would like to get coaching on the most appropriate approach to reviewing Roth strategies, we welcome your call.

#IRA #RothIRA #Roth #RothConversion #FinancialPlanning #Investments #RetirementIncome #RetirementPlanning #Taxes #TaxStrategies #TaxSavings #Cornerstonewmi

This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc. and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 – money.cnn.com/2017/12/20/pf/taxes/tax-cuts-temporary/index.html [12/20/17]
2 – marketwatch.com/story/how-the-new-tax-law-creates-a-perfect-storm-for-roth-ira-conversions-2018-03-26 [8/17/18]
3 – fidelity.com/building-savings/learn-about-iras/convert-to-roth [8/27/18]

Comparing two popular retirement account types.

By Cornerstone Wealth Management

When you think about retirement accounts, it is likely that at least one of these two account types come to mind: the IRA and the 401(k). Each are common and relatively easy ways to save for retirement. Each have unique and common features and benefits. What follows is a summary of features, merits, and demerits of each account type.

What IRAs and 401(k)s have in common.

  • Taxes are deferred. One significant advantage is that funds held in these accounts have the potential to grow and compound year after year tax deferred.1 When money is eventually withdraw from either plan, it will be taxed as ordinary income.
  • IRAs and 401(k)s can reduce ordinary income taxes. It varies depending on whether the account is traditional or Roth in nature. Contributions to a traditional IRA may be tax deductible while contributions to a 401(k) lower your taxable income. When money is eventually withdraw from either plan, it will be taxed as ordinary income. When you have a Roth IRA or Roth 401(k), contributions are not tax deductible, but can potentially be withdrawn from the account without taxation.1
  • Generally, the I.R.S. penalizes withdrawals from these accounts before age 59½. Distributions from traditional IRAs and 401(k)s prior to age 59½ usually trigger a 10% federal tax penalty, on top of income tax on the withdrawn amount. Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s allow you to withdraw a sum equivalent to your account contributions at any time without taxes or penalties, but early distributions of the account earnings are taxable and may also be hit with the 10% early withdrawal penalty.1
  • You must make annual withdrawals from 401(k)s and traditional IRAs after age 70½. This is called a Required Minimum Distribution (RMD). And while withdrawals from a Roth IRA are not required during the owner’s lifetime, only after his or her death. Roth 401(k)s do require annual withdrawals after age 70½.2 At this point, you may be starting to get confused on the nuances. If you have questions, we welcome you call.

How IRAs and 401(k)s differ.

  • Annual contribution limits for IRAs and 401(k)s differ greatly. As an employee non-business owner, you may direct up to $18,500 into a 401(k) in 2018; $24,500, if you are 50 or older. In contrast, the maximum 2018 IRA contribution is $5,500; $6,500, if you are 50 or older.1 The additional $6,500 contribution is called a “catch-up.”
  • Your employer may match your 401(k) contributions. This is free money coming your way. If your employer offers matching, amount of match differs by employer, is usually partial, but certainly nothing to disregard – it might be a portion of the dollars you contribute up to 6% of your annual salary, for example. Do these employer contributions count toward your personal yearly 401(k) contribution limit? No, they do not. Retirement planning tip: Consider contributing at least enough to qualify for the full match if your company offers one.1
  • An IRA permits a wide variety of investments, in contrast to a 401(k). The typical 401(k) might offer only about 20 investment options, and you have no control over what investments funds are chosen. With an IRA, you can have access to hundreds of investment options.1,3
  • You can contribute to a 401(k) no matter how much you earn. Your income may limit your eligibility to contribute to a Roth IRA; at certain income levels, you may be prohibited from contributing the full amount, or any amount.1
  • If you leave your job, you cannot take your 401(k) with you. It stays in the hands of the retirement plan administrator that your employer has selected. The money remains invested, but you may have less control over it than you once did. You do have choices: you can withdraw the money from the old 401(k), which will likely result in a tax penalty; you can leave it where it is; you can possibly transfer it to a 401(k) at your new job; or, you can transfer it into an IRA.4,5
  • You cannot control 401(k) fees. Some 401(k)s have high annual account and administrative fees that effectively eat into their annual investment returns. How costa are established is beyond your control. The annual fees on your IRA may not be as expensive.1

All this said, contributing to an IRA or a 401(k) is a prudent idea. In fact, many pre-retirees contribute to both 401(k)s and IRAs in the same tax year. Today, investing in these account types appear to be essential in achieving retirement savings and retirement income goals.

If you or someone you know would like to get coaching on the most appropriate approach to saving money for retirement, or would like assistance with the jargon below, we welcome your call.

Note: Contributions to a traditional IRA may be tax deductible in the contribution year, with current income tax due at withdrawal. Withdrawals prior to age 59 ½ may result in a 10% IRS penalty tax in addition to current income tax. The Roth IRA offers tax deferral on any earnings in the account. Withdrawals from the account may be tax free, as long as they are considered qualified. Limitations and restrictions may apply. Withdrawals prior to age 59 ½ or prior to the account being opened for 5 years, whichever is later, may result in a 10% IRS penalty tax. Future tax laws can change at any time and may impact the benefits of Roth IRAs. Their tax treatment may change.

#401k #IRA #traditionalIRA #RMD #RequiredMinimumDistribution #CatchUp #Investments #MarketOutlook #RetirementIncome  #RetirementPlanning #Taxes #TaxStrategies #TaxSavings #cornerstonewmi

This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc. and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 – nerdwallet.com/article/ira-vs-401k-retirement-accounts [4/30/18]
2 – irs.gov/retirement-plans/retirement-plans-faqs-regarding-required-minimum-distributions [5/30/18]
3 – tinyurl.com/y77cjtfz [10/31/17]
4 – finance.zacks.com/tax-penalty-moving-401k-ira-3585.html [9/6/18]
5 – cnbc.com/2018/04/26/what-to-do-with-your-401k-when-you-change-jobs.html [4/26/18]

To find out if this tax applies to you, look closely at two factors.

Provided by Cornerstone Wealth Management

Your Social Security income could be taxed. That may seem unfair or unfathomable. Regardless of how you feel about it, it is a possibility.

Since 1984, Social Security recipients have had to contend with this possibility. Social Security benefits became taxable above a certain yearly income level in that year. Then in 1993, a second, higher yearly income threshold (at which a higher tax rate applies) was added. Unfortunately for today’s recipient, these income thresholds have never been adjusted upward for inflation.1 As a result, more Social Security recipients have been exposed to the tax over time. Today, about 56% of senior households now have some percentage of their Social Security incomes taxed.1

Only part of your Social Security income may be taxable, not all of it. This is good news for some. Two factors come into play here: your filing status and your combined income.

Social Security defines your combined income as the sum of your “adjusted gross income” (AGI), any non-taxable interest earned, and 50% of your Social Security benefit income. (Your combined income is actually a form of “modified AGI,” or MAGI.)2

Single filers with a combined income from $25,000 to $34,000 and joint filers with combined incomes from $32,000 to $44,000 may have up to 50% of their Social Security benefits taxed.2

Single filers whose combined income tops $34,000 and joint filers with combined incomes above $44,000 may see up to 85% of their Social Security benefits taxed.2

If you are a head of household, or a qualifying widow/widower with a dependent child, the combined income thresholds for single filers apply to you.2

What if you are married and file separately? No income threshold applies. Your benefits will likely be taxed no matter how much you earn or how much Social Security you receive. (The only exception is if you are married filing separately and do not live with your spouse at any time during the year. In that case, part of your Social Security benefits may be taxed if your combined income exceeds $25,000.)2

You may be able to estimate these taxes in advance. You can use an online calculator (a Google search will lead you to a few such tools) or the worksheet in I.R.S. Publication 915.2

You can even have these taxes withheld from your Social Security income. You can choose either 7%, 10%, 15%, or 22% withholding per payment. Another alternative is to make estimated tax payments per quarter, like a business owner does.2,3

Did you know that 13 states tax Social Security payments? In alphabetical order, they are: Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and West Virginia. It might be a surprise to some that California is not on this list. Sometimes, only higher-income seniors face such taxation. For example, in Kansas, Missouri, and Rhode Island, the respective AGI thresholds for the taxation of a single filer’s Social Security income are $75,000, $80,000, and $85,000.1

If it appears your benefits will be taxed, what can you do? You could explore a few options to try and minimize the tax hit, but keep in mind that if your combined income is far greater than the $34,000 single filer and $44,000 joint filer thresholds, your chances of averting tax on Social Security income are slim. If your combined income is reasonably near the respective upper threshold, though, some moves might help.

If you have a number of income-generating investments, you could opt to try and revise your portfolio so that less income and tax-exempt interest are produced annually. Part of our work with clients is to review this possibility.

As written about in another article, a charitable IRA gift may be a good idea. You can make one if you are 70½ or older in the year of the donation. Individually, you can endow a qualified charity with as much as $100,000 in a single year this way. This idea could have a dual purpose: The amount of the gift counts toward your Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) and will not be counted in your taxable income.4

You could withdraw more retirement income from Roth accounts to lower AGI. Distributions from Roth IRAs and Roth workplace retirement plan accounts are tax exempt as long as you are age 59½ or older and have held the account for at least five tax years.5

Will the income limits linked to taxation of Social Security benefits ever be raised? Retirees can only hope so, but with more baby boomers becoming eligible for Social Security, the I.R.S. and the Treasury stand to receive greater tax revenue with the current limits in place.

If you would like to review options to help manage social security taxes, we welcome your call.

#FinancialPlanning #RetirementIncome  #RetirementPlanning #SocialSecurity #Taxes #TaxStrategies #TaxSavings

This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 – fool.com/retirement/2018/08/30/everything-you-need-to-know-about-social-security.aspx [8/30/18]
2 – forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2018/02/15/do-you-need-to-pay-tax-on-your-social-security-benefits-in-2018 [2/15/18]
3 – cnbc.com/2018/09/12/the-irs-is-warning-retirees-of-this-impending-surprise-tax.html [9/12/18]
4 – fidelity.com/building-savings/learn-about-iras/required-minimum-distributions/qcds [9/17/18]
5 – irs.gov/retirement-plans/retirement-plans-faqs-on-designated-roth-accounts [10/25/17]

Two recent court rulings may make you want to double-check.

How often do retirement plan sponsors check up on 401(k)s? Not as often as they should, perhaps. Employers should be especially vigilant these days.

Every plan sponsor should know about two recent court rulings. One came from the Supreme Court in 2015; another, from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in 2017. Both concerned the same case: Tibble v. Edison International.

In Tibble v. Edison International, some beneficiaries of the Edison 401(k) Savings Plan took Edison International to court, seeking damages for losses and equitable relief. The plaintiffs contended that Edison International’s financial advisors and investment committee had breached their fiduciary duty to the plan participants. Twice, they argued, the plan sponsor had added higher-priced funds to the plan’s investment selection when near-identical, lower-priced equivalents were available.1

Siding with the plan participants, the SCOTUS ruled that under ERISA, a plaintiff may initiate a claim for violation of fiduciary duty by a plan sponsor within six years of the breach of an ongoing duty of prudence in investment selection.1

The unanimous SCOTUS decision on Tibble (expressed by Justice Stephen Breyer) stated that “cost-conscious management is fundamental to prudence in the investment function.” This degree of alertness should be applied “not only in making investments but in monitoring and reviewing investments. Implicit in a trustee’s [plan fiduciary’s] duties is a duty to be cost-conscious.”2,3

Two years later, the U.S. District Court ruled that Edison International had indeed committed a breach of fiduciary duty regarding the selection of all 17 mutual funds offered to participants in its retirement plan. It also stated that damages would be calculated “from 2011 to the present, based not on the statutory rate, but by the 401(k) plan’s overall returns” during those six years.3

The message from these rulings is clear: the investment committee created by a plan sponsor shoulders nearly as much responsibility for monitoring investments and fees as a third-party advisor. Most small businesses, however, are not prepared to benchmark processes and continuously look for and reject unacceptable investments.

Do you have high-quality investment choices in your plan? While larger plan sponsors may have more “pull” with plan providers, this does not relegate a small company sponsoring a 401(k) to a substandard investment selection. Sooner or later employees may begin to ask questions. “Why does this 401(k) have only one bond fund?” “Where are the target-date funds?” “I went to Morningstar, and some of these funds have so-so ratings.” Questions and comments like these may be reasonable and might surface when a plan’s roster of investments is too short.

Are your plan’s investment fees reasonable? Employees can deduce this without checking up on the Form 5500 you file – there are websites that offer some general information as to what is and what is not acceptable regarding the ideal administrative fees.

Are you using institutional share classes in your 401(k)? This was the key issue brought to light by the plan participants in Tibble v. Edison International. The U.S. District Court noted that while Edison International’s investment committee and third-party advisors placed 17 funds in its retirement plan, it “selected the retail shares instead of the institutional shares, or failed to switch to institutional share classes once one became available.”3

Institutional share classes commonly have lower fees than retail share classes. To some observers, the difference in fees may seem trivial – but the impact on retirement savings over time may be significant.3

When was the last time you reviewed your 401(k) fund selection & share class? Was it a few years ago? Has it been longer than that? Why not review this today? Call in a financial professional to help you review your plan’s investment offering and investment fees.

This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 – faegrebd.com/en/insights/publications/2015/5/supreme-court-decides-tibble-v-edison-international [5/18/15]

2 – cpajournal.com/2017/09/13/erisas-reasonable-fee-requirement/ [9/13/17]

3 – tinyurl.com/yd8s2rq3 [8/17/17]