Proposed Cap on IRAs Would Touch Middle Class

Coins in a Glass Jar“Max out your retirement plans every year” has long been standard advice I’ve given to working adults who want to secure a reliable income when they retire.  Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), along with 401(k), 403(b), and profit sharing plans offered by some employers, are among the most accessible ways for middle-class workers to provide for retirement and build wealth.

If a proposal in President Obama’s budget plan is approved by Congress, however, retirement plans may no longer be the first and best stop along the road to financial independence.

The proposal would limit a person’s total balance in all tax-advantaged retirement plans to the amount it would cost to purchase an immediate annuity paying $205,000 a year.  This appears to not be indexed for inflation.  The articles I’ve read and my own calculations suggest this would mean capping retirement accounts at around $3 million.

From the sketchy details available so far, the proposal appears to target traditional IRAs and other tax-deferred retirement plans.  Contributions to these accounts are made with pre-tax dollars, and the earnings in the account are not taxed until they are withdrawn.

Since 58% of Americans don’t have any retirement plan, my guess is they will pay little attention to this proposal.  Saving $3 million dollars seems well out of reach.  While that may be true in today’s dollars, it most likely will not be true in future dollars.

If inflation over the next 40 years matches that of the past 40, a $3,000,000 IRA in 2053 will be equal to $575,000 today.  If today’s 25-year-old, retiring then, wanted to be sure the money would last another 40 years, the IRA would provide an income equivalent to about $1,500 a month.

Even in today’s dollars, the $3 million maximum isn’t as unreachable as it may seem.  Employees can currently contribute a maximum of $5,500 per year ($6,500 for those 50 and older) to Roth or traditional IRAs.  Small business owners and the self-employed may have SIMPLE (savings incentive match plan for employees) or SEP (simplified employee pension) IRAs.  The maximum annual contribution is currently $17,000 for a SIMPLE and $51,000 for a SEP. A self-employed plumber, business owner, or doctor who was a conscientious saver with a diversified portfolio could certainly accumulate $3 million over a lifetime.

Or suppose the wife of a small business owner was a self-employed counselor with her own SEP plan.  If he died at age 58 and she inherited his IRA, the combined totals could easily put her over the $3 million cap.

It isn’t clear how the proposal would equate the withdrawal rate with the cap.  One possibility would be to raise the required minimum distribution amount, which would erode the value of an IRA more quickly.  Another option would be to penalize excess accumulations with a hefty tax of 40% or more.  Of course, the President could follow in Argentina’s footsteps and just confiscate any amount over the cap.  Any of these would add to the diminution of retirement plans as a vehicle for income during retirement.

The proposal includes this statement: “But under current rules, some wealthy individuals are able to accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”

Apparently we, as individual citizens, are not considered capable of defining “reasonable levels” of retirement saving for ourselves.  The real goal of this plan appears to be wealth distribution, instead of encouraging more Americans to save and provide for their own retirement.

You can read more about this proposal at Bloomberg and Market Watch, and here is a link to the President’s budget.  If this proposal is passed, retirement plans will play a much smaller role in many middle class Americans’ golden years.

Rick Kahler

 

Rick Kahler is a Certified Financial Planner, President of Kahler Financial Group, author of the “Financial Awakening” blog, and a featured contributor on the CIF Blog.

Obama Proposes $3 Million Cap on IRAs

I listened to several of the Sunday talk shows and while there was criticism of the President saying the CA attorney general was good looking, there wasn’t a word about his unprecedented attack on IRAs in his new budget proposal, which was made public on Friday.

The administration released a preview of their budget proposal which would save around $9 billion over a decade by capping the amount a person could withdraw or hold in their retirement plan, like an IRA.

According to an articles in The Hill,  Bloomberg, and Forbes one of the President’s spokespeople said that wealthy taxpayers can currently “accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”

The President’s proposal will mandate that no one can withdraw from their retirement plan more than $205,000 per year.  The article suggests that means a cap of around $3 million for retirement.  The article is not clear how the proposal equates the withdrawal rate with the cap.  It is possible the President wants to either raise the RMDs, cap withdrawals, or cap the balance allowed in retirement plans, or perhaps a combination of all the above.

One way to interpret the sketchy details is this proposal may raise the required withdrawal rate on a balance of $3 million to $205,000, or about 7%.  Currently the RMD is around $120,000, so hiking the RMD to $205,000 would erode IRAs even faster, subjecting them to income taxes much earlier than currently.

Whether the cap is on withdrawals, the RMD is raised by almost two times, or they cap plans at $3 million; you can be sure IRAs will play a much smaller role in many American’s retirement plans.TaxForms

Of course, this is exactly what the administration is attempting to encourage.  The goal is overt wealth distribution.  This is Obama’s comment to Joe the Plumber that he needs to spread his wealth around in action.  By their own admission, the White House is making a grand edict that no one needs over $205,000 a year in retirement income or $3 million.  So, they intend to penalize those hard working Americans who save for retirement, encouraging them instead to join the ranks of those who spend today and look to the government for support tomorrow.

There is a hint in the articles I’ve read that the IRA cap is retaliation against Mitt Romney, who accumulated tens of millions in his IRA.  The inference is that the former Massachusetts governor must have done something illegal to squirrel away so much money in that sort of retirement account.

I am guessing the average American, who lives month to month and doesn’t have an IRA, will turn a deaf ear to this proposal, thinking that $3 million is significantly beyond what they will ever save.  While that may be true in today’s dollars, it most likely will not be true in future dollars.

A 25 year old who hasn’t begun to think about an IRA today, probably will have a significant change of opinion when they are 65. If inflation averages over the next 40 years what it has over the last 40 years, a $3,000,000 IRA will be equal to $575,000 today.  And what type of retirement will $575,000 buy you if you don’t want your money to run out over your lifetime?  An income of about $1,500 a month.

While we wait for more information, the intention of this administration is very clear. People who want to earn and achieve financial independence, which is above a level approved by the government, are becoming personas non gratis in the United States.

Rick Kahler

 

Rick Kahler is a Certified Financial Planner, President of Kahler Financial Group, author of the “Financial Awakening” blog, and a featured contributor on the CIF Blog.

What are the Sequestration Cuts?

Exactly what are the sequestration cuts and when are they going to take place? More important, is this something to fear? As you’ll see, the answer is no. You do not need to panic over the sequestration.

It’s true that President Obama and Congress failed to find common ground on spending cuts. Maybe the fiscal cliff was averted – for the time being – but the budget crises hasn’t been resolved.  As a result, the sequestration took effect on March 1st. Immediately thereafter many popular main stream media publications reported that automatic cuts are going to start taking place immediately and those cuts would cripple the government and economy. Let’s discover why these naysayers are off their rockers.

What are the sequestration cuts?

This year the government is supposed to cut $85 billion in spending. However, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) foresees that there will only be $44 billion shaved from government spending in 2013. The other $41 billion will be planned this year but will be implemented in the future. So, the cuts in 2013 amount to about 1% of total spending. That’s what all the hoopla is about. I bet you could cut 1% of your budget without even rolling out of bed. For our government however, it’s as if we’re asking them to remove their own liver with a rusty spoon.  Pass the Advil please.

As I said, many major news outlets screamed about the draconian spending cuts that were going to be implemented starting Monday morning. Here is a sampling of some of what I read:

  • Office of Management and Budget will direct the Pentagon to cut its budget by 13%. Other government agencies will have to cut their budgets by 9%.
  • Lower rates will be paid for school construction and energy bonds.
  • EPA staff will be notified that they must take an unpaid 13 day hiatus from work.
  • Money that goes to support public rent assistance, farm loans and food programs will be reduced immediately.
  • Large military contractors will send out layoff notices this month.
  • The school-year will be trimmed and teacher layoffs will take place.
  • The Agriculture Department will have to remove 300,000 poor people (women and young children) from its various assistance programs.
  • The FAA will reduce its staff. Airports will be closed. Flights will be canceled.
  • The USDA will have fewer inspectors to visit meat packing plants. Some factories will close.

Why aren’t I tearing my hair out and wearing sack cloth? Because none of this is going to happen as reported and here’s why.

Almost as soon as the sequester became law, both the Republicans and Democrats agreed that they will make sure the government receives full funding as they continue to slug out how to implement the required $85 billion in automatic budget cuts.

Is your budget out of whack?  Are you heading towards your own  ”personal sequester”?  If so, check out You Need A Budget.  It’s a wonderful tool that will help you get control over your spending and get out of debt fast.  You may not be able to trim $85 billion from your spending, but you will get back on track muy pronto.

Even if this latest agreement fails to result in a solution and the automatic cuts are implemented, you may not have to head for the hills with all your survival gear.

Why You Shouldn’t Lament the Sequester

As I said, Congress is going back to the huddle to try to coordinate how to implement the spending cuts wisely. There aren’t any specific dates for budget cuts. Unless things change, the cuts will be applied evenly across the board but the impact will be program-specific.

If government agencies lay off employees they have to provide them with 30 days’ notice first. That means that it will be at least April 7th before anybody is laid off.  If you work for the government, you may have to start looking for a new job – but you have some time to start preparing for it.

Of course, some of the fallout from the budget cuts is tough to foresee. The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Housing and Urban Development hasn’t chimed in on how and when they might cut their programs. Neither has the Department of Health and Human Services.

Immediate Cuts We Know About

The Air Force has already cut some flight training hours off its schedule. I don’t know if those hours are crucial or not to the defense of our country. I have faith that if those hours are crucial to long-term readiness, they will be restored.

The USS Truman Aircraft Carrier was supposed to be under way towards the Persian Gulf early last month but that departure has been delayed. That’s a direct result of the budget sequester.

The Capitol building in Washington D.C. closed some entrances. Also, the janitors at the Capitol building won’t be able to work overtime. Yawn.

Cuts That Might Happenwhat are the sequestration cuts

If cuts are made by the TSA and FAA, travel could be delayed and made more difficult. If cuts are made to the FBI it might be more difficult to detect and stop criminal and terrorist acts.

Even though Medicare benefits are beyond the reach of the sequester, payments to providers of Medicare benefits aren’t. As a result, payments will shrink by 2%. Doctors and hospitals aren’t going to like this.

So, yes, there will be consequences of our government tightening the belt. But nobody knows what that is going to look like.

Which programs won’t be cut according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS):

  • Social Security Benefits.
  • Medicare Benefits
  • VA Benefits
  • Pell Grants
  • Medicaid Benefits
  • Welfare & Food Stamps
  • Children’s Health Insurance Program
  • Child Nutrition Programs

As is often the case, things are rarely the way they seem. We can’t predict how government spending cuts will be manifest and we can’t predict the ultimate outcome.

Certainly there will be spending reductions and that’s going to translate into some pain for some people. I don’t want to understate that. But there might be a very shiny silver lining. These spending reductions could be the first steps we take that eventually lead the United States towards a financially stable economic future.

How do you feel about the sequester? Are you worried or are you generally optimistic?

Neal Frankle

 

Neal Frankle is a Certified Financial Planner with more than 25 years of experience, author of the Wealth Pilgrim blog, and a featured contributor here on the “CIF Blog”!

Balancing Retirement With Supporting Adult Children – Money Magazine

How many times have you heard “I will start saving for retirement once I get my kids through college”? I hear it at least once a week from prospective clients that have fallen into the trap of believing their personal finances will loosen up after their kids have graduated. What happens when the children you put through school move back home after graduation? What if at the same time, your parents continue to age and need more of your time, energy, and money?

I recently spoke with Penelope “Penny” Wang, Editor-at-Large of Money magazine about this financial dilemma facing an entire generation of clients. I told her that clients may be able to handle taking financial responsibility of their adult children or parents, but very few can handle both:

“When it’s both, it gets overwhelming,” says Milwaukee financial planner Alan Moore.

So what can you do about it? What happens when they really do need your help, but you aren’t able to fully support them? If adult children are moving home, or need financial support, I recommend that clients put EVERYTHING is writing. Be sure they understand the expectations upfront, and that everyone is on the same page, so there are no surprises. I told Penny about a client once that didn’t follow this advice, and ended up doing the unthinkable to try and get their life back:

One of Moore’s clients ended up buying his son, who hadn’t moved out, a house. “He told me, ‘I just wanted my house back,’ ” says Moore. ”I’m not sure he could really afford it.”

The truth is, the client couldn’t afford to give their son a home, but they felt it was their only option.

Click here to read the full article.

So what do you think? Are you taking care of adult children and aging parents? How are you able to manage all of the bills? Have you been able to keep saving for your own retirement? I would love to hear your story, or any questions you may have!

Alan Moore

 

Alan Moore is the founder of Serenity Financial Consulting. He is a Certified Financial Planner (CFP) and a Certified Retirement Counselor, author of the Serenity Financial Consulting Blog, and a featured contributor here on the California Institute of Finance blog.

4 ways to stay young like those Taco Bell seniors

It makes for a good commercial but is it in line with reality?

The good commercial, for those who didn’t see it during the Super Bowl on Sunday or on YouTube, was the Taco Bell ad in which Bernie Goldblatt and his buddies sneak out of their retirement home for a wild night on the town.

Over the course of their spree that night, they sneak into a swimming pool; they go disco dancing; one elderly woman has a dalliance in a bathroom stall with a much younger man; and Bernie gets his last name tattooed across his back. The old fogies finish off the night, much like my teenage sons, at Taco Bell before heading back to the Glencobrooke Retirement Home.

You can watch the ad, titled “Viva Young” – 2013 Taco Bell Game Day Commercial here. (Of note, it was Grandparents.com’s favorite commercial from the Super Bowl.)

Now the truth of the matter is that this commercial is far from the truth, or at least far from the truth I know. When my father lived in an assisted living facility several years ago few, if any, of the residents had wild nights on the town such as that in the Taco Bell commercial. In fact, most of the residents were in bed by 7 p.m.

It is true that the residents did take road trips. However, all of these road trips were sponsored events. They would shuffle onto a bus to go on a whale watch, or watch the Pawtucket Red Sox, or grab a quick lunch at Hooters. And no one that I ever met there ever ate spicy food.

Still, the Taco Bell commercial strikes a chord. Who among us doesn’t want to be young at heart? Who among us doesn’t want to recapture a piece of the past, even if only for an evening? Who among us doesn’t want to throw caution to the wind and go wild every now and then?

Well, the answer is that all of us would like go on a spree like Bernie and his friends every now and then. Unfortunately some (or is it many?) of us don’t know what it would take be youthful again, even if means getting heartburn or throwing out your back.

What would it take? Who has the permission slips? Well, here’s what experts say you have to do to stay young in deed and thought.

Change your perspective

Annarose Ingarra-Milch has the main character in her novel, “Lunch with Lucille,” address the concept of youthfulness. Lucille, the nonagenarian, breaks it down to four diamonds or four valuable lessons. Learn more about the book, “Lunch with Lucille,” here.

The first diamond, said Ingarra-Milch, is all about changing our perspective. “If we see ourselves as old, we will act old,” she said. “We will focus on what we can’t do. What we have lost. And as a terrible consequence people will treat us as old folk, stick us in a corner, and ignore us.”

If, however, you change your perspective and see your age as something valuable, then it makes sense that the more years, the more value, Ingarra-Milch said. “The knowledge we have learned over our lifetime, our crystallized intelligence, is a priceless commodity and only gifted to a select few.”


Taco Bell Enlarge Image

Bernie takes a joy ride around the football field on a souped-up scooter.

In other words, how you see yourself is key to how others see and treat you. “If we see ourselves as fun-loving and adventurous, then others will too,” said Ingarra-Milch. “Going forward, think how the nurse will relate to Goldblatt and his crew should she become privy to their nighttime antics?”

Let go of the past

The second diamond is about letting go of the past, said Ingarra-Milch. “It is no secret that we live in a youth-centered culture,” she said. “Hell, we created it. Hide the gray. Get rid of the wrinkles. Look younger and be happy.”

You can certainly try and keep up with that to-do list, but it will be a losing battle. And that in turn will create stress.

The antidote, said Ingarra-Milch, is self-acceptance. “Enjoy where we are now,” she said. “Where ever we are on the adulthood spectrum, carpe diem.”

Her advice: Do new things, learn new ways of doing old things, taste different foods, sip different drinks, and read different genres of books. “We still need to stay open to the smorgasbord of people and their ideas, no matter how kooky they may seem,” she said. “And of course, we must make an effort to be actively involved in what goes on around us—in our own health, our family, our community, and our world.”

Have goals

The third diamond, meanwhile, keeps us looking forward and into the future. “Having goals gives us a target,” said Ingarra-Milch.

To be fair, you don’t have to look down the road 10, 20 or 30 years as you once did. Your goals can be as short term as deciding what you will have for dinner tonight, what shoes you will wear tomorrow, what movie you will see next week, or in Goldblatt’s case, how you will sneak past the nurse’s station when it’s go-time. “Looking to the future allows us to continue moving,” she said. “We keep from getting stagnant. We keep questioning, ‘what else, where else, how else?’”

In the novel, for instance, the main character, Lucille, raises her glass each day at lunch and toasts “Cent’anni,” 100 years in Italian. “It is a goal she wishes for herself and each of her lunch companions,” said Ingarra-Milch. “Well, I figure that if we are looking to live to be 100 years old, there must be a lot of things we want to do before we get there.”

Others, by the way, are of the same opinion. Consider, for instance, the advice of Jim Stovall, author of the best-selling novel “The Ultimate Gift.” “People stay young as long as they have something to do, someone to love, and something to look forward to,” he said. “We stay young as long as we believe our best days are still ahead.”

George Kinder of the Kinder Institute of Life Planning also thinks it’s wise to ask yourself the following questions: What would you do if you had all the money you needed or all the time? What would you do if you had only five to 10 years to live? And, what would you regret not having done if you learned you only had one day left to live?

You might not head out to Taco Bell after asking yourself those questions, but odds are high the answers will help you focus on what’s important to you in your golden years.

Develop a gratitude attitude

In Ingarra-Milch’s novel, Lucille recommends developing a gratitude attitude. The advice is this: Be thankful for what you have no matter how minor, for what you can do or still do, for the people in your life or the people you had in your life, or for whatever goes on in your day. “Each and every day we must look to find what it is we appreciate and then remind ourselves of our good fortune,” said Ingarra-Milch.” This positive outlook, as the song goes, keeps us on the “sunny side of the street” and makes every day a celebration. It is no secret that people are attracted to positive, upbeat people. It is an easy way to keep our old friends close as well as attract new ones.”

Ingarra-Milch said Lucille’s four diamonds are fundamental best practices for keeping a youthful presence. And, she acknowledges that they do take effort and persistence to master. “But we know that, we have lived long enough to know that everything worthwhile takes effort and persistence,” she said. “Changing our perspective, letting go of the past, making new goals, and choosing a positive attitude can turn anyone into a ‘Goldblatt.’”

Hats off to Taco Bell

And for what it’s worth, Ingarra-Milch also praised Taco Bell for airing the Bernie Goldblatt commercial. “Unfortunately, I, like many I suppose, have become accustomed to only seeing seniors in commercials hawking how to pay for their own funeral expenses, discreetly manage their incontinence, and yelling for help after they’ve fallen and can’t get up,” she said.

In fact, Ingarra-Milch said the commercial reminded her of her youth. “I thought back to when I was a teenager and right after Johnny Carson signed off, I would creep past my sleeping mother and out the back door to hang with my friends and be up to ‘no good,’” she said “Way to go Taco Bell for recognizing that age has nothing to do with wanting to have fun, laughing, smiling, playing, sharing time with friends, taking risks, and (still) bucking the system.”

Retirement Expert: Robert Powell

 

Robert Powell is a featured writer on the MarketWatch Retirement blog, a Research Fellow at the California Institute of Finance, and  a Featured Contributor here on the CIF blog.