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to these accounts are made with pre-tax dollars, and the earnings in the account are not taxed until they are withdrawn.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.

Does Uncle Sam Want Your IRA?

“The Feds Want Your Retirement Accounts.” This was the headline of a February 22 poston the American Thinker blog recently forwarded to me by a reader. Normally I hit delete on articles warning of some type of impending financial doom. I read this one, since Argentina confiscated its citizens’ retirement accounts shortly before I first visited there in 2009.

According to the article, in 2007 a professor of economic policy from the New School for Social Research, Theresa Ghilarducci, wrote a paper calling for the US government to eliminate private retirement accounts. She suggested confiscating the assets in those accounts and replacing them with a “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA) guaranteeing a return of 3%, which is essentially another program like Social Security.

This is basically what Argentina did one year later.

I brushed aside Argentina’s action as the quirky behavior of a third world “banana republic.” Such confiscation would never happen in a developed country like the US.

Today, I am not as nonchalant about the prospect of nationalizing private retirement accounts. While I still believe it’s unlikely, I don’t completely rule it out as right-fringe conspiracy lunacy. The dramatic fall of our economic freedom from third in the world to 18th in 10 short years should give any US citizen pause. Even since 2009 we’ve seen a significant shift in public preference toward a government-controlled economy versus a market economy.

Does that mean we should stop funding our IRAs and 401(k)s and start stuffing gold coins into coffee cans? I don’t think so.

I still favor retirement accounts and personally fund mine to the maximum. I recommend that most wealth accumulators do the same. Roth IRAs, where the proceeds are distributed tax-free, are especially attractive vehicles in which to store investments. However, they are only as good as our government’s word.

Certainly, we can point to a number of circumstances where the US government did renege on its promises. One example was the Tax Simplification Act of 1986, signed into law by President Reagan, where Congress penalized real estate investors by retroactively changing the laws. A second instance, engineered by President Obama, was the unconstitutional confiscation of GM bondholders’ collateral which was handed over to the unions. Such acts do make me pause and wonder if I am being naïve.

Yet a sovereign government that issues its own currency has no need to confiscate financial assets of citizens if the currency is sound. As long as the government can find vendors to accept its currency in exchange for goods and services, there is no need to take citizens’ assets. All it needs to do is create new currency.

If a government with a sound currency would confiscate assets, the reason would almost certainly be to redistribute wealth. However, any country that starts taking the assets of its citizens will not be considered politically stable and will not have a sound currency for long. Other countries, corporations, and individuals will become reluctant to accept its currency.

This is the case in Argentina, where the currency is devaluing at 30% a year. Nobody wants Argentinian pesos. In response, the government outlawed owning foreign currency; Argentinians cannot legally own more than 100 US dollars.

The US is certainly not to that point. In the meantime, what should investors do?

Nothing. I will continue to fully fund my retirement plans and hold a globally diversified portfolio invested in a wide array of assets. I will, however, continue to cast a watchful eye toward the strength of the US dollar, the CPI, and our tax and economic policy. As my father often says, “Never say never.”

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.

12 questions to answer before you retire

Most people know a thing or two about retirement. Stan Hinden, by contrast, knows 12.

And that should come as no surprise given that Hinden has recently published the fourth edition of his book, “How to Retire Happy: The 12 Most Important Decisions You Must Make Before You Retire.”

According to Hinden, who is 86 and wrote the “Retirement Journal” column in The Washington Post for years after he retired as a financial writer in 1996, there are 12 important decisions that you must make before you retire. And in his book, he details those decisions. In an interview, he boiled those decisions down to the essence of the matter. Learn more about the book.

Are you ready to retire?

Among the questions that you must contemplate is whether you are ready to retire. According to Hinden, there are three good reasons to retire. One, the time is right; two, you have more compelling things to do; and three, your job is changing. There are also three good reasons not to retire: One, your work is your identity; two, you will miss the people you work with; and three, you want to stay in the loop.

In the current economic environment, however, Hinden said, more and more people might be ready to retire but not able. “People aren’t feeling comfortable about retiring,” said Hinden, who was born in the same year Charles Lindbergh first flew across the Atlantic Ocean. “So the answer to the question ‘Are you ready to retire?’ is ‘I’d like to, but I don’t know if I can.’ That is been a change since I wrote the first edition of the book in the retirement scene.”

Instead of retiring outright or only working, Hinden said he sees older Americans now doing both: retiring and working. And to him—and he’s living proof—that’s a good a way to enjoy the best of two worlds. (Hinden, besides updating his book, also writes a weekly column for AARP called the Social Security Mailbox. Read that column.)

Can you afford to retire?

To be fair, in the current economic environment, Hinden said the question of retirement is less about whether you are ready and more about whether you can afford to retire. And one of the key questions to answer about whether you can afford to retire is a rather simple one: Will your income in retirement be greater than your expenses? Of course, there’s more to it than that. But that’s the essence of it.

“When you approach retirement, you really have to sit down and look at your financial situation and try to estimate what your income will be and what your expenses will be,” he said. “It seems to be more and more people will find that their expenses may be more than their income.”

There are, of course, ways to increase your income and lower your expenses. But there are some hard truths to consider as well. One, retirement includes living mostly on a fixed income without the benefit of salary increases as there were during one’s working years. And two, retirement includes expenses that aren’t fixed: health-care costs and taxes tend to rise often faster than inflation.

Among the many things you can do to increase your income, according to Hinden, is use the power of time and compounding. He recommends saving and investing as much as you can as earlier as you can in employer-sponsored and other types of retirement accounts, including Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s.

Another issue that plagues current retirees has to do with the zero-interest-rate world. It’s becoming increasingly difficult for older Americans to generate income without having to put their assets at risk in the stock and bond markets. “It hasn’t been easy” finding safe investments, he said.

When should you apply for Social Security?

One way to increase your income in retirement, according to Hinden, is to delay taking Social Security till age 70, if you can afford it. That is especially so in this low-interest-rate environment and the benefits of this tactic, the delayed retirement credit. (Your Social Security benefit will increase 8% per year for every year you delay taking it after full retirement age.) Read Retirement Planner: Delayed Retirement Credits.

Thus, delaying taking Social Security accomplishes two things, he said. One, you’ll get the largest possible Social Security benefit. Plus, widows and widowers will get the largest possible survivors benefit. Read Survivors Benefits.

“If you can afford it, the better decision is to wait,” said Hinden.

To be sure, deciding when to apply for Social Security is very much a personal decision. And the numbers seem to suggest that most take Social Security either at full retirement age or sooner. In fact, some 74% of the 35.6 million retired workers received reduced benefits because of entitlement before full retirement age, according to a recent government report. Read Annual Statistical Supplement to the Social Security Bulletin, 2012.

“It was obvious in the past, and even more so now, that people take Social Security early for two reasons,” he said. “One, they need the money. And two, people may be afraid they won’t live long enough to get as much as they think they would like to get.”

If, however, you have enough money or income from other sources, from work or from your portfolio, to carry you from normal retirement age till age 70, then it is a good deal to delay taking Social Security, he said. “I live in a place where there are at least a dozen people who are 99 or 100-plus years old,” he said, suggesting that delaying Social Security could make a big difference if you happen to live that long. “If this is a good bet, then the odds are growing in favor of taking your Social Security later.”

Hinden also noted that the widow’s survivors benefit “will be much, much better” if her husband has waited at least until full retirement age to collect Social Security. “One of the main reasons for poverty among aged widows is the fact that their Social Security is so low,” he said. “And the reason it is so low is because their husbands took their benefits at age 62.”

How should you take your pension?

Another decision some retirees have to make concerns their pensions and whether to take a lump sum, or monthly payments based on a single life or on a joint-and-survivor basis. In his case, Hinden said, he took his pension as monthly payments based on his life. But now, with the benefit of hindsight, he would have chosen the joint-and-survivor annuity, the option where the monthly payment is reduced but doesn’t end if he predeceases his wife, Sara. “At the time, I had a fair amount of life insurance,” he said. “But then one day I sat down and did some arithmetic and began to realize that I made the wrong decision. The arithmetic I did was to figure out what income we were getting as a couple and then figuring out what income Sara would get as a single person, as a widow, after I died. And without the pension, she would not have done very well. It was pretty clear that if I done that arithmetic before I retired I would have made a different pension decision.”

Often, he said, we don’t realize the repercussions of making the wrong decision until it is too late.

“The one theme that I’ve been trying to stress in the book all this time is that, as Sara frequently told me, preparation is next to Godliness,” Hinden said. “And she was right. These decisions are coming up. There are many things that you have to learn about retirement. Start learning them now. Start thinking about what you need to know and that will help you a great deal when you finally retire.”

In fact, he said, he wrote his book to help people learn all the things that he should have known before he retired.

What should you do with the money in your company savings plan?

Among the many things that you need to know is what to do with the money in your employer-sponsored retirement plan, after you retire or leave your company. According to Hinden, the best option typically is to roll over your IRA. He also suggested that workers consider not investing in their company’s stock inside in their retirement plans or keep it to a small percentage.

When do you have to take money out of your IRA?

When it comes to taking money out of your IRAs and other retirement accounts, Hinden offered this advice: “My advice would be to avoid a bad case of ‘brain sprain.’” Hinden said those who are faced with the deciding when and how to take money from their IRA should work with a financial adviser or CPA who is familiar with IRA distribution rules. “It’s not a hard calculation to make if you understand the tables and how they work but they are complicated,” he said. “I can remember the first time I did it I wrote a column asking why retirement had to be such hard work.”

How should you invest during retirement?

As for investing in retirement, Hinden said, the trick is to strike a balance between investing for growth and investing for safety. Hinden said he “got caught in the tech bubble” and in retrospect he wishes he had been more conservative with his investment portfolio. And in general, given the vagaries of the market, he recommends that retirees be more conservative than aggressive with their investments. “I’m not in favor of putting everything in bonds,” he said. “You still need stocks. You still need growth and protection against inflation. But you have to do it carefully. There is a price to being in the market. And no matter how well diversified you are, it may not matter.”

What should you do about health insurance?

Hinden also recommends that retirees purchase, if able, Medigap insurance—given the increase in health-care costs, the expenses that Medicare doesn’t cover, and the potential that health-care costs could ruin one’s retirement. “Medigap is very important,” he said. “I’ve always had it since I went on Medicare, and I wouldn’t give it up. I think it is absolutely essential that people have Medigap insurance if they are on Medicare.”

Visit the government’s website, Medigap Policy Search, to learn more about Medigap policies.

Hinden also expressed concerns over efforts to make “Medigap more expensive and more difficult to use.” Policy makers suggest that if Medigap policies cover less of beneficiaries’ costs, some seniors will be less likely to overuse Medicare-covered health care services.

What should you do to prepare for an illness that requires long-term care?

Hinden also recommends that Americans, if they can afford it, purchase long-term care insurance. “And if they can’t afford it, they should figure out a way to afford it,” he said.

Hinden, in this case, speaks from personal experience. His wife Sara, who became afflicted by Alzheimer’s disease in 2007 and now resides in an assisted living facility, has benefited from a long-term care insurance policy Hinden purchased some years ago. “That long-term care insurance policy has been a Godsend to her,” he said. “It doesn’t cover a whole lot, but it is enough to really make a difference.”

Where do you want to live after you retire?

As many know, most Americans prefer to age in place. And the same can be said of Hinden. After raising his family, he and his wife moved to a retirement community and stayed there for many years. After his wife developed dementia, they moved to a senior residence where they could access more health-care support. Today, his wife lives in an assisted living house and he continues to live in the senior residence.

How should you arrange your estate to save on taxes and avoid probate?

According to Hinden, death is not only an emotional event, but also a legal event and a taxable one. And a favorable outcome depends on advance planning, getting good advice, and carefully assembling your financial records and documents.

How can you age successfully?

Hinden said the key to aging successful is a matter of three things. One is to exercise, particularly walking, on a regular basis, two is diet, to eat well, and three is to retain your social contacts. “You need to continue to be part of groups or clubs, to be in touch with people.” he said. “It’s extremely important to be in touch with people. Nobody ought to become a couch potato in retirement. Retirement can be a great experience.”

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.

Can You Make Deductible IRA Contributions?

If you make deductible IRA contributions it can be one of the best financial moves available. Not only do you get an immediate tax savings, you also take advantage of tax deferred investment growth for years to come. What’s not to like?

The question is – are you eligible to make deductible retirement contributions to your IRA? Let’s take a look.

First, let’s get a handle on the ground rules and IRA restrictions. They are fairly straight forward but you do have to pay attention to the nuances. The basic rule is that if your income is $5000 or greater you can contribute as much as $5,000 to an IRA ($6,000 if you are age 50 or more). But if you earn less than these amounts, the most you can contribute is 100% of your earnings. Let’s keep going.

You have to make your IRA contribution by April 15th in the year you file your return. So for tax year 2012, your deadline is April 15th 2013. You have to adhere to this deadline even if you file for an extension.

Is the contribution always deductible?

Sadly….no. If you (or your spouse) can contribute to a plan at work and your income exceeds certain levels, the deductibility of your IRA contribution phases out. Note – it doesn’t matter if you take advantage of the plan at work or not. As long as you are eligible to contribute to a retirement plan at work, you are subject to deductibility limits. This one is one of the reasons I strongly suggest you contribute to retirement plans at work if they are available.

How do those phase outs work?  This is an IRA FAQ if ever there was one. If you are single and your income is below $58,000, you can make a fully deductible IRA contribution even if there is a plan available at work. Between $58,000 and $68,000 the amount of your contribution that is deductible phases out. If you are married filing jointly, the phaseout starts at $92,000. And in this case, none of your contribution is deductible if you earn $112,000 or more.

Wondering how to invest your IRA contribution this year?  Consider using Betterment.  They are a low-risk way to learn about investing as you invest. I think they are a great resource for people with modest amounts to invest.  This is perfect for IRA contributions. 

What does the IRS consider as income?

“Income” for purposes of determining how large an IRA contribution you can make is made up of wages, deductible ira contribuitonssalaries, fees, commissions and bonuses according the Investors Business’ Daily*. Also included are taxable alimony and support payments.

Social security, pensions, investment and annuity income don’t count however. Disability and unemployment don’t count either. Neither does income from rental properties. The only exception is if you are in the real estate business.

Most of this seems logical to me but there is one rule that makes absolutely no sense. That rules stipulates that once you turn age 70 ½ (the year you have to start withdrawing your Required Minimum Distributions) you can’t contribute to an IRA. It’s a dumb rule but a rule you must follow none the less.

Are you making a deductible IRA contribution this year? Why or why not?

 

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”!