FREE NEWSLETTER

If folks thank you for reaching out and promise to circle back, you know they’ve done time in the corporate world.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Short term and long term Social Security planning

"So if they adopt to freeze COLA increases, I wonder if they will also freeze increases to the standard monthly premium for Medicare Part B. Sardonically, Probably not!"
- August West
Read more »

Yet-Another Social Security Spreadsheet Analysis on what Age to Start taking Benefits

"Before asking when to claim Social Security, we should first ask how retirement will be funded during each phase of retirement. What’s the plan for covering living expenses from early retirement to FRA, from FRA to age 70 if benefits are delayed, and then after age 70? Only after that cash-flow plan is clear does the claiming decision really make sense. For retirees with substantial assets, legacy goals also become part of the equation. I know this is a much more complicated problem than comparing breakeven ages or lifetime benefits, but is this the kind of retirement-income planning tool you would consider building?"
- Mark Gardner
Read more »

Beware the CFP Designation?

"A CFA would be top-notch, but they generally don't work with individual clients."
- Ormode
Read more »

Social Security

AT FIRST GLANCE, Social Security appears straightforward. During our working years, we pay into it, and in retirement, it sends us a monthly check, guaranteed for life. Unfortunately, it isn’t always so simple. Below are five aspects of the system that are frequently misunderstood. Benefits estimates. Look at a Social Security statement, and an easy-to-read chart provides estimates of the benefits available at various ages. The heading above the chart reads, “Personalized Monthly Retirement Benefit Estimates Depending on the Age You Start.” That seems clear. But there’s a caveat that can make the chart misleading. Off to the side, there’s a further explanation that reads: “These personalized estimates are based on your earnings to date and assume you continue to earn [your most recently reported salary] per year until you start your benefits.” The numbers shown, in other words, are not guaranteed.  Why would the statements be presented this way? It’s because the Social Security Administration can’t predict when any given person will stop working, so for simplicity of presentation, it assumes that someone will continue working and continue earning the same income each year into the future and will then retire and immediately claim benefits. For most people, this isn’t how it works out, but Social Security has no way to know what each person will choose. That’s why benefits statements shouldn’t be taken at face value. How can you forecast your actual benefit? Fortunately, Social Security’s website provides a calculator that allows custom calculations based on actual retirement expectations. Continuing to work. Some people worry that there would be a negative impact if they chose to continue working after claiming Social Security. This concern isn’t totally unfounded. It’s known as the Social Security earnings test, but there are some details to be aware of. First, the earnings test doesn’t apply after a worker reaches Full Retirement Age. And second, to the extent that benefits are reduced in the years before FRA, Social Security will add back those amounts to future checks. So working while on Social Security shouldn’t be viewed as so problematic. Maximum benefit. All things being equal, Social Security retirement benefits increase with each year that you wait, up until age 70. This is broadly understood. The problem, though, is that oftentimes people view it almost as a rule to wait until 70, but that isn’t always the best choice. For married couples, especially where one spouse has accumulated a larger benefit, there are two reasons why one spouse might claim earlier than 70. The first relates to what’s known as the spousal benefit. This is a feature that originated in the days when more families had just one working spouse, and it provides a benefit to spouses who haven’t worked the requisite 10 years to earn a benefit. In general, the spousal benefit is equal to half of the higher-earning spouse’s benefit at their Full Retirement Age (FRA), which is now age 67 for most people. The only requirement is that the lower-earning spouse can’t start benefits until the higher-earning spouse has started his or her own benefit. The spousal benefit is terrific, but a commonly misunderstood limitation is that—unlike a worker’s own benefit—it doesn’t continue to increase each year until age 70. It hits a maximum at the spouse’s FRA. For that reason, it’s important for a spouse to not delay beyond that point.  Even when both spouses have accrued their own benefits, it often makes sense for the spouse with the smaller benefit to claim somewhat earlier than 70. To understand why, we need to look at it from the perspective of the higher earning spouse’s benefit. Because that benefit would also be available to the lower-earning spouse in the form of a survivor’s benefit (discussed further below), that larger benefit will be available to either spouse as long as either is living. The smaller benefit, on the other hand, has value only while both spouses are living. And while it’s unfortunate to say, that is statistically less likely. For that reason, I generally recommend that the lower-earning spouse claim at, or around, Full Retirement Age. When to claim. In most conversations about Social Security, people tend to talk about claiming decisions in round numbers—claiming at 67 or 68, for example. The reality, though, is that you can claim at any time between ages 62 and 70. You don’t need to wait for your birthday, and the benefit simply increases by a bit for each month that you wait. I find this helpful because it allows flexibility in how we think about claiming. Not sure whether to start at 67 or 68? You can easily split the difference. Survivor benefits. To understand how the survivor benefit works, imagine a married couple, Joe and Jane. Joe’s benefit is $5,000 per month, and Jane’s is $4,000. Now suppose that Joe passes away. At that point, Jane wouldn’t be able to claim the combined total of $9,000. However, she could claim a survivor’s benefit that would increase her monthly check from $4,000 to $5,000, matching what Joe was receiving. That’s the simplest case, but the survivor benefit decision is often more complicated because it also depends on the age of the survivor. Survivor benefits can be claimed as early as age 60, and that can be helpful in certain situations, but there’s also a penalty for claiming too early. Benefits can be reduced by nearly 30%. In other words, and importantly, Jane wouldn’t automatically be entitled to $5,000 just because that was what Joe was receiving. When would Jane be able to claim the full $5,000? For this determination, Social Security uses a yardstick known as the Full Retirement Age for Survivors. This isn’t exactly the same as the standard FRA, but it’s close. (Social Security provides a calculator to look it up.) What might this look like in practice? Suppose Jane were a year shy of the FRA for survivors at the time that Joe died. In this case, Jane would have a choice. She could claim her survivor’s benefit at that time, but her total check would come out to somewhat less than $5,000. Fortunately, Social Security doesn’t automatically turn on survivor benefits when a spouse dies, thus providing survivors more control. In Jane’s case, she might continue with her own benefit of $4,000 per month for one more year. Then, once she became eligible for 100% of the survivor’s benefit, she could claim the full $1,000 to reach $5,000.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Before Someone Else Decides

"Thanks for the suggestions! They’re exactly the kinds of things I love to do. Seems like my efforts yesterday put me on the path to some good outcomes. i meant this as a reply to David below, but learning about some different care options is also good."
- Marilyn Lavin
Read more »

Inflation, prices, COLAs, retirement and the last 16 years

"You’re right it was 1984. I was thinking of something else. My mistake."
- R Quinn
Read more »

Taking a Loss?

"Mark, thanks so much for making me feel less like a dolt! Seriously, Steve's reply is another great example of things that make HumbleDollar a great place to hang out. "
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) are a Generational Bargain Right Now

"Howard, very good explanation about TIPs and the current “positive for investors “ auction. I did some research on Tipswatch.com (as suggested here by others) and found this very good article by David Enna explaining the benefits/ risks and workings of the current TIPS auction. I sent this to my FA who I have a call with this week to discuss if it might be appropriate for our portfolio. thanks again. https://tipswatch.com/2026/07/23/10-year-tips-auction-gets-real-yield-of-2-438-a-great-result-for-investors/"
- luvtoride44afe9eb1e
Read more »

Today in Financial History

"J, you have accomplished the most difficult part of the dilemma, which in my opinion, is finding that trustworthy and successful needle in the haystack."
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

Subconscious Frugality

"I applaud the cost-effectiveness of the course's double-nine concept! ... One reason I stopped even my rare rounds decades ago was that I had spent too much time searching in vain for the balls I sprayed all over the hilly courses."
- Joe Kiefer
Read more »

$400,000 Mistake

BOB MADE A very expensive tax mistake. Doctors told Bob that he only has a year to live… What did Bob do?

He decided to gift a house to his only son before passing away. The house is worth $2,000,000 that he bought back in 1970 for $50,000 in an expensive suburb of California.

The son decided to sell the house and paid about $430,000 in federal taxes.

$430,000 that could have been $0 instead…

How?

When you gift a property to someone, they receive a "carryover basis." It basically means the same price the original owner purchased it for.

The basis of that house was $50,000, so the son had to pay capital gains tax on the difference between the $2 million sale price and the basis, at rates reaching up to 23.8% on the top portion of the gain. But this is where a step-up in basis could come into play.

Assets such as a house or shares held in a brokerage account, when owned inside an estate rather than an irrevocable trust, receive a step-up in basis to their fair market value (FMV) at the time of the decedent's death, per IRC Section 1014. In our case, if Bob held that house in his own name, passed away, and his son received the house, he would've gotten a step-up in basis to the current value, or $2M.

At the time of the sale, if sold for $2M, he would pay $0 in federal taxes, though state tax might still apply. That's about $430,000 of "savings."

"But who cares, Bob is dead anyways?"

While true, many parents still want to make sure their children don't have to pay half a million in taxes. They want their children to enjoy the fruits of their hard labor.

Specifics

The step-up in basis can be a bit nuanced, depending on how the assets are held and titled.

First, the step-up in basis typically adjusts to the market value, unless an election is made to use the value six months after the date of death, subject to certain rules.

The step-up in basis also doesn't apply to assets held in an irrevocable trust , though we will cover some strategies for that later, or to assets held in qualified retirement accounts, such as IRAs and 401(k)s.

In a community property state (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin), the basis steps up whenever a spouse dies. You will typically need to complete a form to receive this step-up in a brokerage account. 

For assets held in joint tenancy, the step-up applies only to the deceased partner's share. For example, Bob and Jenice have a house worth $300,000 with a $50,000 basis. After Bob passes away, Jenice will have a $175,000 basis in the house, calculated as ($300,000 minus $50,000) divided by two, plus $50,000.

There are also two additional things to keep in mind:

1. Living on the right assets

Bob, age 75, has two accounts: a traditional 401(k) worth $500,000 and a brokerage account worth $500,000. Bob's diagnosis isn't good.

From a tax-planning perspective, it might make a lot more sense to withdraw, say, $50,000 a year from the 401(k) to live on, $20,000 of which would be required minimum distributions (RMDs), and pass down the brokerage account to his beneficiaries.

This is because the brokerage account likely has a lot of gains. Bob bought many stocks in his 30s and 40s that could be stepped up now. But a more in-depth analysis might be needed if Bob has a lot of income and is in a high marginal tax bracket.

2. Selling the right lots

Say Bob has a $500,000 brokerage account. Some of the stock purchases have a low basis, meaning a lot of capital gains, and some have a high basis, meaning fewer capital gains.

It's best to sell the high-basis stocks, which come with a lower capital gains tax, and pass down the low-basis stocks to the beneficiaries.

Planning matters. These mistakes can cost thousands of dollars in unnecessary taxes. As always, make sure to consult a licensed CPA or estate attorney with your unique circumstances.

 

Bogdan Sheremeta is a licensed CPA based in Illinois with experience at Deloitte and a Fortune 200 multinational.  
Read more »

How Did You Find Paid Work After Retiring from Your Primary Career?

"I’ve done a lot of jobs since my official “retirement “ 15 years ago at age 57 due to a layoff. Fortunately I was fully vested in my union pension. Moved from California to Colorado, got my CDL and drove a gas truck for 6 years. Did a lot of very scenic (and sometimes scary) mountain driving. My wife tired of the cold winters, so we reretired, sold the house, bought a motorhome and started traveling. Found a company that paid us to travel doing gas line surveying across country. Did that for about 4 years and settled down near my oldest son to be near grandkids. To keep from being bored, I drove a school bus for 2 years. Now I only drive for overnight and longer field trips because they pay me for every hour I’m away from home. So it’s been a very gradual transition to fully retired."
- Mike Wyant
Read more »

Short term and long term Social Security planning

"So if they adopt to freeze COLA increases, I wonder if they will also freeze increases to the standard monthly premium for Medicare Part B. Sardonically, Probably not!"
- August West
Read more »

Yet-Another Social Security Spreadsheet Analysis on what Age to Start taking Benefits

"Before asking when to claim Social Security, we should first ask how retirement will be funded during each phase of retirement. What’s the plan for covering living expenses from early retirement to FRA, from FRA to age 70 if benefits are delayed, and then after age 70? Only after that cash-flow plan is clear does the claiming decision really make sense. For retirees with substantial assets, legacy goals also become part of the equation. I know this is a much more complicated problem than comparing breakeven ages or lifetime benefits, but is this the kind of retirement-income planning tool you would consider building?"
- Mark Gardner
Read more »

Beware the CFP Designation?

"A CFA would be top-notch, but they generally don't work with individual clients."
- Ormode
Read more »

Social Security

AT FIRST GLANCE, Social Security appears straightforward. During our working years, we pay into it, and in retirement, it sends us a monthly check, guaranteed for life. Unfortunately, it isn’t always so simple. Below are five aspects of the system that are frequently misunderstood. Benefits estimates. Look at a Social Security statement, and an easy-to-read chart provides estimates of the benefits available at various ages. The heading above the chart reads, “Personalized Monthly Retirement Benefit Estimates Depending on the Age You Start.” That seems clear. But there’s a caveat that can make the chart misleading. Off to the side, there’s a further explanation that reads: “These personalized estimates are based on your earnings to date and assume you continue to earn [your most recently reported salary] per year until you start your benefits.” The numbers shown, in other words, are not guaranteed.  Why would the statements be presented this way? It’s because the Social Security Administration can’t predict when any given person will stop working, so for simplicity of presentation, it assumes that someone will continue working and continue earning the same income each year into the future and will then retire and immediately claim benefits. For most people, this isn’t how it works out, but Social Security has no way to know what each person will choose. That’s why benefits statements shouldn’t be taken at face value. How can you forecast your actual benefit? Fortunately, Social Security’s website provides a calculator that allows custom calculations based on actual retirement expectations. Continuing to work. Some people worry that there would be a negative impact if they chose to continue working after claiming Social Security. This concern isn’t totally unfounded. It’s known as the Social Security earnings test, but there are some details to be aware of. First, the earnings test doesn’t apply after a worker reaches Full Retirement Age. And second, to the extent that benefits are reduced in the years before FRA, Social Security will add back those amounts to future checks. So working while on Social Security shouldn’t be viewed as so problematic. Maximum benefit. All things being equal, Social Security retirement benefits increase with each year that you wait, up until age 70. This is broadly understood. The problem, though, is that oftentimes people view it almost as a rule to wait until 70, but that isn’t always the best choice. For married couples, especially where one spouse has accumulated a larger benefit, there are two reasons why one spouse might claim earlier than 70. The first relates to what’s known as the spousal benefit. This is a feature that originated in the days when more families had just one working spouse, and it provides a benefit to spouses who haven’t worked the requisite 10 years to earn a benefit. In general, the spousal benefit is equal to half of the higher-earning spouse’s benefit at their Full Retirement Age (FRA), which is now age 67 for most people. The only requirement is that the lower-earning spouse can’t start benefits until the higher-earning spouse has started his or her own benefit. The spousal benefit is terrific, but a commonly misunderstood limitation is that—unlike a worker’s own benefit—it doesn’t continue to increase each year until age 70. It hits a maximum at the spouse’s FRA. For that reason, it’s important for a spouse to not delay beyond that point.  Even when both spouses have accrued their own benefits, it often makes sense for the spouse with the smaller benefit to claim somewhat earlier than 70. To understand why, we need to look at it from the perspective of the higher earning spouse’s benefit. Because that benefit would also be available to the lower-earning spouse in the form of a survivor’s benefit (discussed further below), that larger benefit will be available to either spouse as long as either is living. The smaller benefit, on the other hand, has value only while both spouses are living. And while it’s unfortunate to say, that is statistically less likely. For that reason, I generally recommend that the lower-earning spouse claim at, or around, Full Retirement Age. When to claim. In most conversations about Social Security, people tend to talk about claiming decisions in round numbers—claiming at 67 or 68, for example. The reality, though, is that you can claim at any time between ages 62 and 70. You don’t need to wait for your birthday, and the benefit simply increases by a bit for each month that you wait. I find this helpful because it allows flexibility in how we think about claiming. Not sure whether to start at 67 or 68? You can easily split the difference. Survivor benefits. To understand how the survivor benefit works, imagine a married couple, Joe and Jane. Joe’s benefit is $5,000 per month, and Jane’s is $4,000. Now suppose that Joe passes away. At that point, Jane wouldn’t be able to claim the combined total of $9,000. However, she could claim a survivor’s benefit that would increase her monthly check from $4,000 to $5,000, matching what Joe was receiving. That’s the simplest case, but the survivor benefit decision is often more complicated because it also depends on the age of the survivor. Survivor benefits can be claimed as early as age 60, and that can be helpful in certain situations, but there’s also a penalty for claiming too early. Benefits can be reduced by nearly 30%. In other words, and importantly, Jane wouldn’t automatically be entitled to $5,000 just because that was what Joe was receiving. When would Jane be able to claim the full $5,000? For this determination, Social Security uses a yardstick known as the Full Retirement Age for Survivors. This isn’t exactly the same as the standard FRA, but it’s close. (Social Security provides a calculator to look it up.) What might this look like in practice? Suppose Jane were a year shy of the FRA for survivors at the time that Joe died. In this case, Jane would have a choice. She could claim her survivor’s benefit at that time, but her total check would come out to somewhat less than $5,000. Fortunately, Social Security doesn’t automatically turn on survivor benefits when a spouse dies, thus providing survivors more control. In Jane’s case, she might continue with her own benefit of $4,000 per month for one more year. Then, once she became eligible for 100% of the survivor’s benefit, she could claim the full $1,000 to reach $5,000.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Before Someone Else Decides

"Thanks for the suggestions! They’re exactly the kinds of things I love to do. Seems like my efforts yesterday put me on the path to some good outcomes. i meant this as a reply to David below, but learning about some different care options is also good."
- Marilyn Lavin
Read more »

Inflation, prices, COLAs, retirement and the last 16 years

"You’re right it was 1984. I was thinking of something else. My mistake."
- R Quinn
Read more »

Taking a Loss?

"Mark, thanks so much for making me feel less like a dolt! Seriously, Steve's reply is another great example of things that make HumbleDollar a great place to hang out. "
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) are a Generational Bargain Right Now

"Howard, very good explanation about TIPs and the current “positive for investors “ auction. I did some research on Tipswatch.com (as suggested here by others) and found this very good article by David Enna explaining the benefits/ risks and workings of the current TIPS auction. I sent this to my FA who I have a call with this week to discuss if it might be appropriate for our portfolio. thanks again. https://tipswatch.com/2026/07/23/10-year-tips-auction-gets-real-yield-of-2-438-a-great-result-for-investors/"
- luvtoride44afe9eb1e
Read more »

Today in Financial History

"J, you have accomplished the most difficult part of the dilemma, which in my opinion, is finding that trustworthy and successful needle in the haystack."
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

$400,000 Mistake

BOB MADE A very expensive tax mistake. Doctors told Bob that he only has a year to live… What did Bob do?

He decided to gift a house to his only son before passing away. The house is worth $2,000,000 that he bought back in 1970 for $50,000 in an expensive suburb of California.

The son decided to sell the house and paid about $430,000 in federal taxes.

$430,000 that could have been $0 instead…

How?

When you gift a property to someone, they receive a "carryover basis." It basically means the same price the original owner purchased it for.

The basis of that house was $50,000, so the son had to pay capital gains tax on the difference between the $2 million sale price and the basis, at rates reaching up to 23.8% on the top portion of the gain. But this is where a step-up in basis could come into play.

Assets such as a house or shares held in a brokerage account, when owned inside an estate rather than an irrevocable trust, receive a step-up in basis to their fair market value (FMV) at the time of the decedent's death, per IRC Section 1014. In our case, if Bob held that house in his own name, passed away, and his son received the house, he would've gotten a step-up in basis to the current value, or $2M.

At the time of the sale, if sold for $2M, he would pay $0 in federal taxes, though state tax might still apply. That's about $430,000 of "savings."

"But who cares, Bob is dead anyways?"

While true, many parents still want to make sure their children don't have to pay half a million in taxes. They want their children to enjoy the fruits of their hard labor.

Specifics

The step-up in basis can be a bit nuanced, depending on how the assets are held and titled.

First, the step-up in basis typically adjusts to the market value, unless an election is made to use the value six months after the date of death, subject to certain rules.

The step-up in basis also doesn't apply to assets held in an irrevocable trust , though we will cover some strategies for that later, or to assets held in qualified retirement accounts, such as IRAs and 401(k)s.

In a community property state (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin), the basis steps up whenever a spouse dies. You will typically need to complete a form to receive this step-up in a brokerage account. 

For assets held in joint tenancy, the step-up applies only to the deceased partner's share. For example, Bob and Jenice have a house worth $300,000 with a $50,000 basis. After Bob passes away, Jenice will have a $175,000 basis in the house, calculated as ($300,000 minus $50,000) divided by two, plus $50,000.

There are also two additional things to keep in mind:

1. Living on the right assets

Bob, age 75, has two accounts: a traditional 401(k) worth $500,000 and a brokerage account worth $500,000. Bob's diagnosis isn't good.

From a tax-planning perspective, it might make a lot more sense to withdraw, say, $50,000 a year from the 401(k) to live on, $20,000 of which would be required minimum distributions (RMDs), and pass down the brokerage account to his beneficiaries.

This is because the brokerage account likely has a lot of gains. Bob bought many stocks in his 30s and 40s that could be stepped up now. But a more in-depth analysis might be needed if Bob has a lot of income and is in a high marginal tax bracket.

2. Selling the right lots

Say Bob has a $500,000 brokerage account. Some of the stock purchases have a low basis, meaning a lot of capital gains, and some have a high basis, meaning fewer capital gains.

It's best to sell the high-basis stocks, which come with a lower capital gains tax, and pass down the low-basis stocks to the beneficiaries.

Planning matters. These mistakes can cost thousands of dollars in unnecessary taxes. As always, make sure to consult a licensed CPA or estate attorney with your unique circumstances.

 

Bogdan Sheremeta is a licensed CPA based in Illinois with experience at Deloitte and a Fortune 200 multinational.  
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 21: A HIGH income makes it easier to grow wealthy. But no matter how much we earn, we’ll struggle to amass a healthy nest egg—unless we learn to spend less than we earn.

Truths

NO. 49: YOU CAN have stability of principal and stability of income but, in a liquid investment, you can't have both. Money-market funds and savings accounts offer stability of principal, but the rate paid can quickly rise and fall. Most bonds, by contrast, pay the same amount of interest each year until maturity, but they can fluctuate sharply in price.

think

ANCHORING. Imagine the S&P 500 is up 20% over the past year. You might balk at buying stocks, because you’re anchored on the market’s old level and feel you’re overpaying at current prices. Or imagine your neighbors sold their home two years ago for $300,000. You might be reluctant to accept less for your home, even if property prices have since fallen.

humans

NO. 30: WE underestimate the power of compounding. Most folks grasp that invested money should grow over time, while carrying credit-card debt can trigger interest charges. But studies suggest we fail to appreciate just how much our money can grow if left to compound—and just how costly our debts can be if we fail to pay them off in short order.

Help others

Manifesto

NO. 21: A HIGH income makes it easier to grow wealthy. But no matter how much we earn, we’ll struggle to amass a healthy nest egg—unless we learn to spend less than we earn.

Spotlight: Houses

Our Homes, Our Wealth: A Tale of Two Property Paths

I’m booking flights at the moment. Suzie and I are heading to the South of England to visit my brother-in-law and family in a couple of weeks’ time. They’ve just recently hit a major life milestone by purchasing their first home together, and we’re looking forward to getting a tour by the proud owners. I’m very happy for them; I’m also very happy for myself because I’m getting free accommodation by staying with them.
My brother-in-law is in his mid-forties with a wife ten years younger and has expressed nervousness at taking on such a large debt at his age,

Read more »

Wherever You Live, Your Home is (Probably) Under-Insured

A couple of days ago I chanced on this following very detailed and very lengthy article from the SF Chronicle:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/underinsured-home-what-to-do-20250824.php
This is behind a paywall, but if you haven’t been to the newspaper website recently you can probably read it. I am going to try to summarize some of the content.
Let me begin by putting a personal spin on this topic. I spent 30 years in the property and casualty insurance world. But, like you I have to insure my own home.

Read more »

Rent Forever?

STOCKS, BONDS, CASH—and a house owned free and clear. For many, that’s the recipe for a financially successful retirement. Our homes represent a central pillar of middle-class status. With a paid-off mortgage, we have an affordable place to spend our old age.
Yet signing up for decades of house payments has become controversial for its high opportunity cost—what you give up to pay the mortgage. Has a home mortgage, with its long, slow road to payoff,

Read more »

Would You Rebuild?

This is a thought exercise.
Suppose that you owned a home in Pacific Palisades, or Altadena that was destroyed by one of the wildfires. You have been through a very tough time. The fires are out, and after reporting your loss, you are waiting to hear from the company adjuster. You have a big decision to make……Will you rebuild?
Our little housing area here in the PNW has about 2000 single family homes. The first ones were built in 1976,

Read more »

A Rental House? By the Numbers

Thanks so much for the great comments and advice on my previous post about this topic. As I said in a reply, I’m making a list of all the ideas commenters shared to discuss with my husband. We may or may not move forward with this idea—there are some complicated family dynamics that I won’t get into in this particular post. But if we do, here are some of the numbers we’re considering.

I’ve been looking at small starter homes or condos in either our town or the one 10 miles north of us.

Read more »

Should young people buy or rent?

My son is 30 something working in Silicon Valley paying outlandish rents and looking at expensive housing. Is it still a good option to purchase in this market? I was burned on real estate as a young adult and don’t want to advise him If it is not a good idea.

Read more »

Spotlight: Saha

Life Sentence

WOULD YOU ADVISE someone—who doesn’t drive, doesn’t need a car and doesn’t plan to get one in the foreseeable future—to buy car insurance? I wouldn’t. But it seems some financial advisors think otherwise. That, at least, is the impression I got when an acquaintance, whom I’ll call Laura, mentioned her variable universal life insurance policy to me. A single woman in her mid-40s, Laura has a decent income and lives on her own. She has no one other than herself to support financially. Her parents and other family members have enough savings. She has no plans to start a family, let alone with someone who might be financially dependent on her. I just didn’t get it. It turns out that a “wealth advisor” talked her into the life insurance policy as a sophisticated, tax-advantageous strategy. Laura is far from stupid. But she’s naïve enough to follow professional financial recommendations blindly. She neither spotted the layers of fees involved, nor realized that permanent life insurance wasn’t the best way to build wealth. Now she does, and she isn’t happy about it. It wasn’t apparent to Laura that she could’ve simply put her savings in a Roth retirement account—an even more attractive tax-advantaged vehicle—instead of investing in an insurance policy she didn’t need. To add insult to injury, when she tried to get out of the policy last year, she learned there are steep surrender charges. This costly mistake has a silver lining. Laura realized that financial ignorance isn’t an option for her, and now she’s seeking financial education rather than financial advice. Not surprisingly, she’s highly motivated—and learning fast.
Read more »

Thanks for Nothing

AFTER TAKING THE Series 65 exam in February, I set a goal for 2019: Help 10 friends and family members with their finances. Instead of giving specific investment advice, I wanted to educate them on money matters. I knew that they would benefit from one-on-one discussions, well-regarded books, educational videos and credible websites. But I also suspected that some might hesitate to talk to me about their finances. Nonetheless, I gave it a try. Everyone showed interest and made time—except Aisha, a close friend. She hesitated for two reasons. First, she had a financial advisor and saw little value in educating herself. She figured if she was paying top dollar for advice, she was guaranteed top-notch results. Second, she worried about straining her relationship with her advisor by asking questions she’d never asked before. I insisted that, given the stakes, it was better to be informed than nice. Aisha reluctantly requested that her advisor send along cumulative portfolio performance reports. A little history about Aisha’s investments: Many years ago, she’d received a windfall that she needed to invest. She interviewed a few financial advisors and went with someone who had an impressive job title, a long list of designations and a friendly demeanor. She regularly reviewed her portfolio with the advisor, but never considered there might be performance problems. After all, a paid professional ought to do better than the market, not worse—or so she thought. As it turned out, her portfolio had more than doubled over 16½ years. Aisha was impressed, until she backtested an identical asset allocation—one with half U.S. stocks and half corporate bonds. A 50-50 allocation consisting of just two broadly diversified index funds would have quadrupled her money over the same holding period. She stared at the results in disbelief. The opportunity cost was huge. Why…
Read more »

Bonding With Bonds

FOR MANY YEARS, I didn’t own bonds or anything similar, except some bank certificates of deposit. Frankly, I was clueless. My first dilemma: Should I invest in bonds if I have a mortgage? It didn’t make sense to me to borrow from the bank and, at the same time, lend out my money at a lower interest rate to a bond issuer. I felt I should pay off my mortgage first. A few friends and even a financial advisor recommended otherwise. Their objections notwithstanding, I followed my intuition. I was relieved to find out later that my view wasn’t so naïve after all. Fast forward a few years and I had the mortgage paid off. A magical side effect: My entire paycheck no longer disappeared. For the first time in my career, I realized I could take a long break from work if I had to. This feeling of freedom planted the idea of early retirement in my head. I probed my financial readiness and realized that bonds would now play a vital role. For the next few months, I researched bonds, including different kinds, the risks, credit ratings, taxation, liquidity and so on. Alas, I was left with more questions than answers. What percentage should I allocate to bonds? Individual bonds or bond funds? Is credit risk real? Should I worry about duration or convexity? What about inflation? Tax-exempt or taxable? Government or corporate? Overwhelmed and confused, I needed a simpler approach, so I started over, but this time with a basic question in mind: What are the big problems with my retirement finances and can bonds solve them? This gave me much needed clarity. My financial situation posed two challenges. First, my modest nest egg needed a high stock allocation to survive a longer-than-average retirement, and yet I also needed…
Read more »

Changing My Mindset

WHETHER MONEY BUYS happiness is a matter of debate, but a recent incident reinforced my conviction that financial security does indeed help. The incident would’ve caused me considerable distress a few years ago, when I was earning more but was still dependent on my fulltime job’s paycheck. My newfound financial security, however, transformed the situation into a truly memorable experience. My wife, Bonny, and I both enjoy attending Indian music and dance performances. We make it a point to see the live shows put on by local groups and, if the ticket prices are reasonable, also those featuring artists visiting from India. This year, Bonny was keen to see a dance-drama performance by a touring group from India. Although the show was scheduled for July, Bonny wasted no time securing two tickets when reservations opened in March. I got the sense that the tickets came with a hefty price tag. As the date drew nearer, Bonny’s excitement built. On the day of the event, she repeatedly urged me to hurry up and get ready, with the half-joking threat to leave me behind if I delayed any further. Both of us got dressed up and were about to head out when Bonny received a text message. It was from a friend who’d purchased tickets in the same row as us. She was curious if we changed our seats because she couldn’t spot us in the theater. Bonny responded with a touch of impatience, assuring her that we’d be there shortly. Her friend called within minutes to say the show had just finished. Bonny was perplexed, while I hastily jumped to the conclusion that she must have misremembered the showtime. Bonny, however, was adamant that she had purchased tickets for a 7 p.m. performance, and the screenshots of the tickets saved on…
Read more »

Feelin’ Groovy

I’VE BEEN WORKING from home for nearly two months. Many friends and coworkers are tired of the lockdown. I seem to be an oddball: I feel happier and less stressed. I’m not oblivious to the reality of today’s pandemic. As I write this, my uncle abroad is facing a hard time getting urgent medical care. Millions of others across the globe are also suffering. Against such a gloomy backdrop, I feel almost guilty in seeing a positive side to the lockdown. Examples? For me, the biggest benefit has been the time and energy saved by not commuting. I also like being able to weave small personal chores in between office work. I can plan my hours better and get more done in a day. I’ve also been better able to manage my health. My weight resembles the growth chart of an inflation-protected Treasury bond fund. Occasional short-term fluctuations in either direction are common, but things creep slowly upward over time. Stuck at home, I figured I could devote extra time to better eating and fitness habits. Though I try to eat a balanced diet, with lots of vegetables, fruits and fish, I wasn’t consistent in my good eating habits. Now that there’s more time to prepare healthier and tastier meals, I have no excuses. I’ve been cooking every other day. Meanwhile, there’s no morning rush to get ready to leave for work. When the weather gods smile, I start my day with a walk. There’s an abundance of blooming trees and songbirds in our area. My cousin, who lives next door, joins me in the evening, when I take a second walk to help me unwind. The good eating and the exercise seem to be working. I feel healthier and more energetic. I’ll miss that sense of wellbeing when things…
Read more »

Grateful Debt

THE AGE-OLD DEBATE about not borrowing to buy depreciating assets came up again in a recent HumbleDollar article. Despite being a big proponent of debt-free living, I could relate to the story of borrowing to buy a car. In fact, I’m guilty of having gone deeply into debt in my younger days to feed my passion for music—and I don’t regret it. I grew up listening to Indian music of various genres, but it wasn’t until my college days that I came to really appreciate the sound quality and texture of music. Our dorm had a high-fidelity stereo, plus a decent collection of vinyl records and audio cassettes. I’d spend hours in the common room, listening to classic rock or favorite Bollywood film scores. My newfound love of music, alas, came to an end after I left college and moved back home to Kolkata. We had a portable radio and cassette player in our house, but it didn’t satisfy my craving for quality sound. My life felt so incomplete without a good audio system that I decided to buy one once my paychecks started coming in. I grabbed a coworker named Natesh, who shared my love for music, and we visited an upscale audio showroom near our office. Luckily, the store stocked a nearly identical sound system to the one in my dorm. It was a top-of-the-line modular audio system named Uranus 2 by Sonodyne, one of the most innovative stereo makers in India. I instantly fell in love with the set and wanted to take it home. There was just one small problem. I couldn’t afford it. In the late 1980s, premium audio products weren’t cheap in India. The model I wanted would cost almost a year of my take-home pay. That helped explain why the salesperson didn’t take us…
Read more »