FREE NEWSLETTER

Rising stock prices are a glorious thing—provided you never again plan to add a dollar of savings to your portfolio.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Ageing and the Open Road

RECENTLY I TOOK a free ride on a driverless bus trialling its proposed route, part of my local administration's ten-year rollout plan for self-driving public transport and taxis. I see real potential in this technology, and I'm hoping the infrastructure and implementation stay on schedule. That hope is mostly selfish, I'll admit. In fifteen years I'll be in my mid-seventies, and I'd love to ditch my car and rely on cheap, dependable robo-taxis instead. It would give me freedom precisely in that decade of life when driving starts to become genuinely problematic. I'm planning to change my car in 2027 for a modern hybrid, but in the back of my mind is the thought that it could be my last. If the self-driving rollout hits its targets, I can see the case for never buying another. The advantages for someone in my demographic at that stage of life would be hard to argue with. Think about what car ownership actually costs. There's the purchase price, insurance, road tax, fuel, servicing, tyres, and the occasional bill that arrives like a punch to the stomach. For most people, a car is the second most expensive thing they own after their home. In retirement, when income typically drops and budgets tighten, that ongoing drain becomes harder to justify. This is especially true when the car spends the vast majority of its time sitting on a driveway looking pretty. A robo-taxi model, where you pay only for the journeys you actually take, could represent a dramatic shift in how much personal transport really costs. The numbers, I suspect, will be compelling — with current estimates from real world operations suggesting an 80% reduction in the cost of fares being achievable. Then there's the question of independence. This is the one that matters most to me personally, and I'd imagine it resonates with anyone approaching or already in their later years. Giving up your car keys is one of those milestones that nobody really talks about, but everyone in that demographic understands. It represents a loss of spontaneity and self-sufficiency that can genuinely affect quality of life. The difference with autonomous vehicles is that surrendering the wheel doesn't have to mean surrendering the freedom. A reliable, affordable self-driving taxi available on demand restores something that previous generations simply had to go without once driving became difficult. This could be a trip to the supermarket on a weekday morning or a late evening visit to family. The safety dimension is also worth considering. Reaction times slow as we age. Night vision deteriorates. Concentration over long distances becomes harder. Most older drivers are aware of this and manage it carefully, but there comes a point for everyone where the road becomes a source of anxiety rather than freedom. Autonomous vehicles remove that calculation entirely. You get in, state your destination, and arrive, without the cognitive load of navigating, anticipating other drivers, or worrying whether your responses are still sharp enough. That peace of mind shouldn't be underestimated. There are wider social benefits too. Older people who can no longer drive are disproportionately affected by isolation. Poor rural transport links, infrequent bus services, and the general assumption that everyone has access to a car all contribute to a situation where many retired people find their world gradually shrinking. Autonomous vehicles, particularly if integrated intelligently with existing public transport, have the potential to reverse that. A robo-taxi that can be summoned by a smartphone, or even a simple voice command, could keep people connected to their communities, their families, and their routines far longer than is currently possible. There are, of course, reasons to be cautious. Technology rollouts rarely go entirely to plan. The ten-year schedule my local administration is working to is ambitious, and a lot can change in funding priorities, in public appetite, and in the regulatory environment. The early trials are promising, but promising trials and full-scale dependable infrastructure are very different things. It's worth keeping in mind, with a groan inducing pun: your mileage will vary — literally. Dense urban and suburban areas will almost certainly see reliable services first, and I'm fortunate that describes my situation. For those in more rural communities, the very people for whom isolation is already the sharpest problem, the wait could be considerably longer. I'm hopeful, but I'm not banking on it entirely. Which is why the 2027 hybrid still makes sense. It's a practical hedge, a good, modern, efficient car that will serve me well through the transition years, whatever pace that transition takes. But the fact that I'm already thinking of it as potentially my last car feels significant. A decade ago that thought wouldn't have crossed my mind. The technology has moved from science fiction to credible near-future fast enough to genuinely reshape how I'm thinking about retirement planning. If it delivers, the generation hitting their seventies in the late 2030s could be the first in history for whom ageing and mobility don't have to be in conflict. That's not a small thing. That might turn out to be one of the most personally transformative shifts of the entire autonomous vehicle revolution. It is not about the flashy early adopters or the logistics industry efficiencies. Instead, it is the simple dignity of an older person getting where they need to go, independently, on their own terms. I'm hopeful I'll be taking that ride and certain my children and grandchildren definitely will.
Mark Crothers is a retired small business owner from the UK with a keen interest in personal finance and simple living. Married to his high school sweetheart, with daughters and grandchildren, he knows the importance of building a secure financial future. With an aversion to social media, he prefers to spend his time on his main passions: reading, scratch cooking, racket sports, and hiking.
Read more »

Saving for Grandchildren

OUR FIRST GRANDCHILD recently arrived, which naturally has us thinking about the smartest ways to build a strong financial foundation for her future. In 2019, I wrote Take a Break, which outlined saving strategies on behalf of children. Since then, the landscape has changed with the introduction of Trump accounts and Roth-conversion pathways for 529 accounts.  Families have four tax-advantaged savings approaches on behalf of young children plus the Roth IRA option once the child has earned income – 529 education savings account, a Uniform Gift to Minor (UGM) custodial account, a Coverdell account, and the new Trump account. Each option offers a different mix of tax benefits, contribution requirements and withdrawal rules. 529 Accounts Pros
  • Tax-free growth when used for qualified education expenses
  • High gift-tax contribution limits: $19K per contributor per year (indexed)
  • New ability to convert up to $35K into a Roth IRA for the beneficiary
Cons
  • Relatively complex with penalties and taxes on non-qualified withdrawals
  • Limited, state-approved investment options
  • Risk of underutilization if the child does not pursue qualifying education
Caveats
  • Technology and AI could significantly reduce education’s cost structure in the future
  • Roth conversions are capped at $35K lifetime
  • The 529 must be open 15 years, and contributions must age 5 years before conversion
  • Conversions require the beneficiary to have earned income (i.e. they could Roth anyway)
  • Annual Roth contribution limits still apply (e.g., $7.5K in 2026), so completing the full $35K conversion would take five years
UGM Custodial Accounts Pros
  • Brokerage account where up to $2.7K of unearned income can be tax-free each year
  • High gift-tax contribution limits: $19K per contributor per year (indexed)
  • Broad investment flexibility — stocks, bonds, funds, etc.
  • Few restrictions on how funds may be used for the child’s benefit
  • Potential for low taxes on capital gains, but subject to marginal “kiddie tax” at parent’s rates until tax-independency or age 24 
Cons
  • Higher income or capital gains could trigger the kiddie tax at the parents’ marginal rate
  • Assets count as the child’s for financial-aid purposes
Caveats
  • Custodians have some ability to spend down the account for legitimate child expenses if the child is a wild-child in the later teen years
Coverdell Accounts Pros
  • Tax-free growth for qualified education expenses
  • More flexible investment choices than most 529 plans
Cons
  • Low contribution limit: $2K per year plus income limits restrict who can contribute
  • Essentially irrelevant today given the expanded options within 529 plans
Trump Accounts Pros
  • $1K government seed deposit for children born 2025–2028
  • Contribution limit of $5K per year in 2026, indexed to inflation
  • Parent employers may contribute up to $2.5K per year (also indexed)
  • Tax-deferred growth with Roth-conversion opportunities beginning at age 18
  • No earned-income requirement for Roth conversions 
  • Roth conversions are ideal in low-income years starting after age 18 once the child has transitioned to tax-independency of parents or at age 24 when “kiddie taxation” ends. Early tax independence could even be a combined Roth plus student financial-aid strategy
  • Potential to convert large account values over several years at relatively low tax rates (potentially marginal 10-12% tax-rates, but averaging less due to the standard deduction).
Cons
  • Investment options limited to low-cost indexed stock funds (not necessarily a drawback)
  • Penalty-free withdrawals must wait until age 59½, but the accounts could be advantageous even including penalties
  • Limited custodian control and intervention possibilities if the teen is a wild-child
Caveats
  • If Roth conversions are not undertaken during the child’s low-income years, a UGMA invested to capture long-term capital gains tax-rates may outperform a Trump Account taxed at ordinary income tax-rates
  • Watch this space as future adjustments or eligibility changes are possible
  In effect, the 529 is a two-decade college savings program having some complexity and withdrawal limitations; the UGM is a reasonably flexible, 18-30-year college or house downpayment savings program; and the Trump account is a somewhat inflexible, sixty-year retirement accelerator   Resulting Playbook Here is our family’s intended playbook for tax-advantaged accounts in the grandchild's name:
  • Parents’ retirement account fundings remain their top priority - 401K’s at a minimum up to the match, HSAs with their triple tax advantages, and Roths as long as eligible within income limits.
  • A Trump account has already been initiated to secure the free $1K government seed contribution – grows to potentially $2.6K at age 18 after penalties and taxes.
  • Limited 529 funding has also been initiated to start the 15-year clock for potential later Roth conversions. 
  • The family’s next priority is to fund the Trump account which starts at $5K later this year. Maximizing the Roth conversion opportunity will require ~$116K of contributions (at 3% inflation) over 18 years which we grandparents intend to help fund. I estimate the Roth converted Trump account could grow to ~$2 million of tax-free money at age 60 (6% growth) assuming early-age Roth conversions, and the Wall Street Journal projects as much as $3 million (link likely paywalled).
  • The subsequent priorities are to start UGM taxable account and 529 account contributions in parallel to perhaps initial levels of about $35K each. This may take our family some years depending upon available resources for contributions.
For the UGM account, a balance of $35K should capture a sizeable chunk of the annual $2.7K tax-free income limit by investing in high-yield income alternatives. For the 529 account, $35K aligns with the Roth conversion limit. On a personal note, we had extremely positive UGM outcomes with our children. We saved taxes for two decades, and each child used the ~$60K balance as down payments on their first house shortly after college. Due to the 529’s withdrawal rigidities and potential technology impacts, we are unlikely to fund the 529 to the max. 
  • We will skip Coverdells as the alternatives offer ample savings opportunity in the child’s name ($200K+). 
  • Depending upon spare resources available for gifting, we can always reassess future contributions. 
That’s our plan, and we’re sticking to it…. until something changes.    John Yeigh is an author, coach and youth sports advocate. His book “Win the Youth Sports Game” was published in 2021. John retired in 2017 from the oil industry, where he negotiated financial details for multi-billion-dollar international projects. Check out his earlier articles.  
Read more »

California, Here They Came

"Thanks, Jeff. Interesting coincidence that your grandmother and her six sisters all came to California as six of my grandma’s sisters came as well. Big families back in the day!"
- D.J.
Read more »

Investing Fundamentals: A Simple Guide for Beginners

"WDH, one of the best summaries of Investing discussions where, time, diversifying and compounding are on your side. Stick with the best brokerage houses like Vanguard & Fidelity & Schwab, and pick indices that are low in cost. Spread the wealth, one of the best is the S&P 500 index, these include the biggest and most successful industrial stocks in the market. Save regularly, try to get all matching of money you can from your employer for your 401k, because you will need it in retirement. Good investing to all."
- William Dorner
Read more »

One World, One Kind of Work

"Thank you Mike, I know I'm straying from the normal HD articles but I am not a financial writer."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

Wall Street Trap

IN THE INVESTMENT world, May 1st is a notable day. It was on May 1, 1975 that the Securities and Exchange Commission deregulated the brokerage industry. For the 183 years prior to that, trading commissions on the New York Stock Exchange had been fixed at uniformly high rates. But when deregulation arrived, competition got going. That’s when discount brokers like Charles Schwab got rolling, and over time, May Day, as it’s now referred to, has delivered enormous savings to consumers. More than 50 years later, though, Wall Street still operates in ways that are often at odds with consumer interests. As an individual investor, what are the obstacles to be aware of? At the top of the list is Wall Street’s fixation with individual stocks. For almost 100 years, the data has been clear that stock-picking is counterproductive. Probably the first to uncover this was a fellow named Alfred Cowles. Cowles came from a wealthy family and wondered whether the investment advice his family had been receiving was worthwhile. He set about answering that question and in 1933, published a paper titled “Can Stock Market Forecasters Forecast?” Cowles’s conclusion: They can’t. More recently, research by finance professors Brad Barber and Terrance Odean came to a similar conclusion. The title of their most well known paper is self-explanatory: “Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth.”  Along the same lines, Standard & Poor’s regularly examines actively-managed mutual funds to see how many are able to outperform the overall market. The most recent finding: Over the past 10 years, fewer than 15% of funds benchmarked to the S&P 500 managed to beat the index. Research by Jeff Ptak at Morningstar has found that the more active a fund is, the worse it performs. So-called tactical funds, which shift among different asset classes in response to economic forecasts have, in Ptak’s words, “incinerated” shareholder dollars. This data is fairly well known. The problem, though, is that trading activity generates revenue for the brokerage industry, so it has an interest in keeping investors engaged with the market. That’s why brokerage analysts are on TV every day, offering their forecasts for individual stocks, for the overall market and for the broader economy. To be sure, this makes for interesting television. The problem, though, is that it’s been shown to carry almost no value. According to research by Joachim Klement, the accuracy of Wall Street prognosticators is approximately zero. Why are they so poor at forecasting? For starters, there’s the simple fact that no one has a crystal ball. No one can know what a company—or its competitors—will do a month or a year from now, and how that will translate into stock price gains or losses. Sociologist Ezra Zuckerman Sivan uncovered a more subtle explanation. In research published after the technology selloff in 2000, Sivan found that Wall Street analysts are constrained by two obstacles. The first is that they’re dependent on access to companies’ management teams to help in their research. For that reason, it’s in their interest to maintain positive relationships with the companies that they follow. Investment banks that take a positive view on a company may also be rewarded with profitable mergers or acquisitions work when the need arises. Those factors bias stock recommendations overwhelmingly in the direction of “buy” ratings. Another reason analysts tend to avoid negative comments about the companies they cover: Sivan found that there is a community effect that tends to form among the analysts assigned to a given company, and thus an incentive develops to not “rock the boat” in saying anything too critical. People generally want to get along, and that results in a sort of self-censorship. This research is well understood, and yet Wall Street continues to generate forecasts day after day, year after year. Why? There are two explanations, I believe. The first is that it’s entertaining. I’ll be the first to acknowledge that index funds aren’t terribly interesting to talk about. It’s far more interesting to talk about smartphones or AI and the companies behind them. That makes Wall Street analysts invaluable to the media, who need to fill airtime.  And as long as they’re granted that airtime, forecasters are of great value to the brokerage industry. Since trading activity is profitable for Wall Street, it’s in brokers’ interest to generate continued interest in stocks. That brings in commission dollars for brokers. And even though commissions have shrunk in recent years, brokers benefit in other ways from active trading, including the “bid-ask spread” on each trade. That’s the difference between what buyers pay and what sellers receive, and though these spreads are tiny, they add up for the brokers who collect them. For good reason, then, Wall Street continues to promote stock-picking. At the same time, the investment industry is always busy developing new funds. In the first half of last year, for example, fund companies rolled out more than 640 new funds. Among them: funds that hold single stocks with varying degrees of leverage and other seemingly unnecessary new formulations. The result: There are now many more funds than there are stocks trading on U.S. exchanges.  Many of these new funds follow ever more esoteric strategies. They’re often opaque. And almost invariably, they carry higher fees. In a 2011 study titled “The Dark Side of Financial Innovation,” finance professor Brian Henderson and a colleague looked at one popular category of fund known as a structured product. Their conclusion: These funds were overpriced to the point that their expected return was actually a bit below zero. How were they able to market such an inferior product? Henderson’s hypothesis was that the fund companies designed them to be intentionally as complex as possible in order to exploit individual investors. The bottom line: To a great degree, Wall Street is upside down. But as an individual investor, you don’t have to be. My rule of thumb: In building a portfolio, investors should do more or less the opposite of what Wall Street recommends. That, I believe, is a reliable formula for success.   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 »

How much to provide a college student monthly?

"For sure this is a discussion that should have occurred years ago, so the child knows what to expect. I received no spending money when I went to college. Similarly, I paid all r&b + tuition for my 2 kids, but nothing else. Teach them they can do without that evening pizza, expensive clothes, etc. That's important knowledge to learn - and it's free."
- George Lambert
Read more »

Is saving really that hard? Nope, not for the great majority of Americans. 

"Great article R Quinn. You can spreadsheet, or AI it any way you like. The POINT is compounding is your friend. Being an Engineer and taking Engineering Economics allowed me in 1968 to understand I had to save something, so one day we could look to a comfortable retirement. Inflation of course is your enemy, and you must be balanced and reasonable in your estimates. Because of our discipline along with 3 children, we still found a way to save. When IRA's came, we somehow managed to always save so we could maximize our FREE money put in by the company. Yes, if you relied only on Social Security then, you will have to skimp in your retirement. It turns out our saving discipline has paid off handsomely, and at 76 we changed from saving and earning to spending, and if you are like us living in a CCRC, you will spend more than when you owned a home. At 80, we are fortunate to having a smooth road ahead. You need balance, saving, discipline and some good fortune to make it all work. If you spend, spend and pay 25% on your credit card balance, you will not be able to retire and enjoy it."
- William Dorner
Read more »

First Place

"I was just speaking with good friends who are leaving soon for a tour of Devon and Cornwall. Talking about their trip made me think of this article Jonathan wrote almost 2 years ago. It was a pleasant memory. I hope I get to Hope Cove someday."
- Rick Connor
Read more »

For Richer, For Poorer: 37 Years of Compounding

"Depends on the recipient. $10K to someone w/o money skills would likely putter it away on a luxury item, down payment on a car they can't afford, etc. Likely few would keep it invested. Few young folks (including myself) would likely keep the money in the market. There is also the debate as to the value in dollars today vs. future. Not in pure monetary terms. But what even a minimal amount of money can do for one when they are low means. $1K when I was a poor, unsupported college student, would have a lot more useful to me than the growth amount of this money 20 years later."
- AnthonyClan
Read more »

New Face, old scam

"Thanks for the cautionary tale. So many new and increasingly sophisticated scams. I got hit with one recently which began with a scammer depositing a tiny amount into my PayPal account. A call to PayPal confirmed it was the beginning of a scam. New one to me."
- Andrew Forsythe
Read more »

Everything She Needed

THE MOST FRUGAL person I’ve ever known was my Great Aunt Beatrice. To all the family, she was just Aunt Bea. Never married, she was the sister of my paternal grandfather, a man who passed away 14 years before I was born. She was a dignified lady, proper and pleasant, and not given to bursts of laughter. Still, I felt closer to her than to any of my living grandparents or other relatives from that generation.

When I was growing up, Aunt Bea lived in the same town as us. She would usually be present for our family’s Thanksgiving and Christmas celebrations, and would occasionally be present for other gatherings. Every Christmas, she’d give each of my three sisters and me money envelopes that contained exactly two crisp $1 bills. Although I liked getting the money, back then I couldn’t appreciate what a sacrifice those gifts must have been.

Aunt Bea was born in 1891. I remember that because I inherited the silver dollar bearing her birth year that she kept throughout her life. Although it’s not an especially valuable coin or in particularly good condition, it was probably her most valuable possession at the time she passed away.

[caption id="attachment_1540969" align="alignright" width="300"] The author's Great Aunt Beatrice[/caption]

While I have some old family photographs from when Aunt Bea was young, I don’t know much about her early life. I do know she lost her brother Willits in the great influenza pandemic of 1918. I wish now I’d paid more attention as a youngster when we all got together and she held forth about family history. Being a typical kid, I was bored by stories about people I’d never met.

Aunt Bea’s last job was as a milliner. She sold ladies’ hats during a time when women increasingly went hatless. Her income steadily dropped, while the rent on her shop increased. She stuck at it too long, my mother once told me, and the landlord wanted her out of the space she rented.

Aunt Bea was always hoping fancy hats would come back in style. They never did. Eventually, she was forced to close her little business.

While I was never privy to the details of Aunt Bea’s finances, by the time I knew her, I’m pretty certain she didn’t live on much more than whatever she got from Social Security. I also don’t know whether my father discreetly helped her out financially from time to time. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did.

Aunt Bea rented what would charitably be called a studio apartment, in an older house on the outskirts of town. It was a single large room with the tiniest kitchen area I’ve ever seen.

Aunt Bea didn’t have a car. Her apartment was within walking distance of the local ACME grocery store. Did she have a television? I don’t remember one. I’m guessing she might have had a radio, but I can’t be certain. I really don’t know how she passed her days.

The reason I remember Aunt Bea’s apartment is that one time my parents dropped me off there when they needed an emergency babysitter. With three older sisters, the need for outside babysitting rarely presented itself.

I remember being bored at Aunt Bea’s place. No TV, no games, not much to do. Aunt Bea was a kindly lady, though, and wanted to take good care of me. She boiled some water, and we sat down for a proper tea.

Now, I wasn’t much of a tea drinker, but I had indulged in it before. I saw that for the two cups of tea that she made, she only used one tea bag. When I complained that I should have my own bag, she exclaimed, “Why, I can get four cups of tea out of one bag.”

When asked about my visit with Aunt Bea, I told my parents the tea bag story. My mother burst out laughing—probably mostly due to my imitation of Aunt Bea’s voice. She also explained that Aunt Bea didn’t have much money and had learned to be frugal.

As Aunt Bea aged, her financial situation worsened. Even the rent on her small apartment was a strain. Then, one day, I heard that Aunt Bea—now well into her 80s—was accepted into a church-related retirement home a few towns over. She would assign her small Social Security check to the home, and they would take care of her.

For Aunt Bea, this was like winning the lottery. She had her own room in the large, ancient facility. Her meals were taken care of, and she no longer had to worry about finances. In addition, after living alone for so many years, she was now part of a community. For her, these truly were the golden years. She was so happy to be there.

Aunt Bea continued to appreciate the small things in life. During my high school years, at Christmastime, I would make her a batch of chocolate chip cookies and send it to her at the home, usually with a handwritten letter. Whenever I visited her with my parents, she would rave about the cookies. She would allow herself only one a day to make them last as long as possible.

My letters were a source of amusement for her. The envelopes addressed to “Aunt Bea Cutler” were particularly popular. She loved talking about the letters, even to staff and other residents. I don’t think she received a lot of mail at the retirement home.

Aunt Bea passed away in 1986 at age 95. She had no funeral, and my parents were the only ones present for her burial. She had little to pass on except a box of family pictures and her silver dollar, both of which are now in my possession. Aunt Bea never had much in the way of wealth or possessions. But in the end, she had everything she needed.

Ken Cutler lives in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and has worked as an electrical engineer in the nuclear power industry for more than 38 years. There, he has become an informal financial advisor for many of his coworkers. Ken is involved in his church, enjoys traveling and hiking with his wife Lisa, is a shortwave radio hobbyist, and has a soft spot for cats and dogs. Check out Ken's earlier articles.

[xyz-ihs snippet="Donate"]

Read more »

Ageing and the Open Road

RECENTLY I TOOK a free ride on a driverless bus trialling its proposed route, part of my local administration's ten-year rollout plan for self-driving public transport and taxis. I see real potential in this technology, and I'm hoping the infrastructure and implementation stay on schedule. That hope is mostly selfish, I'll admit. In fifteen years I'll be in my mid-seventies, and I'd love to ditch my car and rely on cheap, dependable robo-taxis instead. It would give me freedom precisely in that decade of life when driving starts to become genuinely problematic. I'm planning to change my car in 2027 for a modern hybrid, but in the back of my mind is the thought that it could be my last. If the self-driving rollout hits its targets, I can see the case for never buying another. The advantages for someone in my demographic at that stage of life would be hard to argue with. Think about what car ownership actually costs. There's the purchase price, insurance, road tax, fuel, servicing, tyres, and the occasional bill that arrives like a punch to the stomach. For most people, a car is the second most expensive thing they own after their home. In retirement, when income typically drops and budgets tighten, that ongoing drain becomes harder to justify. This is especially true when the car spends the vast majority of its time sitting on a driveway looking pretty. A robo-taxi model, where you pay only for the journeys you actually take, could represent a dramatic shift in how much personal transport really costs. The numbers, I suspect, will be compelling — with current estimates from real world operations suggesting an 80% reduction in the cost of fares being achievable. Then there's the question of independence. This is the one that matters most to me personally, and I'd imagine it resonates with anyone approaching or already in their later years. Giving up your car keys is one of those milestones that nobody really talks about, but everyone in that demographic understands. It represents a loss of spontaneity and self-sufficiency that can genuinely affect quality of life. The difference with autonomous vehicles is that surrendering the wheel doesn't have to mean surrendering the freedom. A reliable, affordable self-driving taxi available on demand restores something that previous generations simply had to go without once driving became difficult. This could be a trip to the supermarket on a weekday morning or a late evening visit to family. The safety dimension is also worth considering. Reaction times slow as we age. Night vision deteriorates. Concentration over long distances becomes harder. Most older drivers are aware of this and manage it carefully, but there comes a point for everyone where the road becomes a source of anxiety rather than freedom. Autonomous vehicles remove that calculation entirely. You get in, state your destination, and arrive, without the cognitive load of navigating, anticipating other drivers, or worrying whether your responses are still sharp enough. That peace of mind shouldn't be underestimated. There are wider social benefits too. Older people who can no longer drive are disproportionately affected by isolation. Poor rural transport links, infrequent bus services, and the general assumption that everyone has access to a car all contribute to a situation where many retired people find their world gradually shrinking. Autonomous vehicles, particularly if integrated intelligently with existing public transport, have the potential to reverse that. A robo-taxi that can be summoned by a smartphone, or even a simple voice command, could keep people connected to their communities, their families, and their routines far longer than is currently possible. There are, of course, reasons to be cautious. Technology rollouts rarely go entirely to plan. The ten-year schedule my local administration is working to is ambitious, and a lot can change in funding priorities, in public appetite, and in the regulatory environment. The early trials are promising, but promising trials and full-scale dependable infrastructure are very different things. It's worth keeping in mind, with a groan inducing pun: your mileage will vary — literally. Dense urban and suburban areas will almost certainly see reliable services first, and I'm fortunate that describes my situation. For those in more rural communities, the very people for whom isolation is already the sharpest problem, the wait could be considerably longer. I'm hopeful, but I'm not banking on it entirely. Which is why the 2027 hybrid still makes sense. It's a practical hedge, a good, modern, efficient car that will serve me well through the transition years, whatever pace that transition takes. But the fact that I'm already thinking of it as potentially my last car feels significant. A decade ago that thought wouldn't have crossed my mind. The technology has moved from science fiction to credible near-future fast enough to genuinely reshape how I'm thinking about retirement planning. If it delivers, the generation hitting their seventies in the late 2030s could be the first in history for whom ageing and mobility don't have to be in conflict. That's not a small thing. That might turn out to be one of the most personally transformative shifts of the entire autonomous vehicle revolution. It is not about the flashy early adopters or the logistics industry efficiencies. Instead, it is the simple dignity of an older person getting where they need to go, independently, on their own terms. I'm hopeful I'll be taking that ride and certain my children and grandchildren definitely will.
Mark Crothers is a retired small business owner from the UK with a keen interest in personal finance and simple living. Married to his high school sweetheart, with daughters and grandchildren, he knows the importance of building a secure financial future. With an aversion to social media, he prefers to spend his time on his main passions: reading, scratch cooking, racket sports, and hiking.
Read more »

Saving for Grandchildren

OUR FIRST GRANDCHILD recently arrived, which naturally has us thinking about the smartest ways to build a strong financial foundation for her future. In 2019, I wrote Take a Break, which outlined saving strategies on behalf of children. Since then, the landscape has changed with the introduction of Trump accounts and Roth-conversion pathways for 529 accounts.  Families have four tax-advantaged savings approaches on behalf of young children plus the Roth IRA option once the child has earned income – 529 education savings account, a Uniform Gift to Minor (UGM) custodial account, a Coverdell account, and the new Trump account. Each option offers a different mix of tax benefits, contribution requirements and withdrawal rules. 529 Accounts Pros
  • Tax-free growth when used for qualified education expenses
  • High gift-tax contribution limits: $19K per contributor per year (indexed)
  • New ability to convert up to $35K into a Roth IRA for the beneficiary
Cons
  • Relatively complex with penalties and taxes on non-qualified withdrawals
  • Limited, state-approved investment options
  • Risk of underutilization if the child does not pursue qualifying education
Caveats
  • Technology and AI could significantly reduce education’s cost structure in the future
  • Roth conversions are capped at $35K lifetime
  • The 529 must be open 15 years, and contributions must age 5 years before conversion
  • Conversions require the beneficiary to have earned income (i.e. they could Roth anyway)
  • Annual Roth contribution limits still apply (e.g., $7.5K in 2026), so completing the full $35K conversion would take five years
UGM Custodial Accounts Pros
  • Brokerage account where up to $2.7K of unearned income can be tax-free each year
  • High gift-tax contribution limits: $19K per contributor per year (indexed)
  • Broad investment flexibility — stocks, bonds, funds, etc.
  • Few restrictions on how funds may be used for the child’s benefit
  • Potential for low taxes on capital gains, but subject to marginal “kiddie tax” at parent’s rates until tax-independency or age 24 
Cons
  • Higher income or capital gains could trigger the kiddie tax at the parents’ marginal rate
  • Assets count as the child’s for financial-aid purposes
Caveats
  • Custodians have some ability to spend down the account for legitimate child expenses if the child is a wild-child in the later teen years
Coverdell Accounts Pros
  • Tax-free growth for qualified education expenses
  • More flexible investment choices than most 529 plans
Cons
  • Low contribution limit: $2K per year plus income limits restrict who can contribute
  • Essentially irrelevant today given the expanded options within 529 plans
Trump Accounts Pros
  • $1K government seed deposit for children born 2025–2028
  • Contribution limit of $5K per year in 2026, indexed to inflation
  • Parent employers may contribute up to $2.5K per year (also indexed)
  • Tax-deferred growth with Roth-conversion opportunities beginning at age 18
  • No earned-income requirement for Roth conversions 
  • Roth conversions are ideal in low-income years starting after age 18 once the child has transitioned to tax-independency of parents or at age 24 when “kiddie taxation” ends. Early tax independence could even be a combined Roth plus student financial-aid strategy
  • Potential to convert large account values over several years at relatively low tax rates (potentially marginal 10-12% tax-rates, but averaging less due to the standard deduction).
Cons
  • Investment options limited to low-cost indexed stock funds (not necessarily a drawback)
  • Penalty-free withdrawals must wait until age 59½, but the accounts could be advantageous even including penalties
  • Limited custodian control and intervention possibilities if the teen is a wild-child
Caveats
  • If Roth conversions are not undertaken during the child’s low-income years, a UGMA invested to capture long-term capital gains tax-rates may outperform a Trump Account taxed at ordinary income tax-rates
  • Watch this space as future adjustments or eligibility changes are possible
  In effect, the 529 is a two-decade college savings program having some complexity and withdrawal limitations; the UGM is a reasonably flexible, 18-30-year college or house downpayment savings program; and the Trump account is a somewhat inflexible, sixty-year retirement accelerator   Resulting Playbook Here is our family’s intended playbook for tax-advantaged accounts in the grandchild's name:
  • Parents’ retirement account fundings remain their top priority - 401K’s at a minimum up to the match, HSAs with their triple tax advantages, and Roths as long as eligible within income limits.
  • A Trump account has already been initiated to secure the free $1K government seed contribution – grows to potentially $2.6K at age 18 after penalties and taxes.
  • Limited 529 funding has also been initiated to start the 15-year clock for potential later Roth conversions. 
  • The family’s next priority is to fund the Trump account which starts at $5K later this year. Maximizing the Roth conversion opportunity will require ~$116K of contributions (at 3% inflation) over 18 years which we grandparents intend to help fund. I estimate the Roth converted Trump account could grow to ~$2 million of tax-free money at age 60 (6% growth) assuming early-age Roth conversions, and the Wall Street Journal projects as much as $3 million (link likely paywalled).
  • The subsequent priorities are to start UGM taxable account and 529 account contributions in parallel to perhaps initial levels of about $35K each. This may take our family some years depending upon available resources for contributions.
For the UGM account, a balance of $35K should capture a sizeable chunk of the annual $2.7K tax-free income limit by investing in high-yield income alternatives. For the 529 account, $35K aligns with the Roth conversion limit. On a personal note, we had extremely positive UGM outcomes with our children. We saved taxes for two decades, and each child used the ~$60K balance as down payments on their first house shortly after college. Due to the 529’s withdrawal rigidities and potential technology impacts, we are unlikely to fund the 529 to the max. 
  • We will skip Coverdells as the alternatives offer ample savings opportunity in the child’s name ($200K+). 
  • Depending upon spare resources available for gifting, we can always reassess future contributions. 
That’s our plan, and we’re sticking to it…. until something changes.    John Yeigh is an author, coach and youth sports advocate. His book “Win the Youth Sports Game” was published in 2021. John retired in 2017 from the oil industry, where he negotiated financial details for multi-billion-dollar international projects. Check out his earlier articles.  
Read more »

California, Here They Came

"Thanks, Jeff. Interesting coincidence that your grandmother and her six sisters all came to California as six of my grandma’s sisters came as well. Big families back in the day!"
- D.J.
Read more »

Investing Fundamentals: A Simple Guide for Beginners

"WDH, one of the best summaries of Investing discussions where, time, diversifying and compounding are on your side. Stick with the best brokerage houses like Vanguard & Fidelity & Schwab, and pick indices that are low in cost. Spread the wealth, one of the best is the S&P 500 index, these include the biggest and most successful industrial stocks in the market. Save regularly, try to get all matching of money you can from your employer for your 401k, because you will need it in retirement. Good investing to all."
- William Dorner
Read more »

One World, One Kind of Work

"Thank you Mike, I know I'm straying from the normal HD articles but I am not a financial writer."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

Wall Street Trap

IN THE INVESTMENT world, May 1st is a notable day. It was on May 1, 1975 that the Securities and Exchange Commission deregulated the brokerage industry. For the 183 years prior to that, trading commissions on the New York Stock Exchange had been fixed at uniformly high rates. But when deregulation arrived, competition got going. That’s when discount brokers like Charles Schwab got rolling, and over time, May Day, as it’s now referred to, has delivered enormous savings to consumers. More than 50 years later, though, Wall Street still operates in ways that are often at odds with consumer interests. As an individual investor, what are the obstacles to be aware of? At the top of the list is Wall Street’s fixation with individual stocks. For almost 100 years, the data has been clear that stock-picking is counterproductive. Probably the first to uncover this was a fellow named Alfred Cowles. Cowles came from a wealthy family and wondered whether the investment advice his family had been receiving was worthwhile. He set about answering that question and in 1933, published a paper titled “Can Stock Market Forecasters Forecast?” Cowles’s conclusion: They can’t. More recently, research by finance professors Brad Barber and Terrance Odean came to a similar conclusion. The title of their most well known paper is self-explanatory: “Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth.”  Along the same lines, Standard & Poor’s regularly examines actively-managed mutual funds to see how many are able to outperform the overall market. The most recent finding: Over the past 10 years, fewer than 15% of funds benchmarked to the S&P 500 managed to beat the index. Research by Jeff Ptak at Morningstar has found that the more active a fund is, the worse it performs. So-called tactical funds, which shift among different asset classes in response to economic forecasts have, in Ptak’s words, “incinerated” shareholder dollars. This data is fairly well known. The problem, though, is that trading activity generates revenue for the brokerage industry, so it has an interest in keeping investors engaged with the market. That’s why brokerage analysts are on TV every day, offering their forecasts for individual stocks, for the overall market and for the broader economy. To be sure, this makes for interesting television. The problem, though, is that it’s been shown to carry almost no value. According to research by Joachim Klement, the accuracy of Wall Street prognosticators is approximately zero. Why are they so poor at forecasting? For starters, there’s the simple fact that no one has a crystal ball. No one can know what a company—or its competitors—will do a month or a year from now, and how that will translate into stock price gains or losses. Sociologist Ezra Zuckerman Sivan uncovered a more subtle explanation. In research published after the technology selloff in 2000, Sivan found that Wall Street analysts are constrained by two obstacles. The first is that they’re dependent on access to companies’ management teams to help in their research. For that reason, it’s in their interest to maintain positive relationships with the companies that they follow. Investment banks that take a positive view on a company may also be rewarded with profitable mergers or acquisitions work when the need arises. Those factors bias stock recommendations overwhelmingly in the direction of “buy” ratings. Another reason analysts tend to avoid negative comments about the companies they cover: Sivan found that there is a community effect that tends to form among the analysts assigned to a given company, and thus an incentive develops to not “rock the boat” in saying anything too critical. People generally want to get along, and that results in a sort of self-censorship. This research is well understood, and yet Wall Street continues to generate forecasts day after day, year after year. Why? There are two explanations, I believe. The first is that it’s entertaining. I’ll be the first to acknowledge that index funds aren’t terribly interesting to talk about. It’s far more interesting to talk about smartphones or AI and the companies behind them. That makes Wall Street analysts invaluable to the media, who need to fill airtime.  And as long as they’re granted that airtime, forecasters are of great value to the brokerage industry. Since trading activity is profitable for Wall Street, it’s in brokers’ interest to generate continued interest in stocks. That brings in commission dollars for brokers. And even though commissions have shrunk in recent years, brokers benefit in other ways from active trading, including the “bid-ask spread” on each trade. That’s the difference between what buyers pay and what sellers receive, and though these spreads are tiny, they add up for the brokers who collect them. For good reason, then, Wall Street continues to promote stock-picking. At the same time, the investment industry is always busy developing new funds. In the first half of last year, for example, fund companies rolled out more than 640 new funds. Among them: funds that hold single stocks with varying degrees of leverage and other seemingly unnecessary new formulations. The result: There are now many more funds than there are stocks trading on U.S. exchanges.  Many of these new funds follow ever more esoteric strategies. They’re often opaque. And almost invariably, they carry higher fees. In a 2011 study titled “The Dark Side of Financial Innovation,” finance professor Brian Henderson and a colleague looked at one popular category of fund known as a structured product. Their conclusion: These funds were overpriced to the point that their expected return was actually a bit below zero. How were they able to market such an inferior product? Henderson’s hypothesis was that the fund companies designed them to be intentionally as complex as possible in order to exploit individual investors. The bottom line: To a great degree, Wall Street is upside down. But as an individual investor, you don’t have to be. My rule of thumb: In building a portfolio, investors should do more or less the opposite of what Wall Street recommends. That, I believe, is a reliable formula for success.   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 »

How much to provide a college student monthly?

"For sure this is a discussion that should have occurred years ago, so the child knows what to expect. I received no spending money when I went to college. Similarly, I paid all r&b + tuition for my 2 kids, but nothing else. Teach them they can do without that evening pizza, expensive clothes, etc. That's important knowledge to learn - and it's free."
- George Lambert
Read more »

Is saving really that hard? Nope, not for the great majority of Americans. 

"Great article R Quinn. You can spreadsheet, or AI it any way you like. The POINT is compounding is your friend. Being an Engineer and taking Engineering Economics allowed me in 1968 to understand I had to save something, so one day we could look to a comfortable retirement. Inflation of course is your enemy, and you must be balanced and reasonable in your estimates. Because of our discipline along with 3 children, we still found a way to save. When IRA's came, we somehow managed to always save so we could maximize our FREE money put in by the company. Yes, if you relied only on Social Security then, you will have to skimp in your retirement. It turns out our saving discipline has paid off handsomely, and at 76 we changed from saving and earning to spending, and if you are like us living in a CCRC, you will spend more than when you owned a home. At 80, we are fortunate to having a smooth road ahead. You need balance, saving, discipline and some good fortune to make it all work. If you spend, spend and pay 25% on your credit card balance, you will not be able to retire and enjoy it."
- William Dorner
Read more »

First Place

"I was just speaking with good friends who are leaving soon for a tour of Devon and Cornwall. Talking about their trip made me think of this article Jonathan wrote almost 2 years ago. It was a pleasant memory. I hope I get to Hope Cove someday."
- Rick Connor
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 52: WE SHOULD aim to become homeowners—not because homes deliver handsome capital gains, but because owning locks in our housing costs and, with every mortgage payment, forces us to save.

humans

NO. 29: WE SUFFER from recency bias, meaning we’re overly influenced by current events. Today’s investment dramas loom large, triggering fear or greed and prompting foolish portfolio changes. Meanwhile, we lose sight of market history—the crises that were overcome, the hot stocks that turned cold, and the broad market’s impressive march higher.

act

SEE IF ESTATE taxes are an issue.  Very few Americans need worry about federal estate taxes, given today's high federal exemption. State estate taxes are an issue in just a third of states, and exemptions are typically far below the federal level. But for most Americans, the biggest “death tax” will be the income taxes owed on inherited retirement accounts.

Truths

NO. 67: MOST MUTUAL funds are sector bets. Funds often aim for style purity, sticking with just one stock or bond market niche. To gauge whether a fund is any good, compare it to others in the same category. But to build a diversified portfolio, buy just one or two funds from any given category—and diversify with funds from other categories.

My Money Journey

Manifesto

NO. 52: WE SHOULD aim to become homeowners—not because homes deliver handsome capital gains, but because owning locks in our housing costs and, with every mortgage payment, forces us to save.

Spotlight: Taxes

Missouri Eliminating Capital Gains Tax on Stocks

The Missouri legislature recently passed a wide-reaching tax bill that includes ending the capital gains tax. The House passed the legislation 102-41. Since it had previously been approved by the Senate, it now goes to Gov. Mike Kehoe.
Rep. George Hruza, R-St. Louis County said this is one of the best things the legislature could do for Missouri.
Now I’m not sure it really is the best thing the legislature could do in a state that is #5 in the country in “gun death rates,”

Read more »

Tax Gain Harvesting

MANY PEOPLE ARE familiar with tax loss harvesting, where you sell a losing security/ETF and rebuy a similar, not identical, security/ETF.
But often we don’t really think about the opposite side of the coin: sell a winning security/ETF and rebuy the exact same, or a different, security/ETF.
That strategy is called tax gain harvesting, and because it’s a gain, the wash sale rule doesn’t apply.
 
Execution
Long-term capital gains can be taxed at 0% depending on your income.

Read more »

Kitces – Analyzing Congressional Republicans’ Budget Proposal For The 2025 TCJA Extension

On April 30, Kitces posted an comprehensive article regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) describing in detail where the congress is currently at and what steps are necessary to extend and/or change the the TCJA before the current tax law sunsets at the end of 2025.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-tcja-sunset-budget-resolution-reconciliation-salt-cap-qbi-deduction-congress-republication-house-senate-bill/
I agree with the conclusion of the article to currently “wait and see” before taking action until I have a concrete expectation of what the individual income tax rules will look like in 2026.

Read more »

Overtime and Tips Deduction

THE IRS JUST provided some guidance on how the tips and overtime deductions will work. I wanted to spend a few minutes going over the details so that you can learn how it would be reported on your taxes and share this with friends and family.
Overtime
As a reminder, the OBBBA created Section 225, which allows you to deduct qualified overtime compensation.
This deduction is capped at $12,500 per return ($25,000 for joint filers) and is subject to a phaseout based on modified adjusted gross income.

Read more »

FAQs IRS added March 20, 2025 regarding Employee Retention Credit

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a spike in unemployment federal tax law was modified and the Employee Retention Credit (ERC) was born. The ERC was a refundable tax credit for certain eligible businesses and tax-exempt organizations that had employees and were affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. The business, tax community and the Internal Revenue Service continue to deal with compliance aftermath of the ERC.
On March 20, 2025 the IRS updated their frequently asked questions about the employee retention credit in the section headed “Income tax and the ERC”.

Read more »

Do taxes paid from a qualified annuitized annuity offset RMDs from another ira account?

I recently read that something in the secure 2.0 act allows taxes paid on annuity
income from a qualified, annuitized annuity will count toward a rmd from
a separate ira account. Is this accurate?

Read more »

Spotlight: Horiuchi

Thanks, Younger Self

SAVING FOR THE FUTURE entails a pinch in the present. Every so often, it makes sense to reconsider how much we save—and whether it’s time to take a break from saving. As a recent early retiree, I was pondering this, even before the latest stock market disruption. Unfortunately, none of us has a reliable crystal ball that tells us when to buy low or sell high. We also don’t have complete knowledge of our future self. Maybe future me will receive a windfall or die young, so I can get by with saving less. Or maybe I’ll develop a chronic condition and need more savings. We don’t know how lucky we will be on the way from youth to retirement—those years when we have the greatest opportunity to save. Savings aren’t “safe.” Risk is inevitable. Cash in an FDIC-protected bank account is guaranteed to keep its face value, but it’s also pretty much guaranteed to decline in real value each year due to inflation. Meanwhile, buying bad stock or bond market investments does little more than transfer your wealth to someone else. Recessions, market corrections and normal fluctuations can be difficult to stomach. And then we have occasional extraordinary events, like the economic and political disruptions caused by the coronavirus. Faced with all this uncertainty, I don’t try to divine the future. Instead, in setting aside a portion of my money for future me, I’m simply seeking to maintain purchasing power for a comfortable old age. With moderate luck and ongoing financial education, I might be able to eke out a percentage point or three above inflation, opening the road to a more prosperous retirement. I recently reviewed the Series EE and I savings bonds that I’ve purchased over the years. These ultra-conservative investments are rarely recommended. They’ve never been more…
Read more »

4% every year? even this one?

I'm withdrawing a bit from IRAs, ahead of RMDs in a few years, which will decide for me how much I'll be taking out each year. For those of you who make voluntary withdrawals, do you go with a fixed percentage, like 4% every year, plus an inflation boost, calculated on Jan. 1 and taken at the beginning of the year? Or do you recalculate to reflect market change, and withdraw gradually throughout the year? Or wait till Dec. 31 when you know how the year went, and then take it? I'm thinking this is sort of related to "decummulation", which for me includes both retirement money and other savings socked away.  4% a year max spent out of all your assets? Or more variable?
Read more »

At the End

IT STARTED INNOCENTLY. A doctor’s visit. A blood test. Results. Admit to hospital for “a couple days of observation” that instead cascaded, over six days, into my husband’s death at age 71. His death certificate states “etiology unknown.” While doctors suspected prescribed medication, we will never know just what caused his liver to fail. Throughout, the situation had been confusing. Clarity regarding treatment options—and the likely outcome from procedures—was in short supply. He and I and doctors made medical decisions in the face of this uncertainty and without regard to costs. Crucially useful was my husband’s advance medical directive, completed a decade earlier when we updated our wills. I kept this at hand to reference as we made decisions. Language in directives is ambiguous and can be a poor fit to clinical decisions. Yet the directive was essential to working through differences of opinion among family members and to obtaining, in the final hours, a frank assessment from attending doctors and clinicians. Amid many roundtrips at all hours between home, hospital, airport and hotels, I lost my identification twice. Once, I was paying for parking at the hospital lot kiosk. I cancelled my credit and debit cards before getting my wallet back two days later, less the cash. “Nobody turns wallets in, ever,” said the hospital security guard as he handed it back. After that, I only carried keys, phone, my driver’s license and my backup credit card, and lost the license and credit card a couple of days later. It would be two months before I could replace my driver’s license with a new picture ID. In the interim, I carried my passport card and a printout listing my appointment with the DMV to replace my driver’s license. At the end, I was bedside with our three teenagers. Afterward, before…
Read more »

Twin Peeks

CAN IT REALLY BE TWO years since I wrote about sending my twins off to college? One is a chemistry major, midway through her junior year. Meanwhile, for her twin sister, the artist, there have been big changes in her college trajectory. My initial criteria for college selections included published statistics on cost, likelihood of admission, timely graduation and low rates of loan default. I took this last stat as a reasonable proxy for post-college success. My daughter the chemistry major is on track to graduate after four years. This past semester was her first as an organic chemistry lab assistant. She’s applying for internships in her field. If that doesn’t work out, she’ll take any other job. Her sister, after three semesters in art school, came home without a degree. She’d become uncomfortable with the expense, not to mention the raw talent, Herculean effort and plain old good luck that would be essential to earning a living in the arts. She loved the big city and befriended amazing people. I’d paid tuition in full each semester, so she walked away debt-free. I’ve told her from the first to avoid the sunk cost fallacy—seeing something to completion only because she’d already invested considerable effort. Rather, I encouraged her to treat each semester as a new decision. She could continue at art school, look for work, switch to community college, become a volunteer or try something else. She returned home with “some college,” a category frequently found in job descriptions. A family friend suggested she volunteer at a school library. In our city, many elementary school libraries are open part of the day and staffed by volunteers. To take on this role at a public school required fingerprinting for a criminal background check and screening for tuberculosis. The principal explained the…
Read more »

Goodbye Assets

MY TWINS ARE SENIORS in high school. That means, pandemic or no pandemic, we spent the fall applying to colleges. Here in California, the pandemic closed public schools in March and most did not reopen for in-person teaching with the start of the current academic year. That forced parents to stand in for college counselors. The preparations high school juniors usually engage in, such as visiting colleges and taking standardized tests, didn’t occur this past spring or summer. Student athletes spent the summer practicing in parks and driveways. Grades suffered under remote learning. For all these reasons, applying to college has been more difficult. And then there’s the price tag. Post-secondary education can be relatively inexpensive—or it can break the Bank of Mom and Dad. The federal government supplies some grants and many loans to limit the immediate financial damage, and colleges also dole out money from their own funds. Still, the student loan crisis is front page news. That’s one reason so many parents try to ensure their young adults don’t leave college with crushing debt. The federal government’s role begins with the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, with “free” meaning it doesn’t cost you to ask. FAFSA calculates a family’s expected family contribution (EFC) based on the parents’ and student’s income and assets. On top of that, colleges use their own guidelines to distribute the grant money they control. For families earning below about $50,000, the EFC will likely be $0. After that, the amount rises sharply—and sometimes unfairly. For instance, middle-class single parents, along with older parents with a healthy amount of savings, may be shocked by how much they’re expected to pay toward college costs. There’s no way to sugarcoat it: Parents with decent incomes, or who’ve successfully set aside a chunk of…
Read more »

Missing a Step

I LIKE TO THINK my husband and I were savvy and careful when planning our estate. Yet anybody can make an occasional dumb mistake. That brings me to my next surprise in settling my husband’s affairs—and it came with an unfortunate legal bill. As a couple, we’d established a revocable living trust at a young age, when death was a strictly theoretical idea. The trust eliminated the need for our estate to go through probate, not that I knew what that was at the time. Ten years later, as it dawned on us that we had edged closer to the end of life, we reviewed our trust for changes in the law and in our finances. This process included updating financial accounts, so they’d roll into the trust, either immediately or on our deaths. We’d decided on a trust based on our personal situation. Not everyone needs one. Shady characters try to sell them to people who don’t. Still, even if you don’t need a revocable living trust, you do need to ensure your house, retirement accounts and other assets are inherited according to your wishes. The process of establishing the beneficiaries for a financial account is typically simple. After reviewing our trust, we dutifully mailed request letters to retitle accounts, so they’d be included in the trust. Some institutions immediately updated our accounts, while others responded with their own forms that needed to be signed and notarized, and then returned. Well, we were busy. With kids and work and life, those forms sat unattended, along with other important but not urgent paperwork. After my husband died, I found these forms. Luckily, most accounts had been retitled and had named beneficiaries. But one personal account had no beneficiary named. Our legal work to ease the management of our estate was…
Read more »