Hi, John. It's a pleasure to see you here this morning. I've always greatly enjoyed your writing, and this very thoughtful article is no exception. I especially liked your comments on "peripheral interactions" and the role of "anticipation" in happiness. Jonathan likewise often wrote about the latter. Your observations about retirement are insightful and interesting. I'll add that I believe retirement is a very individual thing. I've been retired now, likewise from the practice of law, for almost 10 years and have thoroughly enjoyed it. But as an introvert, while I need some amount of human interaction to be happy, I likely don't need as much as the average person, so that hasn't been a problem for me. I do enjoy staying in touch with my friends, and retirement has also given me the pleasure of spending more time with my wife---who put up with my ridiculous work hours for many years. As for the intellectual stimulation that work no longer provides, in this day of the internet I believe that anyone with a curious mind has no reason to be bored or to quit learning. In fact, the additional free time I now have has allowed me to read and explore way beyond what I could possibly manage during my hectic work days. Thanks for this topnotch article and I hope to read many more in the coming days. Andrew
Thanks, Adam, for your always excellent articles. Is there an argument for a portfolio that is stock heavy, with a substantial allocation to MM funds (at least during this period of decent interest rates), and only a small bond allocation, if any? I'm assuming enough in the MM funds to cover expenditures for 10+ years.
William, you might want to check the comments below, including Bill Perry's link to the draft 2026 1040. It has line 12f showing this deduction is anticipated to be below-the-line (after AGI is calculated).
I agree that you have to have an ample cushion when figuring this. My goal is to calculate as closely as I can what our income for the year will be. Then I add a substantial cushion to protect against that unexpected additional income you mention. You're right that IRMAA is based on MAGI, but we don't have any amounts (e.g., tax-exempt interest) to add back to AGI to arrive at MAGI, so they're the same for us. In any event, I could've framed the question in terms of MAGI instead of AGI, but it wouldn't affect the answer. If the non-itemizer charitable deduction is "above the line," it reduces AGI, which can then be adjusted, if necessary, to arrive at MAGI. If it's "below the line," then it doesn't reduce either one. Hope that makes sense.
Bill, thanks for your take and the very helpful link. The draft 2026 form1040, line 12f, seems to nail it. I'm supposing there's scant chance the final version would be any different.
Rick, thanks very much for doing all that. There really is a bunch of confusing and contradictory info. out there on this. I agree---till the issue is settled, I'll assume it doesn't reduce AGI.
Ed, great list. Coincidentally, #1 is on my list for today. Every fall, I work up an estimate of what our income for the year will be. That tells me how much of my RMD we can devote to QCDs (Qualified Charitable Distributions) so as to keep our income from going over an IRMAA cliff or putting us in a higher marginal income tax bracket. The trick is, it's good to do this early in the fall so as to have plenty of time to decide on QCD beneficiaries, get the checks, distribute them and get receipts, etc. The counterbalance is that the earlier I do the estimate, the less accurate it will be. Oh well, I guess that's what they call a "first world problem."
Elaine, thank you for this post. I know it's been an awfully tough year for you, so your continuing efforts for HD are especially appreciated. When I visit HD, I first read Jonathan's brief nugget (in the middle under "Get Educated"). It sort of screws my head on right as I begin the day. And it's a nice reminder of his continuing presence here. Andrew
Andrew, This is a beautiful, insightful piece. Jonathan helped so many of us, and in so many different ways. I've described before how much he taught me about clean, straightforward writing, with no unnecessary verbiage. Having my articles edited by him was a privilege and a unique learning experience. Another aspect you mention that has really stayed with me was his unflinching, pragmatic, and selfless attitude in the face of death. I especially remember the humor you highlight. I'm paraphrasing here, but I recall his saying, as he tidied up all the finances to make things easier for Elaine and his kids, "I never realized dying was so much work!" Another time I saw a video of a panel he was on and he referenced the title of his long time WSJ column, "Getting Going." He said if he were writing it now, it would better be titled, "Getting Gone." Jonathan was a treasure. Thank you for maintaining his legacy. Andrew
Comments
Hi, John. It's a pleasure to see you here this morning. I've always greatly enjoyed your writing, and this very thoughtful article is no exception. I especially liked your comments on "peripheral interactions" and the role of "anticipation" in happiness. Jonathan likewise often wrote about the latter. Your observations about retirement are insightful and interesting. I'll add that I believe retirement is a very individual thing. I've been retired now, likewise from the practice of law, for almost 10 years and have thoroughly enjoyed it. But as an introvert, while I need some amount of human interaction to be happy, I likely don't need as much as the average person, so that hasn't been a problem for me. I do enjoy staying in touch with my friends, and retirement has also given me the pleasure of spending more time with my wife---who put up with my ridiculous work hours for many years. As for the intellectual stimulation that work no longer provides, in this day of the internet I believe that anyone with a curious mind has no reason to be bored or to quit learning. In fact, the additional free time I now have has allowed me to read and explore way beyond what I could possibly manage during my hectic work days. Thanks for this topnotch article and I hope to read many more in the coming days. Andrew
Post: The Number Is Not The Answer
Link to comment from October 10, 2026
Thanks, Adam, for your always excellent articles. Is there an argument for a portfolio that is stock heavy, with a substantial allocation to MM funds (at least during this period of decent interest rates), and only a small bond allocation, if any? I'm assuming enough in the MM funds to cover expenditures for 10+ years.
Post: Why Bonds Matter
Link to comment from October 3, 2026
William, you might want to check the comments below, including Bill Perry's link to the draft 2026 1040. It has line 12f showing this deduction is anticipated to be below-the-line (after AGI is calculated).
Post: Does the new-for-2026 $1000/$2000 charitable deduction for non-itemizers reduce AGI?
Link to comment from September 26, 2026
I agree that you have to have an ample cushion when figuring this. My goal is to calculate as closely as I can what our income for the year will be. Then I add a substantial cushion to protect against that unexpected additional income you mention. You're right that IRMAA is based on MAGI, but we don't have any amounts (e.g., tax-exempt interest) to add back to AGI to arrive at MAGI, so they're the same for us. In any event, I could've framed the question in terms of MAGI instead of AGI, but it wouldn't affect the answer. If the non-itemizer charitable deduction is "above the line," it reduces AGI, which can then be adjusted, if necessary, to arrive at MAGI. If it's "below the line," then it doesn't reduce either one. Hope that makes sense.
Post: Does the new-for-2026 $1000/$2000 charitable deduction for non-itemizers reduce AGI?
Link to comment from September 26, 2026
Bill, thanks for your take and the very helpful link. The draft 2026 form1040, line 12f, seems to nail it. I'm supposing there's scant chance the final version would be any different.
Post: Does the new-for-2026 $1000/$2000 charitable deduction for non-itemizers reduce AGI?
Link to comment from September 22, 2026
Thanks, Bill, very helpful. Taken with Bill Perry's post above, I think we have the answer.
Post: Does the new-for-2026 $1000/$2000 charitable deduction for non-itemizers reduce AGI?
Link to comment from September 22, 2026
Rick, thanks very much for doing all that. There really is a bunch of confusing and contradictory info. out there on this. I agree---till the issue is settled, I'll assume it doesn't reduce AGI.
Post: Does the new-for-2026 $1000/$2000 charitable deduction for non-itemizers reduce AGI?
Link to comment from September 22, 2026
Ed, great list. Coincidentally, #1 is on my list for today. Every fall, I work up an estimate of what our income for the year will be. That tells me how much of my RMD we can devote to QCDs (Qualified Charitable Distributions) so as to keep our income from going over an IRMAA cliff or putting us in a higher marginal income tax bracket. The trick is, it's good to do this early in the fall so as to have plenty of time to decide on QCD beneficiaries, get the checks, distribute them and get receipts, etc. The counterbalance is that the earlier I do the estimate, the less accurate it will be. Oh well, I guess that's what they call a "first world problem."
Post: 15 Tasks for Today
Link to comment from September 22, 2026
Elaine, thank you for this post. I know it's been an awfully tough year for you, so your continuing efforts for HD are especially appreciated. When I visit HD, I first read Jonathan's brief nugget (in the middle under "Get Educated"). It sort of screws my head on right as I begin the day. And it's a nice reminder of his continuing presence here. Andrew
Post: It’s been one year
Link to comment from September 21, 2026
Andrew, This is a beautiful, insightful piece. Jonathan helped so many of us, and in so many different ways. I've described before how much he taught me about clean, straightforward writing, with no unnecessary verbiage. Having my articles edited by him was a privilege and a unique learning experience. Another aspect you mention that has really stayed with me was his unflinching, pragmatic, and selfless attitude in the face of death. I especially remember the humor you highlight. I'm paraphrasing here, but I recall his saying, as he tidied up all the finances to make things easier for Elaine and his kids, "I never realized dying was so much work!" Another time I saw a video of a panel he was on and he referenced the title of his long time WSJ column, "Getting Going." He said if he were writing it now, it would better be titled, "Getting Gone." Jonathan was a treasure. Thank you for maintaining his legacy. Andrew
Post: The Jonathan I Found: Through Others’ Eyes
Link to comment from September 19, 2026