Nahum Daniels, Author at Integrated Retirement Advisors

RMDs Are Back for 2021

 

 

 

RMDs, or Required Minimum Distributions, are withdrawals that are required by the IRS each year out of your traditional retirement accounts like 401(k)s and IRAs starting at age 72. The money that you have to take out annually by December 31st at midnight is taxed based on your income tax rate for that tax year.

Some retirees forget about RMDs when planning for retirement, and don’t realize how big the tax bite may be for them. This year, because of the pandemic, the CARES Act suspended the RMD for the 2020 tax year in an effort to help retirees avoid withdrawing money from accounts when the market was down.

(An RMD is calculated based on the closing balance of the account at the end of the previous year. When the markets drop significantly, the RMD represents a much higher percentage of a diminished portfolio and that reduces the ability to recover from big losses.)

In 2021, the RMD will be back. As an example, a 75-year-old man with a traditional IRA worth $100,000 will have to withdraw $4,367 this year.

Roth 401(k) Plans

Roth 401(k) plans, which are funded with after-tax dollars, are subject to the same RMD rules that traditional 401(k) and IRA plans are. The amounts are calculated using the same IRS life expectancy tables and account holders must begin taking them after they turn 72. (One exception is if you continue working after age 72 for the company that sponsors the plan and you don’t own more than 50% of the company.)

The difference is that Roth 401(k) withdrawals are usually not taxed.

You can avoid taking the minimum distributions entirely by rolling a Roth 401(k) into a personal Roth IRA, which is not subject to RMD rules.

2020 RMDs Without Penalty, But With Taxes

As part of the CARES Act, the IRS allowed COVID-related withdrawals from traditional retirement plans up to $100,000 without penalty in 2020 for those who were impacted by the pandemic. Income taxes were due on those withdrawals, which could be paid over a three-year period. Those who can afford to can pay the withdrawals back this year (or over a three-year period) can get the taxes back by filing amended tax returns.

Those Who Just Turned 72—It’s Complicated

The SECURE Act of 2019 raised the age when RMDs must begin to age 72. If you turned 70-1/2 in 2019, the old rules applied—your first RMD should have been due April 1st, 2020. However, because the CARES Act suspended RMDs, the new due date was April 1, 2021 for those individuals.

For retirees who turned 72 in 2020 or will turn 72 this year, you can take your RMD at any point in 2021, or even delay it up until April 1, 2022. But if you choose to delay it, you will owe two RMDs in 2022, which could put you into a higher tax bracket.

You should check with your tax professional before making decisions about RMDs, because there are strict rules about which accounts must be withdrawn from and stiff penalties for mistakes—to the tune of taxes owed plus an additional 50%!

 

To discuss your retirement plan, including RMDs, please call us. We are happy to discuss ideas with you and/or your tax professional. You can reach Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

This article is provided for educational purposes only and its content should not be relied upon for tax advice. As always, check with your tax professional or attorney for specific tax advice related to your situation.

Source:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/01/required-minimum-distributions-on-retirement-plans-are-back.html

Interest rates, bond prices and inflation are related. Here’s how.

 

The Federal Reserve

“Part of the mission given to the Federal Reserve by Congress is to keep [consumer] prices stable–that is, to keep prices from rising or falling too quickly. The Federal Reserve sees a rate of inflation of 2 percent per year–as measured by a particular price index, called the price index for personal consumption expenditures–as the right amount of inflation.

“The Federal Reserve seeks to control inflation by influencing interest rates. When inflation is too high, the Federal Reserve typically raises interest rates to slow the economy and bring inflation down. When inflation is too low, the Federal Reserve typically lowers interest rates to stimulate the economy and move inflation higher.”  ~The Federal Reserve of Cleveland

Interest Rate Risk

In general, low interest rates can be good for mortgage and other consumer loans because you will pay less to borrow money. However, low interest rates are not so good when you’re looking at the low interest credited on savings accounts and CDs.

But the main reason interest rate risk is considered a risk has to do with bond prices.

About Bonds

Bonds are basically fixed-rate loans with set maturity dates. Buying or selling them before maturity, when current interest rates might be higher or lower than the bond’s face value interest rate, is what affects their price.

In general, when interest rates go up, bond values go down. As bond prices increase, bond yields fall. Interest rate risk is common to all bonds, even U.S. Treasury bonds.

“The most important difference between the face value of a bond and its price is that the face value is fixed, while the price varies. The face value remains the same until the bond reaches maturity. On the other hand, bond prices can change dramatically.” ~Investopedia

Why You Should Care

Pre-retirees and retirees with money invested in the stock market often have the majority of their investments held in bonds after they reach age 50+ because in general, bonds are often considered “safer” than stocks.

A common principle used by some stockbrokers and bankers called “the Rule of 100” uses age to determine how much of their client portfolios are held in bonds versus stocks. The rule works like this: When you are 60, 60% of your portfolio will be in bonds versus 40% in stocks, when you’re 70, 70% will be in bonds versus 30% in stocks, etc. going up from there.

This shift to more bonds and less stocks as you get older happens automatically in many 401(k) “target date” funds as well.

Bonds Versus Bond Funds

Because the term “bonds” is often used interchangeably with “bond funds,” it’s important to know that some Wall Street experts consider bond funds to be correlated with stock market risk, and therefore not “safer.”

“A bond fund is simply a mutual fund that invests solely in bonds… An investor who invests in a bond fund is putting his money into a pool managed by a portfolio manager. Most bond funds are comprised of a certain type of bond, such as corporate or government bonds, and are further defined by time period to maturity, such as short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term. Some bond funds comprise of only one type…Still, other bond funds have a mix of the different types of bonds in order to create multi-asset class options.

“The types of bond funds available include: US government bond funds, municipal bond funds, corporate bond funds, mortgage-backed securities (MBS) funds, high-yield bond funds, emerging market bond funds, and global bond funds…Typically, a bond fund manager buys and sells according to market conditions and rarely holds bonds until maturity.

“In other words, bond funds are traded on the market, and the market prices on bonds change daily, just like any other publicly-traded security.” ~Investopedia

 

What’s Happening Now: The Headlines

 

  • Inflation Fears

“Inflation is near a decade low and well below the 2% level the Federal Reserve targets as ideal. The usual conditions for rising inflation—tight job markets and public expectations of rising prices—are glaringly absent. Yet anxiety about inflation is at a fever pitch, among economists and in markets, where long-term interest rates have been grinding higher since President Biden unveiled plans for huge new fiscal stimulus.” ~Wall Street Journal

  • Rock Bottom Interest Rates

“The Federal Reserve’s emergency rate cut back in March [2020], which dropped the benchmark interest rate to zero, is likely here to stay…the Fed publicly stated that even if inflation starts to pick up again amid the economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic, it doesn’t expect to raise interest rates any time soon as the labor market rebounds. Wall Street economists predict that these rock-bottom rates may be around for the next several years. In fact, after the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, the Fed kept benchmark rates low for seven years. While this means that borrowing becomes cheaper for those who can get approved for loans, it’s not such good news for savers.” ~CNBC

  • Bond Yields Higher

“The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield climbed back above the 1.5% level on Thursday [3/4/21] after Fed Chair Jerome Powell said there was potential for a temporary jump in inflation and that he had noticed the recent rise in yields. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note rose to 1.541% shortly in afternoon trading. The yield on the 30-year Treasury bond pushed higher to 2.304%. Yields move inversely to prices.” ~CNBC

“If you hear that bond prices have dropped, then you know that there is not a lot of demand for the bonds. Yields must increase to compensate for lower demand.” ~The Balance

  • Long-Term Bonds Face Nearly Zero Upside

“Buffett is bearish on bonds. Why does [Warren] Buffet think that “bonds are not the place to be these days”? Yields on Treasurys are near historical lows, and investors locking in these low returns by investing in long-term bonds face nearly zero upside with significant downside if rates rise.” ~Think Advisor

 

To Recap: Interest Rate Risk / Bond Risk / Inflation Risk

  • Bond Risk: In general, when interest rates go up, bond values go down. Interest rate risk is common to all bonds, even U.S. Treasury bonds. A bond’s maturity and coupon rate generally affect how much its price will change as a result of changes in market interest rates.
  • Inflation Risk: Inflation risk is the risk that rising costs will undermine purchasing power over time. The Fed will raise interest rates if inflation rises.

 

Inflation risk, bond risk, and interest rate risk can be managed through strategies like portfolio diversification, insured solutions that offer inflation adjustments, and by proper financial and retirement planning.

It’s more important than ever to make sure you are protected from multiple risks as you get closer to or are already in retirement. If you have any questions about your situation, please don’t hesitate to call us. You can reach Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

Sources:

https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/our-research/center-for-inflation-research/inflation-101/why-does-the-fed-care-get-started.aspx#

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bond-yield.asp

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/013015/how-does-face-value-differ-price-bond.asp

https://www.cnbc.com/select/what-happens-when-interest-rates-go-down/

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/04/us-bonds-treasury-yields-lower-ahead-of-fed-chair-powells-speech.html

https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2021/03/03/is-buffett-right-to-be-bearish-on-bonds/

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bondfund.asp

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-inflation-a-risk-not-now-but-some-see-danger-ahead-11614614962

 

 

7 Tips to Resolve Financial Issues Between Couples

No matter how long you have been together, financial issues can wreak havoc on a committed relationship. According to Investopedia, some of the top money issues between partners include money/personality style clashes, debt, personal spending, children, and extended family differences.

When couples don’t agree about spending and saving habits, it can lead to stress, arguments and resentment. Here are seven ways you can address financial issues positively, preferably before they arise.

  1. Understand Your Money Styles

Think of some extreme examples of money styles in your circle. Like your friend, the foodie, who won’t touch a bottle of wine that costs less than $75. Your sister who constantly surfs Amazon with boxes showing up at the doorstep day and night. Your mom who washes aluminum foil, folds and reuses it. And your stepdad who always insists on buying everything for the grandkids, fixing his own 30-year-old car, and keeping his handwritten savings ledger to the penny.

Everyone has a money style, and it’s helpful to talk about it without any name-calling or labeling involved. Understanding your partner’s spending habits often involves a deep-dive into money fears, scarcity memories and childhood traumas. Empathizing with your partner while freeing yourselves from negative patterns can be done if you work together. The most important thing is to come up with a spending plan that works for both of you, and hold yourselves accountable to work the plan together.

It’s also very important to check any power plays that may be happening at the conscious or subconscious level. The biggest money-earner shouldn’t think they have the largest say or the only right to dictate how the money gets spent; a marriage should be equally balanced. The partner who earns less and the partner who earns more both need to cooperate as a team to create a spending plan that’s fair for both of them.

So, check your ego at the door. It’s true that money is power, and few things build resentment faster than being made to feel inferior. The person earning more should take great care to act with empathy while taking care of their own needs reasonably rather than selfishly.

  1. Decide How to Divvy Up Bills…and Save for Future Goals

There are several ways to pay the bills. You can both put all your earnings in a joint account and pay everything out of that. You can divide bills based on a percentage of your earnings. Or you can split bills down the middle and keep the rest of your own earnings for yourselves.

Once you have decided how the bills get paid, you need to devise a plan for saving for your long-term goals—like purchasing a home or securing your retirement. Remember that you need to work closely together as life changes arise—such as one of you losing a job, cutting back on hours to care for a parent, or one of you becoming disabled. If 2020 has taught us anything, it’s that contingency plans are always advisable. Putting together a financial plan for your future is a great first step toward a financially healthy future.

  1. Create Personal Spending Allowances…That Stay Personal

Having some personal money that’s designated just for you each month can really help how you feel about your relationship. It can also help avoid relationship-ruining behavior like “financial infidelity,” when one spouse hides money or purchases from the other. The personal spending allowance gives each partner the chance to spend their money however they wish, no questions asked—including gifts to each other, a new pair of shoes, or coffee every day on the way to the office. In most cases, the personal monthly spending allowance amount should be equal for both of you so that resentments can’t arise.

  1. Compromise on Spending for Children and Family Members

On average, it costs $233,610 to raise a child to age 18, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That doesn’t include expenses for grown children, helping them with the purchase of cars or homes, or funding other (expensive) needs that might arise for them.

Furthermore, spending related to the extended family on both sides can also be tricky, especially as your expectations can be very different from your spouse’s when it comes to helping family members out or getting involved with costly family vacations or activities.

Addressing these discretionary expenses and agreeing on them before to committing to children or other family members is critical.

  1. Face and Eliminate Undesirable Debt

Some debt may be necessary or even advisable depending on your tax situation, for instance, some people need or want a mortgage interest write-off. Other debt should be paid off following a plan that you both agree upon—be it credit card, car loan or student loan debt.

In most states, debts brought into a marriage stay with the person who incurred them and are not extended to a spouse, but debts incurred together after marriage are owed by both spouses. Debts incurred individually married are still owed by the individual, with the exception of child care, housing, and food, which are all considered joint debt no matter what.

There are nine states where all debts (and property) are shared after marriage regardless of individual or joint account status. These states include Arizona, California, Nevada, Idaho, Washington, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, and Wisconsin. In these states you are not liable for most of your spouse’s debt that was incurred before marriage, but any debt incurred after the wedding is automatically shared—even when applied for individually.

Both partners should have an honest discussion about curtailing bad spending or financial habits. Couples should also employ a strategy to pay off debt—such as paying off the higher-interest debt first or paying off the smallest loans first (the snowball method).

  1. Set a Budget You Can Both Live With

One of the best ways to keep in sync with your partner when it comes to finances is to have a budget as part of your overall financial plan. The budget includes your household bills, your personal spending allowance, your debt-paying strategy, and your monthly budget for long-term goals like retirement.

  1. Communicate Honestly

Lack of communication is the source of many marital issues, and talking regularly, honestly, and without judgment is where the hard work of marriage comes in. Some couples may even find it helpful to actually schedule a time once a month or once a quarter to revisit short- and long-term goals with each other, and meet at least once a year to discuss objectives with their financial advisor.

Don’t talk about things when you’re tired, angry or have had too much to drink—organize and adhere to clearheaded discussions for success. Honest communication can help you both face and conquer the financial challenges of life, changing course and adjusting along the way.

 

If you have any questions, or would like to review your finances together as a couple, call us! You can reach Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

 

Sources:

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/09/marriage-killing-money-issues.asp

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2017/01/13/cost-raising-child

https://www.kiplinger.com/personal-finance/602036/a-marriage-starter-plan-for-finances-even-if-youre-late-to-the-party

https://www.marriage.com/advice/finance/how-to-overcome-financial-conflict/#:~:text=Married%20couples%20fighting%20over%20financial,couples%20fail%20to%20do%20so.

5 Highlights of the New Stimulus Package

 

 

What the latest round of funding may mean for you.

 

The $900 billion Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (2021 CAA) was signed into law by President Trump on December 28th as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact employers and employees. The new package resembles March’s $2.2 trillion CARES Act, but will only be $920 billion, with roughly half of that—$429 billion—being paid for with unspent CARES funds.

Here’s a quick recap of five key highlights:

 

  1. Stimulus Checks

The new law authorized a second round of $600 checks for people with income that meets the criteria. The checks start to phase out for individuals who earned at least $75,000 in 2019 and $150,000 for married, joint filers.

Each dependent child under age 17 is also eligible for the $600 stimulus payment to the taxpayer claiming them on their taxes. But just like the CARES Act, adult dependents are left out—such as college students and disabled adults—amounting to an estimated 15 million people.

 

  1. Unemployment Benefits

The law provides up to $300 per week in federal benefits on top of state benefits through March 2021. The enhanced benefits also extend to self-employed individuals and gig workers.

An additional $13 billion has been put into SNAP benefits and food banks, among other programs, during one of the biggest hunger crises the U.S. has seen in years.

 

  1. Student Loan Repayment

The 2021 CAA extends the CARES Act provision that allows employers to repay up to $5,250 annually towards an employee’s student loan payments. The payments are tax-free to the employee. There is no data yet about how many employers have actually implemented this benefit.

 

  1. Small Businesses

The 50% limit on the deduction for business meals has been lifted. Business meal expenses after December 31, 2020, and before January 1, 2023, may now be fully deductible. Please consult your tax, legal, or accounting professional for more specific information regarding this provision.

 

  1. PPP Loans

The new law contains $284 billion in relief for a second round of Payment Protection Program loan funding, with some loans eligible for forgiveness. Businesses with 300 or fewer employees may be eligible for a second loan. “Second-draw” loans are available through March 31, 2021.

The bill also includes $20 billion in grants for companies in low-income areas and money set aside for loans from community-based and minority-owned lenders.

 

 

###

 

This article is as accurate as our research sources (below), but it is to be used for informational purposes only and is not intended as financial advice. Consult with your tax, legal and accounting professionals before taking any action based on this information.

Like with any new legislation, as 2021 gets underway expect additional guidance from regulators on 2021 CAA. Our office will keep an eye out for updates and pass information as it becomes available.

Call us if you have any questions, call Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

 

 

 

Sources:

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/12/31/covid-stimulus-how-compares-other-coronavirus-aid/3922144001/

https://www.forbes.com/advisor/personal-finance/do-adult-dependents-get-the-second-stimulus-check

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/stimulus-checks-unemployment-aid-and-more-in-900-billion-coronavirus-relief-plan.html

Your Annual Financial To-Do List

Things you can do for your future as the year unfolds.

What financial, business, or life priorities do you need to address for the coming year? Now is an excellent time to think about the investing, saving, or budgeting methods you could employ toward specific objectives, from building your retirement fund to managing your taxes. You have plenty of choices. Here are a few ideas to consider:

 

Can you contribute more to your retirement plans this year? In 2021, the contribution limit for a Roth or traditional individual retirement account (IRA) is expected to remain at $6,000 ($7,000 for those making “catch-up” contributions). Your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) may affect how much you can put into a Roth IRA. With a traditional IRA, you can contribute if you (or your spouse if filing jointly) have taxable compensation, but income limits are one factor in determining whether the contribution is tax-deductible.

Remember, withdrawals from traditional IRAs are taxed as ordinary income, and if taken before age 59½, may be subject to a 10% federal income tax penalty starting again in 2021 because the CARES Act ends December 31, 2020. Roth IRA distributions must meet a five-year holding requirement and occur after age 59½ to qualify for tax-exempt and penalty-free withdrawal. Tax-free and penalty-free withdrawals from Roth IRAs can also be taken under certain other circumstances, such as a result of the owner’s death.

Keep in mind, this article is for informational purposes only, and not a replacement for real-life advice. Also, tax rules are constantly changing, and there is no guarantee that the tax landscape will remain the same in years ahead.

 

Make a charitable gift. You can claim the deduction on your tax return, provided you follow the Internal Review Service (I.R.S.) guidelines and itemize your deductions with Schedule A. The paper trail is important here. If you give cash, you should consider documenting it. Some contributions can be demonstrated by a bank record, payroll deduction record, credit card statement, or written communication from the charity with the date and amount. Incidentally, the I.R.S. does not equate a pledge with a donation. If you pledge $2,000 to a charity this year but only end up gifting $500, you can only deduct $500.  You must write the check or make the gift using a credit card by the end of December.

These are hypothetical examples and are not a replacement for real-life advice. Make certain to consult your tax, legal, or accounting professional before modifying your record-keeping approach or your strategy for making charitable gifts.

 

See if you can take a home office deduction for your small business. If you are a small-business owner, you may want to investigate this. You may be able to write off expenses linked to the portion of your home used to conduct your business. Using your home office as a business expense involves a complex set of tax rules and regulations. Before moving forward, consider working with a professional who is familiar with home-based businesses.

  

Open an HSA. A Health Savings Account (HSA) works a bit like your workplace retirement account. There are also some HSA rules and limitations to consider. You are limited to a $3,600 contribution for 2021 if you are single; $7,200 if you have a spouse or family. Those limits jump by a $1,000 “catch-up” limit for each person in the household over age 55.

If you spend your HSA funds for non-medical expenses before age 65, you may be required to pay ordinary income tax as well as a 20% penalty. After age 65, you may be required to pay ordinary income taxes on HSA funds used for nonmedical expenses. HSA contributions are exempt from federal income tax; however, they are not exempt from state taxes in certain states.

 

Review your withholding status. Should it be adjusted due to any of the following factors?

* You tend to pay the federal or state government at the end of each year.

* You tend to get a federal tax refund each year.

* You recently married or divorced.

* You have a new job, and your earnings have been adjusted.

These are general guidelines and are not a replacement for real-life advice. Make certain to consult your tax, human resources, or accounting professional before modifying your withholding status.

 

Did you get married in 2020? If so, it may be an excellent time to consider reviewing the beneficiaries of your retirement accounts and other assets. The same goes for your insurance coverage. If you are preparing to have a new last name in 2021, you may want to get a new Social Security card. Additionally, retirement accounts may need to be revised or adjusted?

 

Consider the tax impact of any upcoming transactions. Are you planning to sell any real estate this year? Are you starting a business? Might any commissions or bonuses come your way in 2021? Do you anticipate selling an investment that is held outside of a tax-deferred account?

 

If you are retired and in your 70s, remember your RMDs. In other words, Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) from retirement accounts. Under the SECURE ACT, in most circumstances, once you reach age 72, you must begin taking RMDs from most types of these accounts.

 

Vow to focus on your overall health and practice sound financial habits in 2021. And don’t be afraid to ask for help from professionals who understand your individual situation. Give us a call if you would like to discuss. You can reach Integrated Retirement Advisors in Stamford, Connecticut at (203) 322-9122.

 

Sources:

https://thefinancebuff.com/401k-403b-ira-contribution-limits.html

https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/iras/articles/what-is-the-secure-act

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p590b

https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/consumers/2020/11/22/these-tax-laws-charitable-donations-were-changed-help-pandemic/6295115002/

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/tax/09/self-employed-tax-deductions.asp

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/082914/rules-having-health-savings-account-hsa.asp#:~:text=You%20can%20only%20open%20and,as%20a%20catch%2Dup%20contribution.

https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2020/11/29/10-tax-tips-to-take-by-year-end/

 

2021 Limits for IRAs, 401(k)s and More

Numbers to know for the new year.

On October 26, the Treasury Department released the 2021 adjusted figures for retirement account savings. Although these adjustments won’t bring any major changes, there are some minor elements to note.

 

401(k)s. The salary deferral amount for 401(k)s remains the same at $19,500, while the catch-up amount of $6,500 also remains unchanged.

However, the overall limit for these plans will increase from $57,000 to $58,000 in 2021. This limit applies if your employer allows after-tax contributions to your 401(k). It’s an overall cap, including your $19,500 (pretax or Roth in any combination) salary deferrals plus any employer contributions (but not catch-up contributions).

 

Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA). The limit on annual contributions remains at $6,000 for 2021, and the catch-up contribution limit is also unchanged at $1,000. This total includes traditional IRA (pre-tax) and Roth IRA accounts or a combination.

 

Deductible IRA Contributions. Taxpayers can deduct contributions to a traditional IRA if they meet certain conditions. If during the year either the taxpayer or his or her spouse was covered by a retirement plan at work, the deduction may be reduced, or phased out, until it is eliminated, depending on filing status and income.

For single taxpayers covered by a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out range is $66,000 to $76,000, up from $65,000 to $75,000. For married couples filing jointly, where the spouse making the IRA contribution is covered by a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out range is $105,000 to $125,000, up from $104,000 to $124,000.

 

Roth IRAs. Roth IRA account holders will experience some slightly beneficial changes. In 2021, the Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) phase-out range will be $198,000 to $208,000 for couples filing jointly. This will be an increase from the 2020 range of $196,000 to $206,000. For those who file as single or as head of household, the income phase-out range has also increased. The new range for 2021 will be $125,000 to $140,000, up from the current range of $124,000 to $139,000.

 

QLACs. The dollar limit on the amount of your IRA or 401(k) you can invest in a qualified longevity annuity contract is still $135,000 for 2021.

 

Although these modest increases won’t impact many, it’s natural to have questions anytime the financial landscape changes. If you’re curious about any of the above, please call Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

 

Sources:

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/income-ranges-for-determining-ira-eligibility-change-for-2021

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2020/10/26/irs-announces-2021-retirement-plan-contribution-limits-for-401ks-and-more/?sh=5d6a21f215f8

 

10 Reasons You Need a Financial Plan

October is Financial Planning Month which serves as a useful, annual checkpoint to make sure you are on track to meet your financial goals. A written, up-to-date financial plan encompasses not only investments, but risk management solutions, tax reduction strategies and estate planning.

Here are 10 reasons you need a financial plan:

  1. To have one comprehensive document to address your finances.

Financial planning provides one summary location for everything related to your family’s financial life. From your budget, to your savings, to your investments, to your retirement, a financial plan helps you consider your finances in a holistic manner, and gives you one central place to see everything at a glance.

  1. To ensure your investments are in line with your current short- and long-term goals.

A financial plan includes short-term goals like buying a house and long-term goals like saving for retirement, as well as everything in between. As your goals change through time, your financial plan is a living document that should get updated with your advisor on at least an annual basis.

  1. To ensure you’re not spending too much money each month—to have adequate cash flow.

A realistic budget is very important to keeping you on track with your goals. This doesn’t mean you have to deprive yourself of little luxuries—it just means that those are already built into in the plan so you don’t overspend.

  1. To ensure you’re saving enough money, in the right places, including adequate reserves.

As many of us have learned during the pandemic, having adequate emergency funds is important. That amount varies from person to person, and your advisor can help you define the amount you have saved for emergencies, and help you find the right strategies to use so that your savings are liquid and accessible when you need funds.

  1. To ensure your retirement is on track.

Making sure your retirement funds are invested for best performance while matching your risk tolerance and time horizon to retirement is one part of making sure your retirement is on track. Another part is making decisions about your desired retirement lifestyle and the corresponding monthly budget you will need later. These retirement lifestyle decisions can change throughout your working career, but should get more solid as you get from five to 10 years away from retiring.

  1. To put and keep adequate protection in place against risks—like health, disability, accidental death and liability.

Providing for your family’s financial security is an important part of the financial planning process, as is assessing other risks you may face such as liability from lawsuits. Having the proper insurance coverage in place can protect your whole family. And today’s policy designs mean you may be able to cover multiple risks with fewer policies—and may even be able to enjoy “living benefits” while providing death benefit protection for your family members.

  1. To address and have a plan in place for your estate.

Everyone needs an estate plan. A will allows you to spell out your final wishes, such as listing recipients of each of your possessions and designating minor children’s guardians. A trust can bypass probate court, saving money and keeping things private while easily transferring wealth. Health care directives and powers of attorney are critical should you become incapacitated. When creating your estate plan, your ideal team should include an estate attorney, your financial advisor and your tax professional.

  1. To help you manage changes.

A financial plan includes all its various parts and pieces so that you can quickly see what needs updating when life changes happen. Remember, the beneficiaries you list on your individual insurance policies and your retirement accounts (like 401(k)s) take precedence over what is in your estate planning documents. Too many people have had their ex-spouses receive money because they forgot to update all documents properly.

  1. To help you mitigate taxes.

It’s truly not how much you have; it’s how much you get to keep. Tax reduction strategies can help you annually, but your advisor can also help you look further ahead to reduce taxes later, such as during retirement. Remember, all the money you have saved in accounts like 401(k)s are pre-tax dollars—you will have to pay ordinary income tax on that money when you withdraw it, which you have to do starting at age 72. Making a plan for taxation can help.

  1. To help enhance your peace of mind.

Reducing stress and sleeping more soundly may be the best reason of all to have a financial plan in place.

 

If you would like to create, update or review your financial plan, please call Nahum Daniels at Integrated Retirement Advisors at (203) 322-9122.

 

Yes, You Can Lose It All, Even If You’re Wealthy

by M. Nahum Daniels

If you’ve been wondering about the book I wrote, RETIRE RESET!, we are publishing some excerpts right here on our blog so that you can learn more. Along the way, you will learn why our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, was founded: we’re on a mission to help people with retirement!

 

Here are some excerpts from Chapter 6.

Chapter 6: WALL STREET INSECURITIES

       “Unless you have millions and millions and millions … you cannot retire on the investment return on your savings … because there is no return on it.”

       Jeff Gundlach, Bond King & Modern Art Collector, Founder and CIO, DoubleLine Capital

 

I first conferred with Mauricio in 1995, overlooking New York’s Central Park from a Fifth Avenue penthouse filled with modern art. Studying his experience as a do-it-yourself retiree has taught me an invaluable lesson: Even if you enter retirement with many millions, you are always subject to the risks, rules and ratios embedded in modern retirement planning. Should they go misunderstood or ignored, the result can be depletion and austerity—no matter how wealthy you may be starting out. Retirement success, on the other hand, especially if you have only modest wealth, depends on an informed approach to managing your nest egg that properly balances your capital and spending over an open-ended time horizon.

Do you find it hard to believe that even the very rich can run out of money? (Do you find it even harder to be sympathetic?) Allow me to demonstrate the vital lessons worth learning.

Deciding to enter retirement as he turned 65, Mauricio had just completed the sale of a Parisian fashion company he founded, clearing a nest egg of $100 million. Our purpose in meeting that day was to discuss his legacy planning. He faced a 50% estate tax upon his death and was looking for ideas that could mitigate the impact of those levies on his children and grandchildren. As for Mauricio’s income planning, he wasn’t looking for help from me or anyone else. He made it clear that he would consider only US Government bills, notes and bonds.

Mauricio, as it turns out, had serious trust issues. A Holocaust survivor, he spent some of his formative years in Buchenwald, the Nazi slave-labor camp near Weimar, Germany. At age 15, he was one of the prisoners liberated by American troops in April 1945. While maintaining his European connections and building a post-war business there, Mauricio became a proud and grateful American citizen, trusting in the inherent goodness and reliability of US government promises. It was simply unthinkable that the United States of America could ever default. In his mind, government paper was as safe as safe could be, and he viewed it as the key to a “risk-free” retirement that would let him sleep soundly at night while enabling him to live a fulfilling life by day.

And he wasn’t one to fuss. A saver at heart, he’d be happy to buy and hold US notes for their ten-year duration and simply roll them over to new issues when they matured. He would hear of nothing else. Risk was anathema. Professional advice was gratuitous. He would manage his own money by lending it (safely) to the US Treasury.

Besides, in January 1995 savers like Mauricio could still thrive. The risk-free 10-year Treasury note was yielding 7.69%. In theory, it would pay him annual interest of $7,690,000 for ten years without having to dip into principal. What’s more, that yield was tax-advantaged: Interest income on US Government obligations was then (and is still) given preferential tax treatment. He would have to pay about 40% in federal income taxes but would avoid New York state and city taxes that together could have easily added another 10% or so to the burden.

Mauricio estimated that around $4.6 million spendable dollars would enable him to fund his family needs and essential living requirements, his discretionary globetrotting, his passion for modern art and his generous philanthropy. So, he matched his lifestyle to the income his capital would generate. “Living off the interest,” he began his retirement by effectively withdrawing 7.97% from his nest egg. As for his estate-tax obligation, he would simply set up a life insurance trust and be done with it.

Later on, I learned that Mauricio had failed to factor in inflation, which averaged around 3% a year during the decade that followed (and even more in the prices bid for modern art). To keep up with his increasing cost of living he would have to up his annual withdrawal. To avoid dipping into principal, Mauricio faced the sacrifice of reducing his art-buying and charitable giving. He decided to give his lifestyle priority. Luckily, falling Fed interest rates during this period mitigated any capital depletion as he sold some of his bonds into a rising-price market. Still, after ten years, he found that he was left with only $85 million of the $100 million with which he began (Table 2).

When he rolled his portfolio over in 2005, however, 10-year rates on government notes had fallen to 4.16%. Reinvesting his capital at age 75, he would be earning $3.54 million in interest, less than half of what he had started with ten years earlier, and after federal income tax, it would leave just $2 million spendable dollars. Meanwhile, his annual expenses had inflated to over $10 million. Withdrawing $10 million a year from an $85 million nest egg would equate to a 12% annual withdrawal rate. Now 75, he wanted that money to last him another 25 years, just to be safe, and a 12% withdrawal rate would put him at great risk of premature depletion.

Facing the same challenge that can confront every retiree, Mauricio recognized that something had to give—despite the abundance with which he was blessed. He would either have to cut back his lifestyle or tap into principal and risk running out of money. He decided to reduce his annual withdrawal to $6.5 million. His art collecting slowed; his travels became less frequent; his charitable contributions less charitable. Bottom line: He started to feel pinched.

Despite the belt-tightening, at age 85 Mauricio found he only had $42.5 million remaining when the time came to replenish his matured portfolio with newly issued bonds. His luck couldn’t have been worse. It was January 2015 when the ten -year rate hit 1.81% and Mauricio had to face the reality that his remaining principal would generate taxable interest of just $766,000 each year! Still healthy and active, he found himself a victim of his own loss-aversion, severely set back by the Fed’s Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP). His was an almost unbearable dilemma: Accept more austerity by further shrinking his lifestyle, family and charitable giving (and start to sell off his beloved art collection) and still face possible depletion at age 95—and/or chase higher yields by taking on more risk.

TABLE 2. MAURICIO’S SURPRISING RETIREMENT OUTCOME

A Shadow Banking Crisis

Mauricio’s dilemma is the same one that has faced all savers since the Great Recession of 2008 [and we are seeing it again now, during the current 2020 crisis]. Low yields pressure you to turn to a subset of “shadow banks” for greater returns.

Like the big commercial banks, the shadow banks are financial intermediaries. Unlike their commercial counterparts, they are not “cash depository” institutions; they are neither able to borrow from the Fed’s discount window in a crisis nor insure your account for up to $250,000. Some of the shadow banks—the ones of interest to us as investors—specialize in the issuance, custody and trading of non-cash financial instruments known as stocks and bonds. These institutions include the investment banks, broker dealers, money management firms, mutual fund companies and hedge funds that comprise the Wall Street community.

The Wall Street subset of the shadow-banking universe provides no guarantees. On the contrary, like commercial banks they commerce in risk—offering returns arguably great enough to compensate for the possibility of “capital impairment,” i.e., financial losses, temporary or otherwise. The Wall Street shadow banks earn money by exposing your cash to risk and trading their own.

Transforming Savers into Investors: [Stocks and Bonds] 

When buying a bond, you’re lending money to a government or business in return for an interest payment over a given period of time, at the end of which you expect to be fully repaid. Like lending to a bank when you make a deposit, you are giving the borrower the use of your money for a price. Bonds come in a myriad of forms, offering claims against the borrower’s assets in the event of default based on the specific terms of the loan set forth in their respective indentures. If a secured borrower defaults, you may claim against its assets for repayment and you may come before other types of creditors. The less risk incurred in making the loan—i.e., the more credit-worthy the borrower—the lower the interest offered. When held to maturity, the interest payments over time comprise your yield. Their steady cash flow stabilizes their value, so in terms of price, bonds tend to be less volatile than stocks.

Buying a share of stock represents an incident of ownership, or equity, in a business. Stocks have no maturity date; you own them until you decide to sell them. Their payouts come in the form of dividends made at the discretion of management—both in terms of magnitude and periodicity. Some years you may get more, some less, and some none depending on the company’s operating profitability and other financial circumstances.

Among larger, mature dividend-paying US companies, dividends reflect about 50% of annual earnings. Dividend flow as a percent of the share price you paid is a critical component of stock ownership, sometimes amounting to 40% of the total return earned over time. But as an owner, you are taking the risk of total loss in the event of business failure because you are at the bottom of the capital stack, and lenders get paid first. Risk of total loss is balanced by the potential for greater reward in the form of price appreciation.

Company growth tends to be reflected in a rising share price, offering the potential for a gain on the capital you invested in addition to the dividend yield. These two components—dividends and gains—make up the “total return” potential of your invested capital.

Importantly, stocks tend to be much more volatile than bonds in terms of price.

The Wall Street brokerages buy, sell, hold and trade securities (including stocks and bonds) for their customers’ accounts. Wall Street dealers also own stock and bond inventories to facilitate customer transactions and earn proprietary trading returns.

Broker/dealers do both. The money center commercial banks, like Bank of America, have wealth management arms that are their broker/dealer affiliates, like Merrill Lynch.

Like the global economy, the investment business too is always evolving. Traditional stockbrokers can execute customer orders or make recommendations considered suitable based on their knowledge of the client’s risk tolerance, investment objectives and time horizon. Fee-based portfolio managers at mutual fund companies, money management firms, and hedge funds usually require a free hand to buy and sell securities on a client’s behalf, so handing over discretion to the portfolio manager is often mandatory. Commission-based brokers at the big bank “wire houses” and other execution-based brokerage firms typically require a client’s consent to a trade before its execution.

Trading for Trading’s Sake

With or without discretion and whether commission- or fee-based, the buying and selling of securities encapsulates the raison d’être of the Wall Street shadow banks, and securities trading is their lifeblood. But trading for trading’s sake tends to invite speculation and receives criticism from buy-and-hold investors who tend to be more analytical and systematic.

Beginning in the late 1990s, stockbrokers took on the title “financial advisor” when the big wire houses shifted from a commission- to a fee-based revenue model and wanted to exude a more knowledgeable, caring and comprehensive approach to customer service. Fees are a steady income source that levels out brokerage-firm cash flow, so most firms prefer them to the less consistent flow derived from broker commissions.

Trading is a win/lose proposition that pits buyers and sellers against each other, with both sides seeking an advantage. Buyers want to spend less and sellers want to get more for their securities. Traditionally, investment securities are valued—or priced—based on specific free -market fundamentals. For bonds, the key metric is “yield,” or the cash flow they generate. Yield translates into price: the lower the yield an investor is willing to accept, the higher the price that investor is willing to pay for a bond—the standard of “fixed income” investments.

Bonds reflect the forces of supply and demand in capital markets. If borrowing demand is high and money supply is low, the cost of money naturally rises and borrowers offer higher yields in the form of interest on the debt they issue. If money supply is plentiful and loan demand soft, lenders are likely to accept a lower rate for putting their surplus cash to work. In a free market, the forces of supply and demand naturally find equilibrium.

An important concept that retirement investors need to understand is that underlying Wall Street’s advice is a narrative that can give rise to exaggerated expectations and a methodology that can ultimately cause your undoing. Rather than buttressing the retirement process, the conventional principles of diversified investing, applied to retirement portfolios, may actually reduce portfolio reliability. Investing in securities at the wrong times and under adverse conditions can increase the odds that you run out of money; if you do make poorly timed decisions, then protecting yourself and improving your probability of success require you to self-impose austerity from the moment you start spending down.

The Wall Street Retirement Portfolio

The “balanced portfolio,” which can sometimes over-weight stocks and at others over-weight bonds, has become Wall Street’s signature retirement planning product. Applying Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), it diversifies among stocks and bonds along an efficient frontier of return per unit of acceptable risk. A 60-40 stock/bond mix is deemed suitable by regulatory authorities for most individuals with median risk tolerance, so an advisor or firm can rarely be faulted for recommending it, even if an outcome falls into the rare extreme of return distribution. If the S&P 500 Index historically averages 10% growth per year and the UST 10-Year averages 5%, then a 60%/40% stock-bond portfolio can be expected to average 8% going forward, goes the oft-repeated incantation.

While the exact composition of each asset class may differ somewhat from firm to firm, most Wall Street customers end up with remarkably similar “investment policy” portfolios in terms of allocation, downside risk exposure and upside potential.

Projecting future returns based on historical averages is known as “deterministic” modeling. It is a form of linear forecasting wherein expected returns do not vary over time—and that’s its key flaw: the average return is most likely the one return an investor will never receive. Thanks to the increasing availability of computer power, “stochastic” modeling has grown in popularity. Applied to statistical sampling, stochastic modeling incorporates randomness. It has been tailored to retirement planning in the form of Monte Carlo simulations, named by one of its original developers after his favorite pastime—calculating the odds of winning at the casino.

In Monte Carlo computer software, returns and inflation are treated as random variables. Monte Carlo “engines” generate thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of possible combinations that produce a probability analysis, i.e., a statistical range of outcomes reflecting the financial impact of various return sequences. Now the standard retirement “modeling” tool, it perfectly captures the Wall Street approach to securities-based retirement planning by surrendering to uncertainty and accepting the necessity of playing the odds.

Changing the input assumptions and the type of mathematics used in a given Monte Carlo engine can materially alter the results. Critics focus on this subjectivity, which they claim introduces bias into the design. Mathematician and financial advisor James Otar, CFPTM, argues that the methodology tends to overstate the probability of favorable outcomes, giving clients a dangerously ex-aggerated sense of security.

Leading researchers in retirement-income planning have recently published seminal studies that address these issues, with some surprising conclusions. Working together, professors Wade Pfau, PhD and Michael Finke, PhD, of the American College of Financial Planning, along with David Blanchett, CFA, CFP, head of retirement research at Morningstar Investment Management, tested the 4% Rule under historic return assumptions and then under forward-looking assumptions, illustrating the possibility of Shiller CAPE-based lower returns.

The group confirmed that based on historical data (stocks returning 12%, bonds returning 5% and a CAPE ratio of 16), a portfolio allocation to stocks of roughly 15% or more would have likely achieved a 90% probability or better that a portfolio would survive thirty years paying out 4% adjusted for inflation.

But if future expectations are lowered based on current interest rates (bonds at 2.5%) and the reduced stock returns predicted by today’s above-average CAPE ratio—even if lowered only modestly—the odds of success plummet, barely exceeding 50% no matter how high the stock allocation!

This industry-standard Monte Carlo probability analysis conveys a stunning implication: Using forward-looking assumptions, Bengen’s “the more stock the better” equity recommendation for portfolio reliability may be overstated. Given reduced future returns, it may even court disaster, driving the odds of 60/40 portfolio success down to 56%—or little better than a coin toss.

Figure 34. Projected Success Rates

Looking ahead based on lowered return expectations, Blanchett, Finke and Pfau questioned how a 90% (or higher) probability of portfolio success can be sustained. The answer: Only by reducing the [retrirement] withdrawal percentage in inverse ratio to the equity allocation; in other words, the higher the ratio of stock held in a portfolio, the lower the safe withdrawal rate you should use and the less income you should take.

Chapter 6 Takeaways

  1. Investing involves risk, including, in the worst case, a total and permanent loss of your principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Neither asset allocation nor portfolio diversification guarantee profit or protect against loss in a declining market. Bonds are subject to interest rate risks. Bond prices generally fall when interest rates rise.
  2. The projections or other information generated by Monte Carlo analysis tools regarding the likelihood of various investment outcomes are hypothetical in nature. They are based on assumptions that individuals provide, which could prove to be inaccurate over time. Probabilities do not reflect actual investment results and are by no means guarantees of future results. In fact, results may vary with each use and over time.
  3. It is advisable to understand the risks, rules and ratios embedded in the financial dynamics of modern retirement if you want to avoid failure—regardless of how much money you have at the start.
  4. Former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s “new normal” of very low interest rates has turned many yield-starved savers into return-chasing speculators.
  5. Given current market valuations, the Shiller CAPE and other historical market metrics caution that equity returns over the next ten years or more may be lower than long-term averages might lead us to expect.

Questions for your financial advisor

  1. Do you rely on a Monte Carlo “tool” to project the probability of my (our) retirement success, and does that mean you can manipulate its mathematical assumptions to reflect better or worse outcomes?
  2. Do you counsel your clients to trust that the future is going to be rosy, or do you recommend they plan to withstand the worst while hoping for (and positioned to participate in) the best?
  3. If I’m nearing or in retirement, what initial withdrawal percentage would you recommend to set a floor for distributions from my nest egg?
  4. How did the balanced portfolio you’re recommending perform peak to trough, i.e., from October 2007 to March 2009?
  5. If we get a repeat of that performance at any time over the next ten years, what will it mean for my (our) withdrawals and standard of living thereafter?

 

###

If you would like to discuss your personal retirement situation with author Nahum Daniels, please don’t hesitate to call our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, at (203) 322-9122.

If you would like to read RETIRE RESET!, it is available on Amazon at this link: https://amzn.to/2FtIxuM

Banks Making Money—For Banks

by M. Nahum Daniels

If you’ve been wondering about the book I wrote, RETIRE RESET!, we are publishing some excerpts right here on our blog so that you can learn more. Along the way, you will learn why our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, was founded: we’re on a mission to help people with retirement!

Here are some excerpts from Chapter 5.

Chapter 5: THE MONEY MAKERS

In the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), governments and regulators have recognized that banking practices were not incidental to the global crisis that almost crashed the world into an economic depression; the failings of a fragile global banking system were at its heart. Indeed, a more accurate account of events might depict a “Global Banking Crisis.” So, after 2008, managing “systemic” banking risk became the focus, containing it became the goal, and internal compliance departments burgeoned, while equity, fixed income and commodities trading desks shrank. Banking processes and culture came under the spotlight and the picture that emerged wasn’t pretty. Many observers were shocked to learn that high-powered bankers were rigging global financial markets.

Protected and Privileged 

Criticized for brazen self-dealing, elitist privilege and even criminal misconduct, banking culture has come under increasing scrutiny since the Great Financial Crisis. For malfeasance ranging from manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) at which banks lend to each other and to which $800 trillion in global assets are pegged, to price-fixing Credit Default Swaps (CDS), to precious metals and energy trading, dozens of the biggest American and European banks have been fined for restraining competition via secret meetings held by traders to benefit themselves and their institutions.

Years of scandal and allegations of misconduct have taken a serious toll. Battered by an unending barrage of revelations, Americans’ confidence in banks stood at 27% in a June 2016 Gallup Poll, well below the 40% historical average. Whether liberal or conservative, only one in four Americans were willing to say they had “a great deal or quite a lot” of confidence in banks, a level that is unchanged since 2013.

Nevertheless, it’s no exaggeration to say that big banking remains a protected industry and high-powered bankers comprise a privileged elite. Why are we, the people, so forgiving? What exactly do banks contribute to our economy that renders them so essential?

Banks Make Money 

Large banks serve as the repository for the money that greases the wheels of commerce—the wellspring of our prosperity and standard of living—while they manage the global payment system that enables willing buyers and sellers around the world to transact business.

At its core, modern banking is the business of lending. Banks fill the role of financial intermediary between borrowers and savers. From its inception in the Middle Ages to serve the gold trade— storing, lending and issuing banknotes representing deposits held of the precious metal—bank lending was ingeniously built around other people’s money (OPM).

Sound banking practices would have dictated that a banker kept a 100% reserve against demand deposits, holding an ounce of gold in the vault for every one-ounce banknote issued. But bankers realized that they could lend a multiple of all the gold money deposited by their lenders by creating a multiple of banknotes against the same reserves, then keeping 100% of the interest charged on the overage.

US financial history is littered with banks that failed due to a mismatch of fractional reserves to depositor claims when poor judgment and/or bad business conditions caused losses from nonperforming loans. This is what happened during the great banking panics of 1893, 1899 and 1907. And it’s exactly what happened during the Great Depression. The stock bubble collapse in 1929 and ensuing margin calls led to the liquidation of $20 billion of bad bank loans extended during the previous debt bubble, about half of which ($9 billion) was stock market margin loans. This liquidation was followed from 1931 to 1933 by four waves of bank runs.

The Federal Reserve System: America’s Central Bank 

The Federal Reserve System had a far more modest purpose than it does today when it was first launched in 1913. It was originally designed to serve the public interest and maintain financial stability by heading off the recurrent financial panics that a less unified banking system had suffered previously.

Starting in the 1980s, the Fed began to grow into its much larger, current role as accommodating buyer of government debt and comanager of the nation’s economy. It was at this time that deficit spending took off. The Federal Reserve System has since become a principal agent of government; by buying federal debt, it has enabled politicians to spend without taxing. Unlike all other central banks, however, and despite appearances, the Fed is not an agency of government. It is privately owned and operated by its member banks.

The complex product the central banking system offers is credit. Credit is first a measure of worthiness. It is also a byproduct of leverage because it is derived as a multiple of other people’s savings. Above all, credit can be monetized; like currency, it is a form of money that has its own financial reality. Banks turn credit into money by issuing debt. The reality is that banking does not “print” money into being, it “lends” money into being. In an ingenious feat of financial engineering, banks create money when they lend wealth that they themselves have borrowed!

Debt 

For lenders, sound debt is good and the more of it that is outstanding, the better. The good news for lenders is that these are boom times for debt.

Dr. Ben Bernanke was Fed chairman in 2008. His response to the Great Financial Crisis / Great Recession of 2008-09 was three rounds of Quantitative Easing (QE), creating money to buy government and federal housing agency securities for the Fed’s balance sheet, while releasing reserves to member banks at little to no cost. Bernanke admitted that while Quantitative Easing was consistent with Monetarist theory, it was still only “an experiment,” but central banks around the world still followed headlong and did the same.

 

     “Central banks launched the huge social experiment of quantitative easing (QE) with carelessly little thought about the side effects.”

     ~William White, PhD Ex-Chief Economist,

                        Bank for International Settlements

 

Integral to loosening the money supply and making loans cheap, Bernanke initiated ZIRP, the Zero Interest Rate Policy. ZIRP set the interest rates over which the Federal Reserve had control at close to zero.

Unfortunately, these rates also set benchmarks for interest paid on customer deposits, driving rates down to a pittance and crushing your savings’ earning power. The financial fortunes of risk-averse retirees would have to be sacrificed—and their tolerance for risk challenged—for the good of big-time economic actors who could continue to borrow and spend.

The Unintended Consequences for Retirees

It’s critically important to understand how bank policies and actions can adversely affect retirees. Under an economic system fueled by credit, the US and its citizens are indebted like never before. As of 2016, total government and personal debt stood at $33 trillion, most of which was accumulated over the last forty years. In 1980 the debt aggregate was about $3 trillion, of which government debt stood at less than $1 trillion. Today, the US national debt stands at [$22 trillion at the time of this posting] after almost doubling over the last eight years alone. According to the US Department of the Treasury, at the current rate, federal debt could double to $40 trillion by 2030—assuming that trillions in private and government pensions don’t implode and need to be bailed out by the federal government, thereby taking on even more debt in the process.

According to MarketWatch, by the end of 2016 Americans carried more debt (including consumer debt, mortgages, auto loans and student loans) than before the financial crisis. As US incomes have remained stagnant for decades, we’ve substituted debt for earnings in what some have come to call “debt-serfdom.”

How might all this debt affect you? First, you may carry mortgage or educational debt (your children’s or grandchildren’s) and/or consumer obligations into retirement. Second, you may have to contend with a significant rise in the real cost of living during your retirement years, an inevitable byproduct of the Federal Reserve’s tireless money creation. Third, as a saver, the Fed’s zero-rate policy will challenge you to earn a safe return on your cash. Finally, as an investor, you may face decades of low returns—nominal and real— driven by slow growth in the underlying economy and exacerbated by a little-understood process known as “financial repression.”

The bottom line? Investors need to recognize the potential risks imposed by a banking culture that serves its own purposes, but that is not particularly focused on the needs or future wellbeing of America’s retirees.

Chapter 5 Takeaways 

  1. In today’s financial world, bankers serve government borrowers, with both borrower and lender believing that national economic wellbeing depends on their collaborative market interventions.
  2. As credit-issuers, the banks serve as intermediaries that leverage fractional reserves to stimulate economic activity by literally creating money through the lending process itself.
  3. The Federal Reserve System, our “central bank,” was established in 1913 to mitigate liquidity pressure on banks. After 10,000 banks still failed during the early phase of the Great Depression, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was introduced to serve as an additional layer of depositor protection to tamp down the public’s tendency to panic.
  4. Some of the unintended consequences of modern banking practices include wealth inequality, monetary inflation, excessive debt burdens on households and governments and manipulated rates that favor borrowers at the expense of savers.
  5. While the Fed sees its mandate today as protecting the international strength of the US dollar and interacting with our economy to help it achieve full employment and broad-based prosperity, our banking system does not shoulder a specific mandate to provide financial security to America’s retirees and, in fact, some of its actions may actually prove inimical.

###

If you would like to discuss your personal retirement situation with author Nahum Daniels, please don’t hesitate to call our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, at (203) 322-9122.

If you would like to read RETIRE RESET!, it is available on Amazon at this link: https://amzn.to/2FtIxuM

 

The Perils of a Volatile Stock Market

 

                      The emotions of investing have destroyed far more potential investment return than the economics of investing have ever dreamed of destroying.

                          ~John Bogle Founder, Vanguard Group

 

If you’ve been wondering about the book I wrote, RETIRE RESET!, we are publishing some excerpts right here on our blog so that you can learn more. Along the way, you will learn why our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, was founded: we’re on a mission to help people with retirement!

Here are some excerpts from Chapter 4.

Chapter 4: MINDING YOUR BEHAVIOR

My first stock market crash began at the opening bell. Recently minted, I was a “financial advisor” for just over a year when Black Monday unfolded. What a day October 19, 1987 proved to be. Starting in Hong Kong and blowing through Europe, a chain reaction of market distress sent world stock exchanges plummeting in a matter of hours. As described by Donald Bernhardt and Marshall Eckblad in their report to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, there was no sanctuary. In the United States, the DJIA dropped 22.6% in one day’s trading, and over three consecutive trading days back then, the S&P 500 lost a combined 28.5% of its value.

I took calls that day from panicked investors who were in the process of moving their pension assets to my supervision. Unable to get through to their brokers with sell orders, they were seeking my assurance that all would not be lost forever. Of course, even if their brokers had taken their calls, the sheer number of sell orders that day vastly outnumbered buy offers anywhere near previous prices. That lack of liquidity—i.e., the absence of buyers—in the face of panic selling is what gave rise to the downward cascade in stock markets in the first place.

This crash was different because it was truly a global event. For the first time, it brought home to American investors—including many baby boomers entering their prime earning years and just starting to invest—the interconnected nature of markets around the world. Donald Marron, chairman of Paine Webber, a prominent investment firm at the time, underscored the new reality: “Nowhere is that (inter-relatedness) exemplified more than people staying up all night to watch the Japanese market to get a feeling for what might happen in the next session of the New York market.”

In retrospect, there was no need for panic. In fact, according to the follow-up Brady Presidential Task Force report, panic selling was estimated to have needlessly cost investors $1 trillion. But in the moment, facing a financial loss of unknown magnitude, fear overtook rational thought, statistical analysis, and probability modeling. Under severe stress, many investors tend to react irrationally—often to their own detriment.

Our Financial Ticks 

Classical economic theory developed in the 18th Century proposed that human beings are rational, marginal-utility-seeking creatures who make financial decisions based on ice-cold calculation. But starting in the 1970s, a more contemporary school of economics emerged, focused on the study of measurable behavior when real people make real financial decisions. Working separately at Chicago, Princeton and UCLA, professors of psychology Richard Thaler, Daniel Kahneman and Shlomo Benarzi inaugurated the field of behavioral finance. Combining finance and behavioral science, its goal was to identify the emotional, psychological, and cognitive factors that shape real-time human financial choices in an effort to improve outcomes.

Kahneman recognized the roles emotion and intuition play in people’s decision making. He proposed a framework of “two minds” to describe the way people make choices: the intuitive mind forms rapid judgments without conscious inputs, and the “reflective mind” is slow, analytical and requires conscious effort. Aware or not of our cognitive biases, we are their prisoners. They’re like ticks. We have no conscious control over them. In fact, they control us.

When it comes to our finances, fear of loss—loss aversion—is said to be at the core of our biases, dominating our decision-making and behavior. Scientific studies have shown that people display a hyper-negative response to potential loss in all its forms. Research conducted at Harvard found that for the average person, losses hurt twice as much as equivalent gains yield pleasure. Researchers at Columbia concluded that retirees are up to five times more sensitive to losses than the average person, so for the people reading this book, losses hurt ten times more than equivalent gains give pleasure!

At the other end of the impulse-spectrum lies greed, the human desire for “more.” In his 2004 Chairman’s Letter, Warren Buffett, considered an investment oracle, advised that “the fact that people will be full of greed, fear or folly is predictable” so if investors insist on trying to time their participation in equities, they “should try to be fearful when others are greedy and greedy only when others are fearful.”

This was Buffett’s acknowledgment that individual investors tend to buy high and sell low precisely because they follow the herd instead of taking a contrarian position. After loss aversion, herding is acknowledged to be the key bias at the root of average investor under-performance. Investors following the herd have historically bought high (out of greed) and sold low (out of fear).

FIGURE 17. THE UPS AND DOWNS OF INVESTOR PSYCHOLOGY HAVE REAL-TIME EFFECTS

Some academics argue that better financial education can enhance investor savvy and strengthen investor resolve to stay invested through market downturns rather than rush for the exits.

Personally, I suffer from a version of what I call “DM Syndrome’—of the magnification variety—and try as I might, I can’t shake it. Black Monday left an indelible mark on me. Knowing that the circuit breakers installed into the stock market’s trading rules after the 1987 crash only limit a one-day index drop to 20%, I ask myself every morning if this might be the day the unforeseeable bears down on us.

Apparently, I am not alone. Writing in the New York Times on Black Monday’s 30th anniversary, Nobel Prize-winning Yale economist Robert Shiller opined that “we are still at risk (of a repeat of the worst day in stock market history)…because fundamentally that market crash was a mass stampede set off through viral contagion…(reflecting) a powerful narrative of impending market decline already embedded in many minds.” In other words, the primary cause of Black Monday, according to Professor Shiller’s research, was not financial or economic in nature. It was a shift in mass psychology fed by rumors gone viral (and that was before we had the Internet to instantly transmit them around the world).

[Recent events in March 2020 have borne this out with the stock market downturn. The coronavirus outbreak is a prime example of a Black Swan—unforeseeable—event that should be mitigated by the retirement portfolio’s design.]

Unlike in 1987, today I am prepared. And I believe my clients are also better prepared to weather market uncertainty, extreme volatility and even a sudden shift in mass psychology. Because the FIA anchoring the stable-core portfolio helps insulate investors from market losses, it can obviate panic, mitigate fear, prevent needless selling, and thankfully, help avoid recriminations. Investors in the FIA-anchored stable-core portfolio can stay calm and clear-sighted, their reflective minds in better control over their intuitive urges.

Chapter 4 Takeaways

  1. The school of behavioral finance illuminates the complex inner workings of our minds when it comes to managing our money under both normal and stressful conditions.
  2. Individuals’ decision-making is influenced by built-in behavioral biases that often overwhelm rationality and thereby undermine investment success.
  3. When markets turn back, fear-driven loss aversion can distort rational thinking and test our resolve.
  4. The need for confirmation leads the average investor to buy high, while the dread of bottomless losses induces the average investor to sell low.
  5. According to research firm Dalbar, buying high and selling low is believed to account for the 50% return shortfall suffered by average mutual fund investors when compared to the long-term average performance of the funds themselves.

###

If you would like to discuss your personal retirement situation with author Nahum Daniels, please don’t hesitate to call our firm, Integrated Retirement Advisors, at (203) 322-9122.

If you would like to read RETIRE RESET!, it is available on Amazon at this link: https://amzn.to/2FtIxuM