Archive for March, 2005

Q: You had a column last year about what documents to save, and for how long. I put it aside, but now I can’t find it. Would you mail me a copy?

A: Well, no. But with the idea that it’s better to teach a reader to fish than to mail her the fish wrap, here are a few ideas for better managing your paper flow.

The guidelines for keeping and discarding paperwork aren’t all that complex. If it has to do with taxes, you’ll generally want to hang on to it for seven years. The exception is for assets that may incur tax when you sell, such as a home or an investment. In that case, you’ll want to keep the paperwork for as long as you own the asset, plus seven years.

If you make a nondeductible contribution to an individual retirement account or other retirement plan, keep the paperwork indefinitely. You can subtract a portion of those contributions from future withdrawals, which will save on taxes.

If you get a periodic summary of your transactions, you can generally discard the interim paperwork. In other words, you can toss your pay stubs once you’ve checked them against your W-2s, and your automated teller receipts once you’ve compared them against your monthly bank statement.

If you make a big purchase, keep the receipt for as long as you own the item. A receipt can help in the short run, when you need to return an item, and in the long run, by establishing its value for insurance purposes.

Old insurance policies and paperwork can be discarded once they’re replaced with new versions and there’s no longer a possibility of filing a claim.

Most people hang on to way too much paper, fearful that they’ll need it somehow, someday — when actually all it does is add to their clutter.

Professional organizer Debbie Stanley, author of “Organize Your Personal Finances in No Time” (Que, 2004), recommends an annual purge of your paper, and tax season is as good a time as any to tackle that.

Once you’re done, though, consider creating one new file — for helpful newspaper articles. Then you’ll be able to put your hands on the information right when you need it.

Post to Twitter

Q I am 30 years old and have saved $65,000 in my former employer’s 401(k).  I recently switched jobs and am trying to decide where to put this money. I don’t want to roll it over into the new employer’s plan because the investment choices are not as good.  Can I roll it over into an IRA?  Why would I want to do this rather than just leave it with the former employer?

A: First, congratulations on not touching your 401(k) when you left your old employer! More than half of young workers cash out their retirement funds when they change jobs, according to Hewitt Associates research, and the damage to their future retirement security can be severe. Not only do they incur big tax and penalty bills for the early withdrawals, but they lose all the future tax-deferred returns their money could have earned.

If you want more investment choices than your former employer’s plan provides, you might consider rolling the old 401(k) into an IRA. The brokerage where you open the IRA can help handle the details. Another reason people opt for rollovers is for simplification purposes: they may have a number of 401(k) accounts with different employers, and want to consolidate their money in one place. Consolidation makes tracking your money easier and can help you reduce administrative or custodial fees, as well.

Using an IRA rather than a 401(k) has a significant drawback, however: your retirement money may not be as protected if you’re sued or you file for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy reform package just approved by Congress limits the amount in an IRA that can be protected from creditors to $1 million. If you think you’ll save more than that–and given what you’ve accomplished so far, there’s a pretty good chance you will–you might consider leaving your money in a 401(k), which is protected by federal retirement law from creditors.

Post to Twitter

Q: I am a 60-year-old computer programmer who has endured some bumpy years.I have no cash in the bank and no money in retirement funds, which were cashed out along the way. What I do have is debt: credit cards, a mortgage and a small auto payment.

I recently landed a job after a period of unemployment that allows me to start seriously paying off the credit cards, but there is no retirement plan.

I know you have good advice about putting pennies away and over 30 years or so they will become big bucks, but I don’t think I will have 30 years. And so my question is: Is it too late for me?

 

 

A: If your dream is to buy a fancy yacht and sail the world, then, yes, it’s probably too late for you to build a retirement nest egg that would support that lifestyle.

If your dream is simply to retire someday, then it may not be too late, as long as you’re willing to make difficult choices.

As a guidebook, pick up a copy of “Your Money or Your Life” by Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin (Penguin Books, 1999). This book describes the strategies and lifestyles of people who radically altered their ideas about how much money they need to live. Many retired in their 50s, 40s or even younger or at least switched to part-time work they enjoyed.

These are not folks who drive luxury cars or ski Aspen in the high season. Most lead extraordinarily frugal lives. But they’ve unchained themselves from the work-spend cycle that keeps many people stressed and in debt.

You actually have an advantage that younger advocates of this “financial independence” movement lack: You soon will have a guaranteed source of income. The annual statement you should be getting each year from the Social Security Administration will show how much you can expect to get each month if you retire at 62, 65 or 70.

If you can ratchet your expenses down to the smallest amount shown (the benefit at age 62), then conceivably you could retire in two years. More likely, you wouldn’t want to live on quite that little, and will want a few more working years to pay off your debts, build up your funds and increase your future Social Security benefits.

To get to your goal, you will probably need to make drastic changes in how much you spend now as well as in retirement. You may need to move to a cheaper area (again, now or in retirement), and you may have to watch your pennies for as long as you live.

That may sound grim, but lots of people live on small, fixed incomes in retirement and still manage to have happy lives.

As Ralph Warner explains in his book “Get a Life: You Don’t Need a Million to Retire Well” (Nolo Press, 2005), money is only part of the retirement equation: Good health, good relationships and absorbing interests matter too.

Post to Twitter

Q: I’ve been working at cleaning up my credit report, but a collection agency keeps changing the date on my oldest debts so they look more recent than they really are.

These debts are all more than seven years old and should have fallen off my report by now. But they’re still there, depressing my credit score. What can I do?

A: The tactic of changing delinquency dates on old debts is called “re-aging,” and it’s illegal. One collection agency, NCO Group, was recently fined $1.5 million for re-aging accounts; that is the largest civil penalty ever obtained under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Your first step is to write a letter to the credit bureaus that are reporting the inaccurate information. Make it clear that the collection agency has illegally re-aged the accounts and ask that the accounts be deleted from your files. Send this, and all other correspondence about the matter, by certified mail, return receipt requested. You’ll want to keep a good paper trail.

Unfortunately, the bureaus may make only a cursory check with the collection agency, which will probably insist that the information is accurate. You will then need to dispute the accounts directly with the collector, pointing out that re-aging is illegal and insisting that the agency provide the correct delinquency dates to the bureaus.

Debt expert Gerri Detweiler recommends sending copies of your letter to the Federal Trade Commission, your state’s attorney general, your U.S. senators and congressional representative and the Better Business Bureau in the city where the collection agency is located.

The collection agency “may decide they don’t want any more trouble and resolve it for her,” said Detweiler, founder of StopDebtCollectorsCold.com. “If not, she will need an attorney.”

It would be nice if you could solve the problem by paying the old debt. But that probably would make matters worse, because the payment would make the delinquencies look even more recent to the FICO credit scoring formula that most lenders use.

Besides, a collection agency shouldn’t be rewarded for using such sleazy and illegal tactics.

Post to Twitter

Q: You recently wrote that the maximum that could be contributed to an IRA was $4,000. I thought the limit was $3,000, or $3,500 if you are 50 or older. When did the limit change?

A: On Jan. 1. The contribution limit for people under 50 rose to $4,000 this year; people 50 and older may make an additional “catch-up” contribution of $500, for a total of $4,500.

The $4,000 limit is scheduled to remain in effect until 2008, when it will rise to $5,000 annually. The catch-up amount, however, will rise to $1,000 next year. That means in 2006 and 2007, people 50 and older will be able to contribute a total of $5,000 a year.

When the regular limit rises again in 2008, people under 50 will be able to contribute a maximum of $5,000, while those 50 and older can contribute $6,000 annually.

You have until April 15, by the way, to make an IRA contribution for the previous tax year. But you can contribute only the previous year’s limit. So if you’re funding a 2004 IRA, you’re limited to $3,000 (or $3,500 if you’re 50 or older).

Simple it isn’t. But for those who can afford to contribute more, the rising limits offer a great opportunity to put away more tax-deferred dough.

Post to Twitter

Dear Liz: I don’t have a question, but I want to share a personal experience that may help illustrate why people should make an estate plan.

My father died in 1982 and left my mother quite well off. Two years later, my mother remarried, sold the family farm and used the cash to build a nice home in a resort area. Two years after that, she died and my stepfather inherited her entire estate, including the nice new house.

I don’t believe either my father or my mother would have wanted this man to inherit everything instead of their children. I hope my experience may help parents to do much more diligent planning on behalf of their children, and perhaps even help children ask important questions before it’s too late.

A: Your situation is all too common. Although there’s a possibility that your parents ultimately didn’t want you to inherit, the more likely explanation is that they simply put off estate planning.

When you don’t have a will or a living trust, the rules of the state where you die dictate who gets what, and often the surviving spouse gets everything. If that’s not the outcome you want, you need to take steps now to make sure your wishes are honored.

Post to Twitter

 

Q: I have about $14,000 in student loans, all with variable interest rates that are now about 4%. I haven’t been paying any of them because I’ve been in school, but I recently became a part-time student and I received a notice from the lender that I will have to start making payments.

 

As a single mother earning less than $20,000 a year, I barely make enough to raise two children, much less make big payments. Any pointers that you could provide?

 

A: You’ll want to act fast to lock in the low interest rate you currently enjoy. The rate on federal student loans is expected to jump July 1, perhaps by 2 percentage points. That could greatly increase your interest costs over the life of these loans.

 

Right now, you can lock in a payment of about $142 a month. After the rates climb, your payment could be $155. Over the 10-year course of the loan, the difference could cost you about $1,600.

 

In addition, Congress is talking about eliminating the option of fixed-rate consolidation loans. In the future, all student loans may well be variable, and that could expose borrowers to big swings in their payments.

 

Those who act by July 1, however, will still be able to enjoy the benefit of a low-cost, fixed-rate consolidation loan. Consolidating now could help you avoid the expected stampede as borrowers rush to take advantage of this narrowing window of opportunity.

 

Once you’ve locked in your rate, you can explore other options. Lenders offer a variety of payment choices, including plans that are based on your income and others that allow you to defer payments for as long as three years, based on economic hardship. For more information, you can contact the Department of Education at (800) USA- LEARN (872-5327) or by visiting http://www.studentaid.ed.gov .

Post to Twitter