0 comments
05/2 2011

Choosing pension payout? Get expert help

Dear Liz: My husband is planning to retire this summer after 30 years as a teacher. He is 55, I am 56, and I do not plan to retire until I’m 66. He has to choose among several options for his pension: getting the maximum benefit, which ends when he dies; choosing a reduced amount that continues 100% to me when he dies; choosing a less-reduced amount that offers a 50% payment to me when he dies; or a reduced benefit that’s guaranteed to continue a certain number of months if he dies or increases if I die first. We can’t decide what’s best for us. Can you help?

Answer: Not really, but an experienced fee-only financial planner can.

Choosing a pension payout option is tricky, because you’ll be living with the consequences of this decision for the rest of your life. You want to discuss this with a professional who can review your entire financial situation and give you individualized advice. This person should be someone who is committed to putting your interests first, rather than his or her own. You can get referrals to fee-only financial planners from Garrett Planning Network at http://www.garrettplanningnetwork.com.

Posted in Couples & Money, Q&A
0 comments
03/14 2011

When savers marry spenders

Dear Liz: I recently got married and have always had a tight grip on my money. Now, I realize, I sometimes may come off as cheap. However, my husband has quite a different view on how and where money should go. As much as I would like to live “college broke” as long as possible (and I could), my husband has the mentality of, “I work hard for my money so I want to see the fruits of my labor.” How can I find a rational middle ground? We have student loans still and he’s planning to return for one more year of graduate education soon.

Answer: Congratulations. Marrying your financial opposite can be challenging, but it also can help you create a more balanced financial life. Savers can learn how to enjoy life today as well as save for tomorrow, while spenders can learn how budgeting and saving actually free them for a richer life overall.

You’re off to a good start by recognizing that your partner’s perspective is different from, but not worse than, your own. Frugal folks sometimes make the mistake of believing their approach to money is the only right way and insisting their spouses have to shape up, rather than recognizing these issues are subject to discussion and compromise.

Start by talking about retirement — when you’d like to quit work, where you’d like to live, what you’d like to do. Playing around with an online retirement calculator can give you both a better idea of the trade-offs you’ll have to make. An early retirement with lots of travel may require a savings rate that’s greater than he (and perhaps even you) would be willing to sustain. Retiring a bit later and spending somewhat less can lower the savings rate to something more comfortable.

Once you find the middle ground, put your plan into practice. Remember that retirement savings needs to come first, even when you have debts and are saving for other goals. Retirement will be expensive, and a delayed start on saving can cost you dearly.

The exercise of creating a retirement savings plan is good practice for every other discussion you’ll have about money. There are always trade-offs involved, and both halves of a couple need to sign off on a money plan for it to work.

It also can help for each of you to have some “no questions asked” spending money, so you don’t have to discuss and compromise over every dollar you spend. Another helpful idea is the “talk to me” limit in which any purchase over a certain dollar amount requires the consent of the other partner. The amount depends on the details of your finances; try $50 to start.

2 comments
01/24 2011

Credit concerns–or just cold feet?

Dear Liz: A couple of years ago my fiance lost two investment properties due to the housing bust. One house was lost to foreclosure, and the other was sold in a short sale. He has delayed our wedding because of his fear of tax ramifications that would, in his mind, affect my clean record and good credit score. Is he right or is he just delaying our wedding for a bogus reason?

Answer: Let’s be generous and just assume your beloved is a bit misinformed.

Foreclosures and short sales of investment properties can indeed result in tax bills if the proceeds of the sale aren’t enough to cover the mortgage and the resulting deficiency is reported to the IRS. This “forgiven” debt typically would be treated as taxable income to the debtor, unless he or she was insolvent.

But debts incurred before marriage, including tax debts, are the sole responsibility of the person who incurred them. And since there’s no such thing as a “joint” credit report — each person has his or her own — these debts won’t appear on your credit records or affect your credit scores.

That’s not to say pre-marriage debts won’t affect you as a couple, since the money spent on repaying these bills won’t be available for your other, joint goals.

It’s not clear from your question, however, whether he is indeed facing tax bills as a result of losing these properties or simply fears that he might. Another possibility is that he may be sued over any debt that he owes his mortgage lenders. Consultations with a tax professional and perhaps with an attorney familiar with real estate law should help you both get the facts. After that, you jointly can get started on building a plan to deal with his liability, if any.

Of course, if he delays making those appointments, you’ll get a pretty clear answer to your question.

Posted in Couples & Money, Q&A
1 comment
10/11 2010

His, hers or ours? Setting up finances as a couple

<a href=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/trb.latimes/biz;;ptype=s;slug=la-fi-montalk-20101010;rg=ur;ref=latimescom;pos=T;sz=728×90;tile=1;at=Banking;at=CareerandWorkplace;at=Retirement;at=HarrisInteractiveIncorporated;at=Mortgages;u=http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-montalk-20101010,0,3134006.column;ord=98351118?” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow”><img src=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/trb.latimes/biz;;ptype=s;slug=la-fi-montalk-20101010;rg=ur;ref=latimescom;pos=T;dcopt=ist;sz=728×90;tile=1;at=Banking;at=CareerandWorkplace;at=Retirement;at=HarrisInteractiveIncorporated;at=Mortgages;u=http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-montalk-20101010,0,3134006.column;ord=98351118?” width=”728″ height=”90″ border=”0″ alt=”"></a>

Setting up finances as a couple

Many couples have only joint bank accounts, some have only separate accounts and some have a combination. Also, more on paying down a mortgage versus saving for retirement.

By Liz Pulliam Weston Money TalkOctober 10, 2010

la-fi-montalk-20101010

Dear Liz: My husband and I have been happily married for a year but have reached a disagreement on how to handle our finances. I think that we should have a joint bank account only to pay bills, with each of us putting in a percentage of our income into it while retaining separate accounts for everything else. He thinks that we should have just a joint account. I’m the main breadwinner, so it’s primarily my money that would be going into the account, and I’m just not comfortable having only a joint account. While I have no problem spotting my husband for things, I don’t like the idea of his being able to spend my money without my say-so. I’m also concerned that if we share an account we won’t be able to surprise each other as we will both be able to see what purchases have been made. Finally, I’m worried that we will both make plans for the same money and that will cause checks to bounce. What is your advice on how to handle this?

Answer: There’s no one right way to set up your finances as a couple, and it may take some trial and error to figure out what works for you.

Half of married couples have only joint bank accounts, according to a Harris Interactive poll, while 18% have only separate accounts. Twenty-nine percent take a combined approach, with both joint and separate accounts, and 3% have no bank accounts.

Those who decide to hold all their accounts jointly often say it helps them to be on the same page financially and supports the idea that they’re working as a team. Those who opt to keep their finances separate may have suffered through bad financial experiences with partners, including divorce, that makes them wary of mingling money.


Get a daily snapshot of market numbers and trends, delivered right to your mobile phone. Text BUSINESS to 52669.

The joint-plus-separate approach allows for a bit of both worlds: joint handling of bills and other expenses while keeping some money separate for each person to spend as he or she chooses. If you opt for this approach, though, you’ll need to make sure that all the accounts are adequately funded. For example, the joint account will need to have enough money to cover all the bills you’re likely to face, and the separate accounts should have enough for reasonable personal expenses. Being stingy with the grocery money or a lesser-earning partner’s “allowance” shouldn’t be an option.

What may matter more than the configuration of accounts is how you handle spending decisions. Many couples have a “talk to me” amount, which means any purchase above a certain dollar amount must be discussed with and agreed upon by the partner. The limit could be $50, $100, $500 — it depends on the details of your finances.

You’ll also need to discuss how much to allocate for retirement, debt repayment, vacations and other big expenses, since those budget items affect how much is left over for other spending. And if you have a joint account, both of you should have online access so you can check the balance frequently to avoid overdrafts.

With a little experimentation and a lot of communication, you can find a way to handle your finances that works for both of you.

1 comment
01/18 2010

Couples’ big age difference affects retirement planning

Dear Liz: My husband is quite a bit older than I (about 18 years). When we married, we agreed that we should put all our savings into joint funds and into his retirement accounts. Our thought was that since I’m younger, we’d have much earlier access to retirement money by funneling it into his retirement accounts (as opposed to mine), and that it was unfair for me to sock away money that he may never have access to.

Intellectually it feels like the fair way to go, since we both work and are equally responsible for our family’s finances. The money we’ve been putting in his retirement accounts will ultimately belong to both of us. But emotionally, I feel anxious about not having my own accounts. Should I just work this out in therapy (joking) or am I right to be concerned? What would you advise for a couple like us with an age difference?

Answer: You are likely to outlive your husband by at least two decades. Rather than focusing on early access to retirement funds, you should be making sure that money lasts for a lifetime: your lifetime, not just his. By the way, considering your own needs is not unfair — it’s sensible. A loving husband wouldn’t want to leave you old, alone and impoverished.

You may not need a session with a therapist, but you should definitely have a meeting with a fee-only financial planner who can review your situation and make sure the needs of both of you are considered.