November 27, 2017 By

Q&A: Volunteering can fill a void for unhappy retirees

Dear Liz: I was very disappointed in your response to the reader who was unable to cope with unplanned retirement. The reader has sufficient assets but was unable to manage the loss of purpose. This is common, and maintaining purpose is one of the most important components of a healthy retirement.

You did not mention volunteer work as an option, and that is a shame. There are hundreds of organizations that need volunteers of all skill levels, and they come in every shape and size you can imagine.

There are social services, cultural, civic, social justice, child development, healthcare and senior organizations that exist only because of their volunteers. You can volunteer long term or short term, or even on occasion.

I have just spent the last five months running a series of events connecting retirees to organizations who need volunteers. My own retirement will be completely focused on doing all of the volunteer work I did not have time for while working.

Retirement is an excellent time to make your contribution to the community that helped you along the way.

Answer: Several people wrote in to suggest volunteering was the answer to the reader’s unhappiness with an involuntary retirement. Volunteering may indeed fill her time, but her point was that she found fulfillment in paid work. She rightly warned others that they need to think through what they might lose by retiring too early.

People may get more than paychecks for their labor. They can get recognition, respect, a feeling of achievement and a sense of mission. What they do may be a significant part of who they are — perhaps far more than they realize.

If they give that up without sufficient thought and planning, they may feel as if they’ve gone from a “somebody” to a “nobody” overnight. That can be a terribly hard adjustment that volunteering may not alleviate. Here’s another perspective:

Dear Liz: Your recent writing about considering when to retire and the dangers of a too-early retirement rings a big bell.

I am a psychotherapist who has worked with a number of people who were either considering retirement or who took early retirement. For those who took early retirement, the emotional problems associated with the large amount of both time and space in their lives after retirement, which they never fully considered, have been very surprising and upsetting for them.

To those working every day at jobs they don’t love, retirement seems like a great thing. But the reality of an open, unstructured life can present an array of problems — financial, relational and emotional — for the newly retired.

People should think about this decision carefully because it is hard to re-create a steady job. Or, even better, have a long hard conversation about it with someone close to you or a specialist like me.

Answer: Excellent advice. In addition to traditional therapists, there is a growing field of professionals who combine financial advice with psychological counseling. People can get referrals from the Financial Therapy Assn. at www.financialtherapyassociation.org.

Filed Under: Q&A, Retirement Tagged With: , , ,
November 20, 2017 By

Q&A: How to figure out the right time for retirement

Dear Liz: I hear so much talk about waiting to collect Social Security. What are good reasons to start collecting Social Security at age 62? I recently retired from the military with a monthly retirement of $4,400. I plan to work a civilian job until I’m 62 (eight more years).

I’m in fairly good health now, but decades of military service and multiple deployments overseas put a lot of miles on my chassis. I truly hope I do, but I don’t know if I will live until I’m 80 or 90 years old.

Answer: None of us knows how much more time we have on this Earth. The primary reason for delaying Social Security is to decrease the odds of running short of money if we (or our spouses) happen to live a long time.

Think of it as a kind of longevity insurance because the longer you live, the more likely you are to use up your savings and to rely on your Social Security check for most, if not all, of your income. The wealthier you are — in savings and in pensions — the less important it may be to delay Social Security.

Your military pension provides a substantial monthly check and (presumably) survivor benefits for your spouse. These benefits will rise with inflation. You also have retiree health insurance at reasonable rates. You’re better off than most people approaching early retirement.

Still, your pension may not cover all your expenses and it’s not clear how much you have in other savings. Also, consider that your survivor would get about half (or less) of your pension check if you die first. So you may still want to hedge your bets by waiting at least until your full retirement age of 67 to start Social Security.

In addition to increasing your benefit, delaying to that age means you won’t be subject to the earnings test that can reduce your check by $1 for every $2 you earn over a certain limit (currently $17,040). You may think now that you’ll be ready to stop working at 62, but many early retirees find they miss the stimulation and social contact work provides.

Filed Under: Q&A, Retirement Tagged With: , ,
November 20, 2017 By

Q&A: When considering retirement, money isn’t the only factor

Dear Liz: You answer many questions about whether people are ready to retire. But there’s one other thing to consider besides money, and this is more important.

Folks need to seriously ask themselves whether they can handle being retired. I know I can’t stand it.

I have more than enough assets, plus a pension, plus healthcare, plus no debts or bills. I’m young and healthy. But I find happiness in work.

Unfortunately, I had to leave my job owing to conditions outside of my control. I now live in a beautiful house at the beach, with all my money and all the things I like to do — and I’m miserable. I’m looking for a part-time job. I live in a small community and there aren’t many jobs, but I’m hopeful to find one.

Tell your readers that it’s not only the advice of a financial planner, but also some good soul-searching that they’ll need, especially if someone is a manager or a highly educated professional. You can’t just give that up and go from full time to no time. At least work part time before retiring to make sure it’s what you want.

Answer: That’s excellent advice. Not everyone derives meaning and purpose from work, but many do, and an abrupt adjustment can be painful. Good luck in your search for a job that gives you a reason to get up in the morning.

Filed Under: Q&A, Retirement Tagged With: , ,
November 20, 2017 By

Q&A: Government financial help after disaster may come as a loan

Dear Liz: With all the recent hurricanes and other natural disasters, people are being helped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency with money for rentals or home replacements. What repayment does the government expect? Are there taxes owed by the recipients of that money?

Answer: FEMA grants aren’t taxable, but they’re typically not enough to replace a home. FEMA may provide up to $33,000, but the typical grant is much smaller — in the $3,000-to-$8,000 range, according to recent data from the agency.

Most financial assistance after a disaster comes in the form of low-interest loans to renters and homeowners, offered through the Small Business Administration. Recipients are expected to repay those loans.

Filed Under: Q&A, Taxes Tagged With: , , ,
November 19, 2017 By

Q&A: More reasons why adding an adult child to a deed is a bad idea

Dear Liz: I’m an estate planning attorney and I agree with your warning to the couple who wanted to add their daughter to their house deed to avoid probate.

The daughter’s share of the home would lose the step-up in tax basis she would get if she inherited instead, plus there are several other issues. What if the daughter gets sued or has creditor problems? The house could be at risk.

The parents also may not have thought through what might happen if the daughter marries, divorces or dies before they do. A living trust would cost some money to set up but would avoid these problems.

Answer: A revocable transfer-on-death deed is another option for avoiding probate, but a living trust is a more all-encompassing solution that also can help the daughter or another trusted person take over in case of incapacity.

In any case, they should consult an estate planning attorney, who has a far better understanding of what can go wrong after a death and how to prevent those worst-case scenarios.

Filed Under: Estate planning, Inheritance, Q&A, Real Estate Tagged With: , ,
November 19, 2017 By

Q&A: Here’s a way to fight Social Security fraud

Dear Liz: To make us less likely to become victims of fraudulent activity, years ago I froze our credit bureau files. I assume the Social Security Administration could be hacked as well. Can those files be frozen?

Answer: No, but you can create an online account to track and monitor your Social Security records — and it’s probably a good idea to do so. Fraudsters are creating such accounts and using them to divert benefits onto prepaid debit cards. If you created yours first, this fraud will be harder to pull off. If someone has already created an account in your name, you can find out and start the process of taking back your identity. The place to set up your account is www.ssa.gov/myaccount.

Filed Under: Identity Theft, Q&A, Social Security Tagged With: , ,
November 19, 2017 By

Q&A: Don’t jump into early retirement without considering these things

Dear Liz: I am almost 59½. Can I retire at 60½?

I have $570,000 in a 401(k) and $180,000 in an IRA. I owe $253,000 on a condo that would sell for $600,000. I plan to buy a home next year for $400,000 and pay off the mortgage with the proceeds of the condo. Then I would be left with no bills. I will start collecting Social Security at 62 for approximately $1,850 a month.

I had a wonderful job for 23 years but something changed at work and now just going to work is hard on me. Let me know if you think this is doable.

Answer: That depends. How much do you need and want to spend?

Financial planners typically consider a 3% to 5% withdrawal rate as “sustainable.” The rate depends on how long you’re expected to live and your asset allocation, among other factors, but you should err on the conservative side if you expect to retire early.

A 3% initial withdrawal rate would give you $1,875 a month. A higher withdrawal rate could dramatically increase your chances of running short of money later in retirement.

While you might not have a mortgage, you would certainly have other bills, including the cost of healthcare insurance. If your employer is subsidizing your coverage, as many do, you could end up paying a lot more.

And if Congress dismantles or alters the Affordable Care Act, your health insurance could get even more expensive or perhaps hard to find. Your healthcare costs may go down once you qualify for Medicare at age 65, but they certainly won’t go away.

Also consider that taking Social Security retirement early means a smaller check for the rest of your life. If you do run short of money, that check may be your only source of income, and you may curse yourself for locking in the smaller amount.

You certainly shouldn’t bail on your job before you’ve had a fee-only financial planner look at your situation and see if your plans are realistic.

Filed Under: Q&A, Retirement Tagged With: , ,
October 30, 2017 By

Q&A: Saving for retirement can’t wait

Dear Liz: I have a family member who at 57 has no savings, a house whose value is 58% mortgaged and debt from a family member of $180,000.

This person is just starting a new job that will cover expenses with about $1,000 left over each month. The job offers a 401(k) but doesn’t allow contributions until employees have been with the company for eight months.

This person has paid into Social Security so that will be there (hopefully!) at retirement. What would be the best way for this person to start saving toward retirement?

Answer: Your relative shouldn’t wait to be eligible for the 401(k). People 50 and older can contribute up to $6,500 annually to a traditional IRA or a Roth IRA, which is $1,000 more than the usual limit.

If your relative didn’t have a previous job that offered a workplace plan in 2017, then this year’s contributions to a traditional IRA should be deductible.

Next year, when your relative is eligible for the 401(k), the deductibility of contributions will depend on that person’s income. In 2018, deductibility begins to phase out when modified adjusted gross income reaches $63,000 for singles. If IRA contributions aren’t deductible, after-tax Roth contributions typically are a better deal, but the ability to contribute to a Roth begins to phase out for singles at $120,000 in 2018.

Encourage your relative to save and to delay starting Social Security for as long as possible. When Social Security makes up the majority of one’s income in retirement — as it will for your relative — it’s important to maximize that check.

It’s not clear why your relative has been saddled with a family member’s debt, but any retirement plan needs to include options for paying off, settling or even erasing (through bankruptcy) such a substantial amount. Your relative should talk to a credit counselor and a bankruptcy attorney to better understand the options.

Filed Under: Q&A, Retirement, Saving Money Tagged With: , ,
October 30, 2017 By

Q&A: Free credit monitoring won’t prevent identity theft

Dear Liz: I thought I would share some information in light of the Equifax disaster.

Two of my credit card issuers provide free credit monitoring. Capital One scans my TransUnion file and Discover uses Experian. Both send email and text alerts about new activity and a monthly “reassurance” email when no such activity turns up in the previous 30 days.

Along with the credit freeze I placed at Equifax, I feel pretty secure at the moment. I’m sure that other credit card issuers have similar programs in place, and perhaps people should ask their financial institutions if such monitoring is available to them as account holders.

Answer: Free credit monitoring can certainly be helpful, but understand that it can’t prevent identity theft. At best, credit monitoring alerts you after the fact if someone has opened a new account in your name. Only credit freezes at all three bureaus can prevent those accounts from being opened in the first place.

Unfortunately, credit monitoring and freezes can’t help you with the most common type of identity theft, which is account takeover. That’s when someone makes bogus charges to your credit cards or steals money from your bank accounts.

Financial institutions use different types of software to detect fraud, but nothing replaces vigilance on the customer’s part. We should be reviewing transactions on our accounts at least monthly if not weekly. Online access to accounts can help you better monitor what’s going on.

You also can set up alerts that will email or text you if large or unusual transactions happen. (Just beware of a common scam where you’re texted an “alert” that your account has been frozen, along with a link that encourages you to divulge your login information.)

Even if you do everything in your power to avoid identity theft, you still can’t prevent scammers from using your information to file bogus tax returns, get medical care or commit criminal identity theft (by giving your name to the police when they’re arrested, for example). As long as Social Security numbers are used as an all-purpose identifier by businesses and government agencies alike, you can’t make yourself completely secure.

Filed Under: Identity Theft, Q&A Tagged With: , , ,
October 23, 2017 By

Q&A: To give or not to give can be a taxing question

Dear Liz: A good friend who is childless wishes to give his property to my daughter before his death. He has been an informal uncle for the whole 50 years of my daughter’s life, and we are, in effect, his family. However, I am concerned that the gift tax may be more than he bargained for. He is not tax-aware, and earns very little, so his tax knowledge is skimpy. He owns his property outright, however.

I know that someone can give as much as $14,000 without having to file a gift tax return and that there is a “’lifetime exemption” of more than $5 million. If his property is worth, say, $500,000, can he be tax free on a gift of that magnitude by, in effect, using his lifetime exemption?

Answer: Essentially, yes, but he may be creating a tax problem for your daughter.

Gift taxes are not something that most people need to worry about. At most, a gift worth more than $14,000 per recipient would require the giver to file a gift tax return. Gift taxes wouldn’t be owed until the amount given away in excess of that annual exemption limit exceeds the lifetime exemption limit of $5.49 million.

Capital gains taxes are another matter and should always be considered before making gifts. Here’s why.

Your friend has what’s known as a “tax basis” in this property. If he sold it, he typically would owe capital gains taxes on the difference between that basis — usually the purchase price plus the cost of any improvements — and the sale price, minus any selling costs. If he has owned the property a long time and it has appreciated significantly, that could be a big tax bill.

If he gives the property to your daughter while he’s alive, she would receive his tax basis as well. If she inherited the property instead, the tax basis would be updated to the property’s value at the time of your friend’s death. No capital gains taxes would be owed on the appreciation that took place during his lifetime.

There’s something else to consider. If your friend doesn’t make much money, he may not have the savings or insurance he would need to pay for long-term care. The property could be something he could sell or mortgage to cover those costs.

If he gives the property away, he could create problems for himself if he has no other resources. Medicaid is a government program that typically pays such costs for the indigent, but there’s a “look back” period that could delay his eligibility for coverage. The look-back rules impose a penalty for gifts or asset transfers made in the previous five years. He should consult an elder-law attorney before making such a move.

Filed Under: Estate planning, Q&A, Taxes Tagged With: , , ,