Q&A

Q&A: Renovations with high returns

January 12, 2015 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: What renovation projects reap the most return when selling? Replacing windows and carpeting is what I had in mind.

Answer: Remodeling magazine’s latest Cost vs. Value report puts window replacement near the top of renovation projects that pay off, but none of the projects the survey tracked recouped more than they cost.

In 2014, a homeowner could expect to recoup about 79% of the cost of window replacements, assuming the home was sold soon after the improvement. Major kitchen remodels offered a 74% return on a mid-range project that cost about $55,000, or 64% of a high-end project that cost about $110,000. The amount you can expect to recoup usually declines over time as the improvements start to get dated or suffer wear and tear.

The survey doesn’t track projects that are typically considered more maintenance than improvement, such as replacing carpeting or painting. Those projects may, however, get a home sold faster if done just before the house is put up for sale.

Q&A: Terminating private mortgage insurance

January 5, 2015 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I bought my first home about a year ago. Because I had very little money for the down payment, I have to pay private mortgage insurance, which is a whopping $385 each month. My burning question about this is: How can I get rid of it? There must be a way to pay the loan quicker or pay more each month or something to make it go away.

Answer: Mortgage insurance protects the lender in case you default on your loan. Since loans with small down payments have a higher risk of default, mortgage insurance is typically required until your balance falls to 80% of the original value of your home. At that point, you can request in writing that the mortgage insurance be canceled. If you don’t make the request, the lender is still typically required to terminate PMI when your balance reaches 78% of the home’s original value.

To speed that day, you can pay down your principal, but do it the right way. Call your mortgage servicer and ask how to be sure the extra money you submit is reducing your mortgage balance. Otherwise, your extra money may just be applied to the next month’s payment, which won’t help reduce your balance much.

Q&A: Paying a deceased person’s debts

January 5, 2015 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: When I read the letter from the woman about her mother’s debts, it brought back my situation with my brother and mom. My brother was trustee to my mother’s living will and told her she had no money. At 90, she became worried and wanted to cut back on the care she needed. My brother had the same attitude as the woman who wrote you that her mother’s property was not an asset for her to use but something to be hoarded for the heirs.

Answer: That’s not the situation the daughter described. She was asking whether she and her sister were responsible for her mother’s debts. They are not. The mother’s estate would be responsible, and her estate would include her home. If the estate’s assets aren’t sufficient to pay all the bills, however, the creditors wouldn’t be able to come after the daughters. Still, some collection agencies have been known to contact survivors, telling them they have a “moral obligation” to pay the dead person’s debts.

Q&A: Follow up on the Windfall Elimination Provision

January 5, 2015 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: You recently addressed the issue of the Windfall Elimination Provision, which reduces Social Security benefits for people who paid into Social Security but who also get a pension from an employer that does not pay into the system. My wife taught for nearly 40 years. Neither she nor her employer contributed to Social Security. As a result she falls under the WEP. This also, however, affects her spousal benefits under my Social Security record. So, because of the WEP, any spousal benefits she would be entitled to are essentially zeroed out since she receives a pension. If she had never worked (thereby not contributing to Social Security), she would be entitled to her entire spousal benefit. That doesn’t seem reasonable to me.

Answer: What you’re referring to is a different provision, the Government Pension Offset. People who receive a pension from a federal, state or local government job that didn’t pay into Social Security can have their Social Security spousal or survivor benefit wiped out by the GPO. By contrast, the Windfall Elimination Provision typically leaves at least half of the worker’s Social Security benefit intact.

The rationale for the GPO goes like this: Spousal and survivor benefits are considered dependent’s benefits. The law has always required that these benefits be offset dollar for dollar by the amount of the person’s own retirement benefit. So if your wife had earned a $1,000 monthly Social Security benefit based on her own work record but a $500 spousal benefit based on yours, she would not receive both. Her own benefit would completely offset the spousal benefit.

Before the GPO, though, your wife could have received a $1,000 monthly pension from a job that didn’t pay into Social Security plus a spousal or survivor’s benefit from Social Security, leaving her much better off than someone who had paid into the system.

Q&A: The tax implications of downsizing

December 29, 2014 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: My mother just turned 75 and wants to downsize from her four-bedroom house. My father passed away six years ago. She owns her home outright, and at the time of my father’s death the value of the house was estimated at $1.2 million. Right now she has enough income from retirement accounts and investments to live comfortably. She could even buy another smaller property if need be. As the executor of her estate, I’m trying to help her decide what to do with the house. She could let another family member live in it who couldn’t pay rent but could help with upkeep; she could rent it out for market value; or she could sell. We see advantages and disadvantages with all three options. What do you think?

Answer: If she hasn’t already, your mother needs to hire a good estate-planning attorney who can help her evaluate her options. Consulting a fee-only financial planner and a tax pro may be a good idea, as well.

If she sells, your mother could face a sizable capital gains tax depending on where she lives. Federal law allows a certain amount of capital gains on the sale of a primary residence — $250,000 per person — to be excluded from income, but after that, capital gains taxes apply.

The gain would be the difference between the home sale proceeds and your mother’s tax basis in the home. At least half of the home received a “step up” in basis to the then-current market value when your father died. If your mom lives in a community property state, such as California, both halves of the property would have received this step up at his death. Any increase in value since then would be subject to capital gains tax (minus, again, the $250,000 federal exclusion).

There’s another tax issue to consider. If she dies owning this house, her heirs would get a tax basis equal to the property’s value at her death. In other words, regardless of the state where she lives, none of the house’s appreciation during her lifetime would be taxable.

The tax issues alone shouldn’t dictate what your mother does. But she should be aware of them to make an informed decision about what to do next.