Dear Liz: Do you have any general advice for choosing a tax preparer? My financial advisor has recommended switching my 403(b) contributions over to Roth 403(b) with the same investment plan. I am worried that this could put us at risk for a higher tax bracket currently.
Q&A
Q&A: A parent had life insurance, but the companies are gone. What to do?
Dear Liz: My mother died last year. I discovered she had two old life insurance policies written by companies that no longer exist. How can I determine which modern insurance company is responsible for policies written by these old companies? How can I submit a claim? My mother was born in 1932. The first policy began 1939 for $350. The second began in 1943 for $600.
Answer: It’s not a given that a modern insurer still has these policies, but it’s possible. You can start by entering the old companies’ names in an internet search engine to see whether new owners are mentioned in the results. If that doesn’t work, contact the insurance department in the state where the old company was headquartered because it will have records of mergers or other changes.
If the company went bankrupt, you’ll need to consult the guaranty association in the state where your mother lived. State guaranty associations protect policyholders when an insurer defaults or becomes insolvent. The National Organization of Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Assns. has a search tool you can use to find the correct association.
Another option is to check the life insurance policy locator service offered by the National Assn. of Insurance Commissioners at https://eapps.naic.org/life-policy-locator/#/welcome. You’ll need to input your mother’s Social Security number as well as her dates of birth and death.
Also check the unclaimed property offices of any states where she lived. You’ll find links at unclaimed.org.
Are two savings accounts safer than one?
Dear Liz: My wife and I will be receiving a sizable amount of money. We want to put the money into a high-yield joint savings account. We don’t want to exceed the FDIC protection. Can we each open joint accounts at the same bank and have each account covered up to the $250,000 limit?
Answer: That’s not quite how it works.
FDIC insurance is per depositor, per ownership category. Ownership categories include single accounts, joint accounts, certain retirement accounts such as IRAs and trust accounts, among others.
A joint account for the two of you would be covered up to $500,000, or $250,000 for each owner. A second joint account at the same bank would not increase your insurance coverage. If you had one joint account plus two single accounts, then your total coverage at the bank would be $1 million ($500,000 for the joint account, plus $250,000 for each individual account).
This assumes none of the accounts has beneficiaries. Naming one or more beneficiaries turns either joint or single accounts into trust accounts, for insurance purposes. Each owner of a trust account is covered up to $250,000 per beneficiary, to a maximum of $1.25 million for five or more beneficiaries.
Is your ex alive? It matters when calculating these Social Security benefits
Dear Liz: You say that people can receive divorced survivor benefits while remarried but only if they married at 60 or later. I am 75 and getting married soon. I hoped to continue to receive my deceased ex-husband’s benefits. We were married for 30 years. When I finally connected with an actual live person in the Social Security office, I was told that is incorrect and I will lose his benefits.
Answer: Social Security rules for spousal and survivor benefits are complicated. Divorce adds another layer of complexity. It’s understandable that many people get confused, but you’d hope the Social Security reps could get this right.
Divorced spousal benefits — the benefits someone gets from an ex’s work record while the ex is still alive — are what end when someone remarries. If your ex is dead and you receive divorced survivor benefits, you can continue receiving those if you remarry at 60 or later.
An aging father chafes at a daughter’s request for financial safeguards
Dear Liz: I am 88. My wife who is 81 has Alzheimer’s but not so bad that we cannot do most things together as before. My younger daughter, an attorney, wants me to sign an agreement that will make it a little more problematic for me to access my substantial financial accounts. She thinks somehow I will get tricked into giving the money to some scam artist. I like the idea of being protected but do not care to have her being able to decide if I can spend my own money as I see fit. She says the document can be deleted by me at any time, but I still feel put upon.
Answer: Take this document to your estate planning attorney for a review. The attorney can help you assess whether this is the best approach or if there are other ways to keep you safe.
If you don’t have an attorney, get one. Estate planning is not a do-it-yourself endeavor when you’re both in your 80s and one of you has dementia.
You’re understandably in a “live for today” mode. You’re focusing, for example, on what you and your wife can still do, rather than on the cognition she’s lost or the losses yet to come. Your daughter’s focus on the future may feel like an imposition, but the reality is that you won’t become less vulnerable to fraud, scams and plain bad decisions as time passes.
Q&A: To lease or to buy a car, that is the question
Dear Liz: You recently answered a question about whether to finance a car purchase. I bought a car in 1963 whose wheels couldn’t stay in alignment. By the time I had driven it 20,000 miles, I was on my third set of new tires. My next car had other repeated problems. Solution? Since then I have always leased and when the lease is up, I buy the car if it has been reliable. By then, the car is cheaper.
Answer: There are at least two ways to view your approach to cars. One is that you found an approach that suits you. The other is that you’ve been overpaying for vehicles for decades based on two long-ago experiences. Meanwhile, car reliability has steadily — and dramatically — improved.
Although there are exceptions, leasing is generally the most expensive way to pay for a car. And buying cars after the lease is over also can be problematic if the buyout price, which typically is set at the beginning of the lease, is higher than the vehicle’s market value.
On the surface, leasing can seem like a good deal. The car’s always under warranty and unlikely to need repairs. Lease payments are often lower than loan payments, since you’re not paying principal. That means you can drive a more expensive car than you could afford if you were paying cash or financing.
But that also means you don’t have any equity in the vehicle. Plus, leasing means you’re paying for cars during their first few years on the road, when they’re rapidly depreciating.
Sometimes manufacturers sweeten lease deals to make them less expensive than an equivalent loan, but usually you’ll pay a lot more over time leasing than you would buying.