Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

q&a

Q&A: Here’s a strategy to avoid going broke in retirement

By

Dear Liz: A lot has been written about how much can safely be withdrawn from a balanced investment portfolio so that it will last a lifetime. A popular strategy is to withdraw a percentage, say 4%, in the first year and then increase that withdrawal each subsequent year by the rate of inflation.

What are your thoughts on an alternate strategy of withdrawing a fixed percentage, say 4%, at the beginning of each year? This has the disadvantage of providing a more variable income stream year to year but has the advantages of simplicity and it can never deplete the portfolio to zero.

Answer: Many retirees would find it hard to cope with incomes that swing wildly from one year to the next. One way to address that volatility is to ensure that retirees have enough guaranteed income — through Social Security, pensions and annuities — to cover their basic, must-have expenses. Retirement plan withdrawals then would provide for their “wants,” such as travel, meals out and so on.

Cutting back on the nice-to-haves isn’t easy, but it’s better than not having enough money to pay the mortgage or buy groceries.

This approach is the core of the “Spend Safely in Retirement Strategy,” created by retirement researchers Wade Pfau, Joe Tomlinson and Steve Vernon with the help of the Society of Actuaries and the Stanford Center on Longevity.

The strategy suggests maximizing Social Security and basing withdrawals on the IRS’ required minimum distribution percentages. Reports detailing the strategy and the research behind it are available on both organizations’ websites, and Vernon’s book “Don’t Go Broke in Retirement” explains the strategy in detail.

Of course, trying to eliminate any possibility of running short means that you may die with a whole lot of unspent money. That may be great news for your heirs, but sad for you if you denied yourself excessively while you were alive. Finding the right balance between security and spending is tough, to say the least.

Q&A: Don’t bother with max credit score

By

Dear Liz: I am seeking your advice on how to maximize my credit score. Recently one of my cards was canceled for non-use, which reduced my available credit to $75,000. I use three other cards in rotation, never use more than 3% of my credit limits and always pay the balances off. I have made a few requests to have my credit limits increased in order to elevate my current 835 FICO score, only to be denied. I want to maintain as high a FICO score as possible (850). In order to do that I need to “play the game” … only I have no idea what the rules are! Could you please help me navigate this?

Answer: There is absolutely no practical benefit to having the highest possible credit score. You’ll get the best rates and terms once your scores are above the mid-700s on a 300-to-850 scale.

Regular readers can recite this next part by heart: Keep in mind that you don’t have one credit score. You have many, and they change all the time.

Even if you did hit 850 with one scoring formula from one credit bureau, you probably wouldn’t keep it for long or achieve the same number with all the other available scores.

You already know the most important credit rules: Use your cards regularly but lightly and pay your balances on time and in full every month. (Credit scoring formulas typically don’t “know” if you’re carrying a balance, so there’s no advantage in doing so.)

If you’re determined to hit 850, however, you could try using even less of your credit limit, applying for a new card to increase your available credit (the initial small ding to your scores would be short-lived) or simply waiting, since often the mere passage of time will add points to your scores.

Q&A: When a lower credit score might not be cause for alarm

By

Dear Liz: I sold my house, paid off my mortgage and then got a new mortgage for another home in 2021. When I applied for the new mortgage, my credit score was 830. After buying the home, my score dropped to the low 700s. It’s gone up only 2 points in seven months. I have no other debt. What’s going on?

Answer: Remember, you don’t have one credit score, you have many. When you applied for a mortgage, you typically would be shown three older-generation FICO scores — one from each of the three major credit bureaus (Equifax, Experian and TransUnion). Your interest rate would have been based on the middle number. If your scores were 840, 830 and 700, for example, your rate would be based on 830. Any score over 740 typically gets the best rate and terms on a mortgage, all else being equal.

The score you’re monitoring now was probably created from a different scoring model. If the score is a FICO score, it probably was created from an updated formula such as FICO 8 or FICO 9. It’s also possible that you’re viewing a VantageScore 3.0 or 4.0. VantageScore is a FICO competitor.

If you’ve been monitoring the same score all along and it actually dropped 100 points since your application, then something else is going on. Please check your credit reports from all three bureaus and look for a skipped payment, a collection or some other serious problem.

Q&A: Where to park cash?

By

Dear Liz: I turned 72 in December and took my first required minimum distribution. With the goal of purchasing property next year, should I put the funds — $6,000 — in my Roth IRA or just put it in my bank savings account? Also, should I convert my traditional IRA to a Roth or just leave it alone?

Answer: To contribute to an IRA or Roth IRA, you must have earned income such as wages, salary or self-employment income. If you don’t have earned income, your contribution would be considered an excess contribution that could incur a 6% penalty for each year the money remained in the account.

You don’t have to be working to convert a traditional IRA to a Roth, but there’s typically not much reason to do so at this point unless you intend the money to go to your heirs and want to pay the income taxes rather than have them do so. Even then, you should run this idea past a tax pro or a financial planner since conversions can create other problems, such as higher Medicare premiums.

Q&A: HELOC situation improves

By

Dear Liz: Your recommendation that a retired couple consider a home equity line of credit to pay for home repairs astonished me. According to news reports, HELOCs are becoming harder and harder to find. Banks that still offer them have gotten stricter. And to suggest a reverse mortgage for a couple who only need $10,000, I think, is not the best option for them.

Answer: Lenders did tighten their requirements for HELOCs after the pandemic began, and some stopped offering them entirely. But the situation is starting to ease, thanks to rising levels of home equity and a generally strong economy.

The original letter writer’s spouse had proposed using a low-rate credit card to pay for a new furnace and water heater. Using a low-rate card isn’t a bad option if the balance can be paid off quickly, but could become expensive otherwise. Low rates are typically teaser rates that expire after a certain period. The couple then could try to roll the balance onto another low-rate card, but there’s no guarantee they would be approved for such a balance transfer or that they would get a large enough credit limit.

You’re quite right that a reverse mortgage wouldn’t be a great solution if the couple needed only $10,000, but the letter writer indicated they had little in savings. A reverse mortgage or line of credit could provide an ongoing source of funds for those with few other options.

Q&A: Social Security and government pensions

By

Dear Liz: You recently mentioned the windfall elimination provision that affects pensions from jobs that don’t pay into Social Security. I’m wondering what those jobs are. Are they just part of the gig economy, or is there some other category of jobs that don’t pay into Social Security?

Answer: Gig economy jobs are supposed to pay into Social Security, just like the vast majority of other occupations. People with gig jobs are often considered to be self-employed, so instead of paying just 6.2% of their gross wages into Social Security like most workers, they also pay the employer’s 6.2%, for a total of 12.4% of their earnings.

Some state and local governments have their own pension systems that don’t require workers to pay into Social Security. People who get pensions from those systems and who also qualify for Social Security benefits from other jobs can be affected by the windfall elimination provision, which can reduce their Social Security benefit. They also can be affected by the government pension offset, which can reduce or even eliminate spousal and survivor benefits from Social Security. Here’s an example:

Dear Liz: I am 59, retired, and receive a pension of approximately $150,000 a year. My husband receives a small pension, about $1,000 a month, and Social Security disability due to a diagnosis of Stage 4 lung cancer. I am the sole financial support of my 88-year-old destitute mother, who requires care that costs approximately $5,000 a month. I retired earlier than anticipated to care for my ailing mother and husband.

Although I worked many years where I paid into Social Security, I knew I would receive only about half of my Social Security check due to the windfall elimination provision that affects pensions received from jobs that didn’t pay into Social Security. What I didn’t know is that when my husband passes, I will receive no survivor benefits from his 41-plus years of paying into the system.

Our entire retirement planning was based on his Social Security combined with my pension. He’s just a few months from passing, and I will not be receiving anything, which will immediately put me in an untenable financial position. How is it that after 30 years of marriage I will receive nothing because I have a pension? This just doesn’t seem right. Do I have any options?

Answer: Your situation shows why it’s so important to get sound advice about Social Security before retiring because many people don’t understand the basics of how benefits work.

Even if you didn’t have a pension, for example, your income would have dropped at your husband’s death. When one spouse dies, one of the couple’s two Social Security benefits goes away and the survivor gets the larger of the two checks the couple received.

Your pension is much, much larger than the maximum you could have received from Social Security in any case. If you can’t get by without your husband’s benefit, consider ways to reduce your expenses. Because your mother is destitute, she may be eligible for Medicaid, the government healthcare program for the poor. Unlike Medicare, Medicaid pays the costs of nursing home and other custodial care expenses. Contact your state Medicaid office for details.