Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

q&a

Q&A: How deposit insurance limits work

By

Dear Liz: My parents, who are in their 80s, just moved and are about to sell their former home. Their net gain from the sale will be approximately $400,000. I am advocating they put this money in a high-yield savings account as capital preservation is key. I know an individual account is insured by the FDIC for up to $250,000. But if we set it up so they are joint account holders, would the FDIC insurance limit on that one account rise to $500,000?

Answer: Yes. The FDIC insures up to $250,000 per depositor, per institution and per ownership category. Ownership categories include single accounts, joint accounts, certain retirement accounts such as IRAs, revocable trust accounts and irrevocable trust accounts, among others. Each depositor in a joint savings account is covered up to $250,000, so a couple would have $500,000 of coverage.

Q&A:Getting bum info from Social Security

By

Dear Liz: After taking Social Security early at 62, I have called, written and visited in person asking to have my benefit suspended so it can earn delayed retirement credits. Nothing has worked. Social Security representatives say I cannot change anything after the first 12 months.

I turn 66 this month and wanted to get this done.

Answer: The employees you’re talking to are confusing benefit suspension with application withdrawal.

As you know, Social Security benefits grow by 5% to 8% each year you delay between 62 and 70. Starting early can be an expensive mistake that permanently reduces the amount you receive over your lifetime.

There are two potential ways to fix the mistake. One is a withdrawal, where you rescind your application and pay back the money you’ve received. Withdrawals are a “do over” that resets the clock entirely on your benefit so that it’s as if you never applied. Withdrawals are only allowed in the first 12 months after your application.

A suspension, on the other hand, is when you ask Social Security to halt your benefit so that it can earn delayed retirement credits. You don’t have to pay any money back, but you also don’t get to reset the clock. Instead, the benefit you’re currently receiving is allowed to earn delayed retirement credits. You can only suspend your benefit once you’ve reached full retirement age. If you were born between 1943 and 1954, your full retirement age is 66.

Social Security explains how suspension works online in the retirement section. You might want to print that out and take it with you to the Social Security office. If someone again tries to tell you that suspension isn’t allowed, ask to speak to a manager. This is your right, and it could make a big difference in providing you a more comfortable retirement.

Q&A: Here’s why one donation of $1,000 beats 10 donations of $100

By

Dear Liz: I want to support about 10 charities and nonprofits but have a limited budget of $1,000. I’ve been dividing it among those charities, but would I have a bigger impact contributing the full amount to just one?

Answer: Absolutely, for a number of reasons.

Each charity spends a certain amount to process your donation. The smaller the donation, the more of it is eaten up by these costs. If it costs $5 to process a donation, for example, the costs represent 5% of each $100 donation. If $1,000 went to one charity, just one fee would be incurred and it would represent just 0.5% of the total.

Any donation you give can trigger more appeals from the charity, so you’re potentially incurring 10 times the junk mail.

Wise donors also research charities using services such as GuideStar or Charity Navigator to make sure the bulk of their contributions go to the cause, rather than to executive salaries, fundraising and overhead. Monitoring 10 charities is a lot more work than keeping track of one or two.

You might also consider making monthly contributions, rather than waiting until the end of the year, since that helps charities budget. A direct debit from your checking account is often the best way to set this up, because using a credit card incurs transaction fees that reduce your contribution.

Q&A: Social Security for a child

By

Dear Liz: I will be 65 next year and have an 8-year-old son. I have been told by various people that I can receive an extra Social Security allowance for him until he is 18. These same people also said it would reduce my benefit permanently. Is that correct?

Answer: Yes, plus your benefit would be subject to the Social Security earnings test if you continue to work. The earnings test applies when you start Social Security before your full retirement age, which is 66 and 2 months, and could temporarily reduce or even eliminate your benefit.

The earnings test disappears at full retirement age, which is why it’s usually good to wait until then to apply if you continue to work. Most people benefit from delaying the start of Social Security even longer, but your situation may be one of the exceptions because the child benefit can be a valuable, if temporary, addition to the family finances.

A child can receive up to half the parent’s full retirement benefit, typically until the child turns 18. (Benefits can continue as late as age 19 if the child is still in high school.) The parent must apply for his or her own benefit to trigger a child benefit. Also, there’s a limit to how much a family can receive based on one worker’s earnings record. This family maximum varies but can be from 150% to 180% of the parent’s full benefit amount.

Free Social Security claiming calculators typically aren’t set up to handle the possibility of child benefits, so you may want to use one of the paid versions such as Maximize My Social Security or Social Security Solutions to determine your best course.

Q&A: Rising insurance premiums

By

Dear Liz: I’m an insurance agent specializing in long-term-care policies and just read your advice to the woman who was upset about how much her premiums had risen. Her premiums were $2,400 annually starting when she was 55 but are $4,470 now that she’s 77. First, thank you for noting that these premium increases are because insurance companies didn’t expect people to live so long and nursing home rates to increase so much. Please also tell your reader that, at her age, her premium for the coverage she has now would be well over $12,000! She bought early and she’s definitely getting a ridiculously low premium for the coverage she has. I’m sorry that she’s on a fixed income, but ask her how she’ll pay for a $60,000-per-year stay in a nursing home. If she can’t afford her premium, she should reduce her amount of time covered, not the amount of dollars covered.

Answer: Let’s be clear about who’s at fault here. It’s not the people who bought long-term-care insurance policies and expected them to remain affordable.

Insurers are supposed to be experts at predicting risk, but they made incorrect assumptions about how many people would drop their policies (known as the lapse rate), how many would file claims and how long those claims would last. Insurers also overestimated the returns they could get on their bond investments, which also help determine premiums.

All these stumbles have led to repeated premium increases that have threatened to make coverage unaffordable right when people need their coverage the most.

This woman is well aware of the high costs of long-term care; that’s why she bought the policy in the first place and kept paying it all these years. Her premium might seem “ridiculously low” to you, but anyone with an ounce of empathy could understand that $4,470 is a huge chunk of change for most seniors.

Keeping her coverage means giving up some of the benefits she was promised and had been counting on. Reducing the number of years the policy protects her, for example, could make her premium more affordable but leave her exposed to devastating costs if she needs many years of care.

This is a crappy situation for people who were trying to do the right thing. They don’t deserve to be sneered at for being upset about it.

Q&A: When savings are meager, it might be time to unretire

By

Dear Liz: I’m 67, retired and have $83,000 in a 401(k) that I left with my employer. Should I see a certified financial planner? Based on my current income, I either need a job, or I have to start pulling $10,000 from my 401(k) each year, which will clean out my account in eight years.

Answer: You definitely need a job.

You could burn through your nest egg even faster than you expect if the stock market drops or an unexpected expense crops up. And retirement is loaded with surprise expenses, from healthcare bills to home repairs to long-term care. Even in a best-case scenario, you’re likely to run short of money long before you run out of breath.

A planner could have warned you about this and suggested that a few more years of working, saving and delaying Social Security could have given you a far more comfortable retirement.

It may not be too late.

If you can return to work full-time, you could suspend your Social Security benefit. That would allow it to grow by 8% each year until you turn 70. If you’re married and the higher earner, that also would increase the survivor benefit that one of you will have to live on once the other dies.

Even if you can’t work full time, a part-time job could ease the drain on your 401(k). If you’re a homeowner, you also could consider a reverse mortgage that would allow you to turn your home equity into a lifetime stream of monthly checks, a line of credit or a lump sum.

A fee-only advisor — one who is paid only by clients’ fees, rather than by commission — could help you review your options. The Garrett Planning Network offers referrals to fee-only planners who charge by the hour.

Another option for people on a budget: accredited financial counselors or financial fitness coaches. These folks aren’t certified financial planners, but they can help with budgeting, debt management and retirement planning. You can get referrals from the Assn. for Financial Counseling & Planning Education.