Warren Wealth Article Archive

The healthcare reforms may lead to some short-term aid.

Provided by Jacob Warren

Could Medicare soon be in better shape? Maybe. At the start of August, Medicare’s trustees reported to Congress that Medicare should remain financially in the black through 2029, a 12-year improvement over last year’s estimate.1 They credited the healthcare reforms carried out by Congress and the Obama administration, citing greater efficiency that would translate to savings for the program.

However, there is no guarantee that Medicare will get to retain those federal savings, and no certainty that the savings projected by eliminating subsidies paid to private insurers will result.

Additionally, as Concord Coalition executive director Robert Bixby told the Los Angeles Times, “You can’t spend the same money twice.”2 It would seem unwise to use Medicare savings to expand Medicare coverage.

The Medicare trustees claimed that with the projected $192 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage plans, home health care and hospitals across the next ten years, both the 75-year shortfall for its hospital fund and projected costs of the Medicare Supplementary Insurance program will shrink. More alterations will be needed to keep Medicare running in decades to come, the August report notes.1,3

Social Security’s fortunes could be enhanced in 2019. Why 2019? In that year, a new tax is scheduled to kick in for so-called “Cadillac plans” – health insurance packages with annual premiums of $8,000 or more for individuals or $21,000 or more for families. In 2019, insurers offering these plans will have to pay a 40% federal tax for every dollar spent over the $8,000 or $21,000 cutoff.1,4

That tax is projected to give Social Security a bit of relief. In 2010, Social Security is paying out more than it is taking in – and by previous federal estimates, that wasn’t supposed to happen until 2016. According to government forecasts, it can continue using payroll taxes and interest income to cover benefits until 2024.1

The projection that Social Security’s accumulated surplus will run dry in 2037 is unchanged. After 2037 (assuming things don’t change), Social Security’s program revenues would only cover about 75% of its expenses – so payroll taxes would have to increase, or benefits would have to be scaled down.1
Until both programs receive true long-term fixes, we will all have to make do with these short-term encouragements.

Jacob Warren
Warren Wealth Management
2300 Main Street, Suite 947
Kansas City, MO 64108
(816) 286-1810








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the views of Peter Montoya Inc., not the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer, and should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.


Citations
1 - nytimes.com/2010/08/06/health/policy/06medicare.html [8/5/10]
2 - latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-0806-social-security-20100805,0,6306255.story [8/5/10]
3 - csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0322/Health-care-reform-bill-101-What-does-it-mean-for-seniors [3/22/10]
4 - slate.com/id/2232434 [10/14/09]


[Permalink]

It may be better to sell that big home rather than keep it.

Provided by Jacob Warren

You want to retire, and you own a large home that is nearly or fully paid off. The kids are gone, but the upkeep costs haven’t fallen. Should you retire and keep your home? Or sell your home and retire? Maybe it’s time to downsize.

Lower expenses could put more cash in your pocket. If your home isn’t paid off yet, have you considered how much money is going toward the home loan? The typical mortgage payment in the U.S. represents about 30% of gross income and about 50% of after-tax income.1 When you move to a smaller home, your mortgage expenses may diminish and your cash flow may greatly increase – and don’t forget about interest savings over the life of the loan.

You might even be able to buy a smaller home with cash (if finances permit) and cut your tax liability. Optionally, that smaller home could also be in a region with lower income taxes and a lower cost of living.

You could capitalize on some home equity. Why not convert some home equity into retirement income? If you were forced into early retirement by some corporate downsizing, you might have a sudden and pressing need for retirement capital – another reason to sell that home you bought decades ago and head for a smaller one.

The lifestyle reasons to downsize (or not). Maybe your home is too much to keep up, or maybe you don’t want to climb stairs anymore. Maybe a condo or an over-55 community appeals to you. Maybe you want to be where it seldom snows. On the other hand, you may want and need the familiarity of your current home and your immediate neighborhood (not to mention the friends attached).

If you decide to downsize, it may not pay to wait. Anyone who wants to retire in the current economy needs all the financial resources that can be mustered. Of course, the real estate market will eventually improve; it depends on how long you want to wait for improvement. Some people want to retire and then sell their home, but it may be wiser to sell a home and then retire since homes tend to sit on the market these days. If you sell sooner instead of later, you can always rent until you find a smaller house that could save you thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars.

Jacob Warren
Warren Wealth Management
2300 Main Street, Suite 947
Kansas City, MO 64108
(816) 286-1810











-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the views of Peter Montoya Inc., not the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer, and should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.


Citations
1 – investopedia.com/articles/pf/07/downsize.asp [7/2/10]


[Permalink]

What might happen if they went away? The debate is gaining volume.

Provided by Jacob Warren

In July, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said that very few taxpayers would be affected if the landmark tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 expired. “I do not believe it will affect growth,” he calmly commented on ABC’s This Week.1 Many legislators and observers on Wall Street and Main Street are far less calm about their potential end.

Why should they end now? The federal government undeniably needs more revenue to help shrink the deficit, and Geithner feels that letting these tax cuts go would not trigger a double-dip recession, as they affect only 2-3% of U.S. taxpayers.1 However, many Republicans and more than a few Democrats see danger here as the richest Americans are also the most influential in job creation.

Deutsche Bank says “don’t do it”. Analysts at the banking titan recently offered their opinion: letting the Bush tax cuts expire would exert a drag of anywhere from 1.1% to 1.5% on U.S. GDP.2 The analysts warn that letting the tax cuts sunset as the federal stimulus winds down could create an economic scenario in the U.S. akin to the one Japan experienced back in the 1990s.

Grassroots momentum gathering. A new website created by the conservative League of American Voters (ReviewTheTaxCuts.com) is gathering signatures in conjunction with a TV ad campaign starring ex-presidential candidate Fred Thompson. This effort comes on the heels of Rasmussen and Gallup polls showing increased concern about taxes. In a mid-July Rasmussen Reports poll, 68% of Americans surveyed said taxes had become a “very important” issue. In April, 63% of Americans surveyed by Gallup felt their taxes would rise in 2011, the largest percentage to respond this way since 1977.3

A battle this fall in Washington. Republicans on Capitol Hill ardently want the tax breaks to remain in place. Democratic leaders in the Senate are striving to introduce a bill in September that would seek to preserve the cuts for the middle class only. Most Democrats seem to favor letting the tax cuts expire for households earning more than $250,000. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is among the voices contending that they didn’t aid the economy much in the first place. Closer to the White House, Secretary Geithner feels that letting the cuts expire would send a message to the world that America is serious about tackling its deficit.3

This is an election year for many members of Congress, and it wouldn’t be surprising if some seats changed hands as a result of the influence of this issue.

More voices. Former Federal Reserve vice-chairman Alan Blinder favors letting the cuts expire. “We couldn't afford them then (and knew it), and we can't afford them now (and know it),” he recently told the Washington Post. “What might be the argument for retaining the tax cuts even though the long-run budget is deeply in the red? That America needs more income inequality? Seems to me we have enough.”4

MoodysEconomy.com chief economist Mark Zandi calls for moderation. Zandi feels the 2001 and 2003 cuts “should be extended permanently for families with annual incomes of less than $250,000 and should be phased out slowly for those making more than that.”4

If the sun sets on these cuts, taxes revert to pre-2001 levels. EGTRRA gave us six tax brackets (10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%). If EGTRRA went away, so would the 10% tax bracket (the lowest bracket would become 15%) and the 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% rates would be respectively bumped up to 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%. (Households earning more than $379,650 would pay taxes at the 39.6% rate.)5

Then we have capital gains, of course. The ceiling on capital gains tax rates would move back up to 20% if these cuts expired. Additionally, qualified dividends would again be taxed at a taxpayer’s regular rate … which could be as high as 39.6% (see above).5

The death of EGTRRA would also wipe out the child tax credit, restore the “marriage penalty” (married joint filers wouldn’t be able to take 2x the standard deduction allowed for single filers) and bring back the phase-out for the personal exemption and itemized deductions.

There is much to consider. This will, most likely, become one of the hottest issues on Capitol Hill and across the country as we get closer to November.5

Jacob Warren
Warren Wealth Management
2300 Main Street, Suite 947
Kansas City, MO 64108
(816) 286-1810










-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the views of Peter Montoya Inc., not the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer, and should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.


Citations
1 – nytimes.com/2010/07/26/us/politics/26geithner.html [7/26/10]
2 – cnbc.com/id/38467149 [7/29/10]
3 – blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/07/27/tax-cut-debate-grows-louder/[7/27/10]
4 – washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/30/AR2010073004758.html [7/30/10]
5 - forbes.com/2010/07/22/expiring-bush-cuts-affect-personal-finance-taxes.html [7/22/10]


[Permalink]

These two objectives are not mutually exclusive.

Provided by Jacob Warren

It can be done. All across America, families are meeting a mighty financial challenge – the challenge of paying college costs with retirement potentially on the horizon. How do they do it? They go about it consistently; they also get creative.

First, make sure the priorities are in the right order. Strange as it may sound, your retirement may need to take precedence over your child’s college education.

Think about it. Your son or daughter might qualify for student loans or financial aid. By the time they are 30 or 35, they will have the earnings potential to pay those loans back. Do you see any ads out there for “retirement loans” or “retirement aid”? For most, it is much harder to earn money at age 65 than at age 35. Because of this, many choose to allow the younger generation to assume the debt.

The following are some short-term and long-term ideas you may want to consider if you have college costs on your mind:

Save for college the DCA way. While dollar-cost averaging is a useful way to build retirement savings, its merit often goes unrecognized when it comes to saving for higher education. If you could put $40 a month even in a basic savings account with a tiny interest rate, over 10 years that is approaching $5,000. That’s nothing to sneeze at, and will certainly help out. Move the money from a checking account each month into a savings account, or …

Consider a tax-advantaged college savings plan. Contribute to a 529 plan, which features tax-advantaged growth and tax-free withdrawals when the withdrawn funds are used to pay qualified education costs. Not all 529 plans are the same – in fact, some of them will even provide a small cash “match” or “sign-up” bonus when you start your plan. Some 529 plans are even “prepaid” – that means you may be able to secure future tuition rates at current prices, usually at in-state public colleges. Another advantage of the prepaid plans – they are often guaranteed by the state.1,2

Exploit your credit card. No, don’t pay for college with it … well, at least not directly. Some credit cards give you a cash-back rewards option. You may as well put the rewards toward college. Some of the major banks let you do this and so do online shopping websites such as Upromise.

Keep your income as low as possible in the base income year. That is the calendar year that starts as your child is in the middle of his or her junior year in high school. That is the year when college financial aid departments start to look at a family’s earned and received income. If you can avoid taking capital gains or a distribution from a 401(k) or 403(b) in that year, that will keep your taxable income low. Will Roth IRA conversions raise eyebrows? Yes, they will.

However, don’t stop contributing to your own retirement savings accounts, and feel free to pay off consumer debts with the money from your savings and checking accounts – the assets in these accounts aren’t used in financial aid formulas.1

Let the college know if your financial situation has changed. Has the value of your home fallen? Is your business netting you far less than it once did? Financial aid departments should be willing to review these developments and may be able to adjust aid for your student accordingly.

Make it a family affair. In some cultures, it is common for all members of a family to pitch in on the down payment or mortgage payments for a home. Consider this strategy as your family saves for college. Close friends and family members may be willing (or even excited) to make ongoing contributions to a college savings plan for your child, and/or an annual “birthday” contribution. They may find giving such a gift to be much more meaningful and fulfilling than a mere toy or item of clothing.

In short, hunting for every scholarship or alumni connection you can and finding a great school at a reasonable price – that’s important. But it may be just as useful (if not more) to be both creative and consistent as you save for college. While it has always been a challenge, by putting some thought into it, most families and students can find ways to respond.

Jacob Warren
Warren Wealth Management
2300 Main Street, Suite 947
Kansas City, MO 64108
(816) 286-1810








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the views of Peter Montoya Inc., not the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer, and should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.


Citations
1 – articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/CutCollegeCosts/financial-aid-101-how-to-get-more-cash.aspx [7/16/10]
2 - money.usnews.com/money/blogs/On-Retirement/2010/07/23/how-to-pay-for-college-without-sacrificing-your-retirement [7/23/10]




[Permalink]