Friday, July 30, 2010

Retirement Plans for Self-employed & Small Business Owners

As many of my new Jacksonville friends are either self-employed or small business owners, setting up a SEP IRA might be a great solution to retirement planning.

The SEP IRA is a retirement plan designed to benefit self-employed individuals and small business owners. Sole proprietorships, S and C corporations, partnerships and LLCs qualify.

In 2010 a SEP IRA has a contribution limit of $49,000. Compare that with the $5000 limit on Roth and Traditional IRAs. Contributions to a SEP IRA are generally 100% tax deductible and investment earnings in a SEP IRA grow taxed deferred. Withdrawals after age 59 1/2 are taxed as ordinary income. Withdrawals prior to age 59 1/2 may incur a 10% IRS penalty as well as income taxes.

A SEP IRA has broad appeal due to its high annual contribution limits, completely discretionary and flexible annual contributions and minimal administration. SEP IRA plans can be established by a one person business or by a business owner with employees. But most frequently a SEP IRA is established by a business owner without employees.

The calculation of how much can be contributed to a SEP IRA is dependent on whether your business is a corporation and you receive a W-2 as compensation or if you are taxed as a sole proprietorship and receive compensation as personal income.

Business owner receives compensation as W-2 income. An S or C corporation, an incorporated partnership or a LLC electing to be taxed as a corporation pays the business owner a W-2 salary. In this situation, the annual SEP IRA contribution can be between 0% to 25% of the owner's W-2 salary up to the SEP IRA contribution limit. SEP IRA contributions are generally 100% tax deductible as a business expense.

Business owner receives compensation as personal income. When a SEP IRA is established for a unincorporated business such as a sole proprietorship, unincorporated partnership or a LLC electing to be taxed as a sole proprietorship, annual contributions are made into your SEP IRA account between 0 to 20% of your net adjusted self employment income (or net adjusted business profits). SEP contributions are flexible and the percentage of contribution can be changed at any time and may be skipped in a bad year. SEP IRA contributions are generally 100% tax deductible from personal income.

A self employed business owner with no full time employees other than a spouse may also want to consider an Individual 401k as well as a SEP IRA.

  • A SEP IRA allows a contribution of up to 20% of net self employment income or 25% of W-2 wages, but an Individual 401k frequently permits a larger contribution at the same income level and may allow a greater contribution. for 2010 Individual 401K contributions are limited to $16,500.
  • Another feature of an Individual 401k versus a SEP IRA is an Individual 401k permits a loan up to 1/2 the value of the account up to a maximum of $50,000.
As always, it is best to discuss these options with your tax professional to determine the most advantageous plan for you.

There doesn't seem to be enough money...

Set flexible financial priorities
By George Mannes, Money Magazine — 07/26/10

You know what your financial priorities are supposed to be:
  • Max out retirement savings.
  • Build a cash cushion for emergencies.
  • Get rid of any credit card debt.
  • Save for your kids' college education.
  • Pay off the mortgage before you retire.
Problem is, for most of us there doesn't seem to be enough money to fully fund all those purposes and put dinner on the table.

Complicating matters are the legitimate demands of everyday existence -- your kid needs a computer, your parents need help with bills, your car needs tires -- as well as your aspirations. In light of all the pressures on your money, it's understandable that you can't always follow the standard advice to the letter.

Balancing reality against the conventional wisdom requires tough choices and compromises, as well as insight into the forces that deter you from hitting your marks. Follow the steps laid out here to set high but achievable goals while giving yourself flexibility to handle the intrusions known as real life.

The starting point for addressing infinite desires with finite funds is knowing what advice you really can't ignore.

Marjorie Fox, a Reston, Va., financial adviser, tells her clients there are three non-negotiables:
  • Contribute enough to a 401(k) to get the employer match (typically a quick 50% to 100% return on your money, depending on your company's plan)
  • Accelerate pay-down on credit card debt so that high finance charges don't drain your resources
  • Work on building adequate emergency savings.
Granted, putting only up to the match in your 401(k) won't get you to Easy Street at age 65. But this bare minimum approach ensures that you will always be saving for retirement -- your most costly goal -- no matter what other forces are at play for your money.

It's no small task ordering the rest of life's priorities. But start by writing down everything you want that requires money you don't have -- anything from retiring at 60 to taking a two-week European vacation.

Next step: Pare it down. Pittsburgh financial planner Kathryn Nusbaum advises pursuing no more than five financial goals at one time; as she says, "once you go beyond that, it's too much to get your head around."

Set your financial priorities. Simply ask yourself which of them you'll regret the most if they don't get completed.

Once you've trimmed your list, decide the amount you'll stash each month. Jill Gianola, a financial planner in Columbus, suggests structuring your savings plan in increments of three to five years. "It isn't instant gratification, but it's see-able," she says. So instead of intimidating yourself with the big number you'll need for retirement, you might aim to have added, say, $50,000 between now and 2015.

Put those savings on autopilot: Have the money automatically transferred each month from checking to dedicated accounts. That way, inertia works in your favor -- you'll have to take action to undo your plan.

No matter how well laid your plans are, you can be sure life will intervene -- probably in the form of family members. You may have imagined a world in which once your kids graduated from college, you were off the hook financially.

And until the day arises when your folks need help, you probably won't have listed "providing parental aid" as one of your long-term goals. But, in fact, nearly a third of affluent older boomers are assisting both their children and aging parents financially, according to the Merrill Lynch Affluent Insights survey. That's not to say that it's always other people who screw up the priorities: Sometimes your own circumstances or desires change.

So what's the solution when something arises that calls your priorities into question? It's to remember that your plan, however firmly set, is also organic. Though you have up to three goals that are non-negotiable, the others are meant to be flexible to the intrusions of real life.

Okay, but what if these exercises make you realize that you can't afford to pay for a home health aide to take care of Dad without doing serious damage to your own retirement plans? Rather than letting guilt subsume you, think about whether you can "massage your goal, and fulfill your need in a more creative way," suggests Nusbaum.

Is there another way to get to the same end result? If the goal is to get Dad the care he needs, you might look into whether he's eligible for government programs that would defray the costs; you might ask siblings to share the burden with you; or you might help him arrange a reverse mortgage.

Alternately, is there another solution that won't cost as much? Return to the story behind whatever it is you want to spend money on, and see if there's a different way to satisfy your motivation. You may also find that a halfway measure will do.

Women in the Workforce - Protecting your Income

While retirement and individual investment plans create future financial security, the engine that drives these is your income.

Your income is your greatest - but most vulnerable - asset. It gives you the security and freedom to plan for the future. Without it, you and your family's way of life, dreams, and aspirations could change dramatically.

The number of working women has grown from 18 million in 1950 to more than 68 million in 2008. Women now play leading careers in law, small business ownership, and technical occupations.

Married women and women who are part of a dual income family are not alone in the work force. Single women, including those with children are also major contributors to the economy. In addition, the number and percentage of families in which a woman is head of the household is also on the rise. In 2006, 14 million families were headed by women.

Presently, women make up almost 50 percent of the labor force. Never before has a woman's ability to work and earn an income been so critical to a family's well-being. But at the same time, statistics show that overall, women face a higher risk of disability than men across all age groups.

  • Do you have enough money in savings to sustain you and your family if you could not work for 2 years, 5 years, Longer?
  • Are you counting on Social Security disability payments? If so, consider this - approximately 70 percent of Social Security Claims filed in 2007 were initially denied. In addition, to qualify for Social Security, your disability must be expected to last for 12 months or end in death, and you must be unable to work in any occupation.
  • Long term disability coverage at work is a good start but workplace disability benefits usually cover just a fraction of your income, and are often taxable.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Is The Stock Market Rigged?

by Stephan Abraham

During the financial crisis that started in 2008 we constantly heard and read about corruption and scandal on Wall Street. We became familiar with terms such as overleveraged, mortgage backed securities, recession and liquidity crisis. There was without a doubt a strong dislike toward Wall Street during those days from Main Street. Many would-be first time investors in the stock market do not believe it is a fair playing field. Likewise, many market veterans have been burned once too many by the greedy few at the expense of the general population.

So investors rightfully wonder whether the stock market is rigged. Technically, the answer is of course, no, the stock market is not rigged but there are some real disadvantages that you will need to overcome to be a successful small investors.

Laws and governing bodies such as Securities and Exchange Commission exist to "level the playing field" for everyday investors. However, there are undeniable advantages money managers on Wall Street have over us: timely access to privileged information, huge amounts of capital, political influence and greater experience. Although intimidating, these apparent disadvantages should not dissuade you from reaching your investment goals. By carefully monitoring your investments and taking risk mitigation steps such as stop losses, as well as keeping informed of general investment themes or trends, you can overcome these imbalances and still be successful in your investing endeavors.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/10/stock-market-rigged.asp

“Why is everyone so interested in mobile? It's a new way of computing...”

“Why is everyone so interested in mobile? It's a new way of computing...” Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google

Within this decade, smartphones will account for most, if not all, of mobile phone sales.

The Gartner research firm predicts that in 2013 smartphone sales will account for 43% of worldwide mobile phone sales, a three-fold increase from 2009. Further, Gartner predicts that in the same time period, smartphone sales in Europe and North America will reach 70% of all mobile phone sales. Smartphone sales are about to reach a breakout phase. In the next three years, smartphones will become prevalent in most developed countries. As prices continue to come down with scale, it is only a matter of time before smartphones replace traditional mobile phones entirely. And since the standard cellular contract is 2 years, after which most people are given incentive to upgrade to a newer device and renew their contract. People will be replacing their mobile phones or smartphones roughly every two years. This considerably faster refresh rate will mean the dynamics of the mobile device market will change very rapidly.

Blackberry, Android, and Apple: Research in Motion was one of the original smartphone pioneers, launching their first smartphone device back in 2002. Much of BlackBerry’s success over the past decade is due to their incorporation of push email service. The combination of the push email service and a full keyboard helped to make the BlackBerry the corporate staple it is today. However, push email service is now standard on all major mobile operating systems. Further, more advanced mobile operating systems have emerged in recent years that are beginning to threaten Research in Motion’s dominance.

When current BlackBerry owners were polled about their next smartphone purchase, 40% of current BlackBerry owners said they would prefer an Apple iPhone as their next device. Further, 30% of BlackBerry owners said they would prefer an Android powered smartphone as their next device. The survey claims a margin of error of +/- 10%, but even those numbers should be alarming to Research in Motion. Unsurprisingly, 90% of current iPhone and Android device owners said they were planning to stick with their current platform. Much of Research in Motion’s future success will be pinned to the BlackBerry 6 mobile operating system. They will need to deliver some very compelling hardware alongside the new mobile operating system to sway current BlackBerry users from switching platforms.

In less than two years, Google’s Android mobile operating system has rocketed to become the only formidable competitor to Apple’s dominance in the market. Google has been developing the Android mobile operating system at a breakneck pace and waging a full-on advertising assault. It is abundantly clear that Google wants Android to be running on any mobile wireless device not manufactured by Apple. By this strategy, Google is positioning itself to become one of the largest players in the mobile operating system space.

Today, Apple is the second largest company in the United States. Only second to ExxonMobil. Much of Apple’s recent success has been fueled by its best-selling product ever, the iPhone. Released in 2007, the iPhone redefined the smartphone and left competitors scrambling to catch-up. In less than four years, the iPhone has turned into Apple’s largest revenue stream. According to Apple’s second quarter earnings release, the iPhone now accounts for over 35% of Apple’s total revenue. The iPhone is the most profitable device that Apple sells.

In the technology space, smartphones, tablets, and mobile computing have the most potential for growth. For someone with a long term perspective and steady nerves, the leading companies in this area could provide significant pay-offs.

Credit to Jason Smyth for his work in this area
www.smythfinancial.com

Disclosure: I hold positions in Apple, Research in Motion and Google

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Stocks have been stuck trading in a narrow range

By Adam Shell, USA TODAY, 28 July 2010

NEW YORK — Range-bound. Directionless. Stuck in a channel.

That's how most Wall Street analysts describe the stock market's pattern the past three months. During that period, stocks have been stuck in a "trading range," a tight price band with a well-defined bottom and top.

Too many mixed messages about the economy, too many upbeat headlines offset by downbeat news, and too many post-financial crisis uncertainties are blamed for stocks' inability to trend strongly in one direction.

The underlying message to buy-and-hold investors? After all the ups and downs, the market will end up at the level at which it started. And your portfolio won't have any profits to show.

Keep a close eye on your account to make sure your money is safe

Some employers steal from 401(k) plans

By Robert Powell, MarketWatch

BOSTON (MarketWatch) -- Most of the time, the money you contribute to your 401(k) ends up in your account. But there are times when it doesn't, as evidenced by a recent flurry of press releases from the U.S. Labor Department's Employee Benefit Security Administration.

Roughly once a week in July alone, some of the 150 million Americans covered by the more than 700,000 employer-sponsored retirement plans received notice that their hard-earned money ended up in the wrong pocket.

To be sure, times are tough for small- and midsized business owners. And now more than ever, these owners, many of whom also serve as the company's retirement plan fiduciary, are caught between a rock and a hard place: Pay the bills or deposit their workers' money into the 401(k) plan. Sometimes, employers make the wrong choice.

But there are things you can do to protect your retirement savings long before your employers end up in a Labor Department press release for the wrong reason.

  • Monitor your account statements to ensure that their contributions are being timely deposited and invested in the right funds. Usually, you can get your account balance on the internet, via an 800 number, and in hard copy once per quarter. Check all three to make sure they are in sync. You should be even more conscientious about those reviews if you have reason to believe that your employer has cash-flow or other financial problems. Your employer is required to deposit your contribution into your account within seven days of the payroll date. If your employer is taking longer than seven days to deposit your funds, and especially if they are taking more than 15 days, you should call the Labor Department immediately. Assuming that your contribution is being made in a timely manner, check the total withheld from your paycheck for a quarter or year against the total of the corresponding statement.
  • Learn what your plan fiduciary's responsibilities are and what recourse you might have if they don't follow the required conduct standards. For instance, "if the plan lost money because of a breach of their duties, fiduciaries would have to restore those losses, or any profits received through their improper actions," the Labor Department said on its website. And if an employer did not forward participants' 401(k) contributions to the plan, they would have to pay back the contributions to the plan as well as any lost earnings, and return any profits they improperly received, according to the Labor Department.
After you call the Labor Department, it will conduct an investigation and, if regulators find that there has been an error or misappropriation it will intervene. In some cases there could be a civil or a criminal action.

Another option if you suspect wrongdoing is to file a lawsuit against your employer. Recently, the Supreme Court clarified that an individual 401(k) participant with a grievance can do so.

At the end of the day, what happens to your 401(k) money is up to you. You are the watchdog. You are your own advocate.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/some-employers-steal-from-401k-plans-2010-07-22

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

When I retire, should leave my money in my company's 401(k) or roll it into an IRA?

By Walter Updegrave,
Money Magazine — 07/20/10

I hate to start with that overused phrase "it depends." But the fact is that the right answer really does hinge on your particular circumstances, not to mention the characteristics of your 401(k) plan.

For example, two factors that can definitely influence your decision to stay or go are your age and how soon you'll dip into your 401(k) stash for living expenses or other needs.

If you're at least 55 when you leave your company, you qualify for an exception from penalties that apply to withdrawals prior to age 59 ½. That means you can pull money from your 401(k) account and pay only income tax on the taxable portion of the withdrawal. By contrast, if you roll your money into an IRA and begin pulling it out, you'll not only owe income tax on withdrawals prior to age 59 ½, but a 10% penalty as well.

So if you're at least 55 but under 59 ½ and you think you'll need access to your 401(k) money over the next few years, you'll probably want to keep at least a portion of your dough in your company plan, at least until you hit 59 ½.

Generally, though, I think most people who are retiring or already retired are probably better off rolling their 401(k) balance into an IRA.

For one thing, if you stay in your 401(k), you're limited to the investment choices within your plan. That may not be so bad if your 401(k) has a broad menu of decent investments that are reasonably priced. But by rolling your savings into an IRA at a mutual fund or brokerage firm, you give yourself access to thousands of different mutual funds, ETFs and other investments.

Not that you need thousands of choices. I think most people are better off keeping things simple and making a diversified portfolio with just a handful of funds. But the point is that by expanding the roster of funds available to you, you may have a better shot at finding low-cost funds. With an IRA rollover you'll likely be able to pick and choose from more index funds and more target-date retirement funds than your 401(k) presently offers.

Another thing you want to consider is how much flexibility you would have for drawing money if you remain in your 401(k). Can you set up a systematic withdraw plan or do you have to put in a separate request each time you need cash? Can you designate which funds draws will come from, or does the plan administrator pro rate the withdrawal amount across your holdings? Does your 401(k) allow for lifetime annuity payments? If so, are the payments competitive with what you can get outside the plan?

Bottom line: before you make a decision, take some time to think about such issues as when you'll need access to your money, how much flexibility you'll have getting to it in your 401(k) vs. an IRA rollover and, of course, how much you'll pay in expenses staying in your plan vs. doing a rollover. I suspect that most people will opt for the IRA, especially if they're 59 ½ or older. But the only way to know which is the better choice is to think it through.

Monday, July 26, 2010

With days left to live, what do you not want to worry about?

A brother's death brings money lessons to life
Commentary: With days left to live, what do you not want to worry about?
By Chuck Jaffe. MarketWatch

DAVIS, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Two years ago, my sister-in-law Eileen went kicking and screaming to meet with lawyers and do some estate planning. There were plans to be made, trusts to be drawn, documents to be written, all focused on some unimaginable, unforeseeable time when she or her husband might be sick, or worse.

She didn't want to think about the possibilities. Planning for things like that only makes them happen. As the comedian Gallagher once put it, "Where there's a will, there's a dead person."

But my big brother Rob was insistent. It came from a family history of heart troubles and weight issues, and from having a pesky younger brother who writes about financial problems and who had seen too many horror stories about what happens when there is no plan.

And so, despite Eileen's objections, they met the lawyers.

Eileen did not find the planning process distasteful. While not pleasant subject matter, it was not morbid. It did not feel like a blessing when it was finished, but neither did it feel like a curse. It was like going for a visit to a doctor or dentist; you'd rather be drinking lemonade on the veranda, but it wasn't a sharp stick in the eye.

And then my brother got ill. On May 31 of this year, he was diagnosed with a condition called primary amyloidosis, a rare, unforgiving, unrelenting disease that attacked him everywhere, determinedly trying to swallow him whole. The disease came out of nowhere, at random; he did nothing to catch it.

While researchers don't know that much about primary amyloidosis, one thing they seem to be sure of is that you don't catch it as a side effect of making an estate plan, drawing up a will or preparing for the one certainty in life, which is that it will someday end.

On July 16, just 47 days after being diagnosed, my brother died. He was 57.

I will miss him more than I can conjure words to describe.

I wrote about him, at his insistence, in late June, because he believed that his story -- and the life lessons it was making so obvious to him -- would be important to others. Less than 10 days before he died, he made me promise that I would write about him again, when his time was up, again because his story would help others.

"We talked about the importance of family and of having the right perspective in that article," he told me, "but people need to know that they can't wait to take care of the important things in their life too. I don't know how many days I've got, but once you think you can count your days, think of how bad it will be on you and your family if you haven't done the hard stuff."
He said things while leaving a blank in some sentences, a space for a number; he told me to fill it in someday. Sadly, I can do that now.

"If you had only [47] days to live, what would you not want to do and not want to worry about?" he asked.

He started to make a list.

You would not want to worry about where Lindsay Lohan is spending her jail time, or how much of it she will actually do. You would not want to read what your horoscope says you should do today. You would not want to drink bad wine or watch bad movies (though he believed there was no such thing as a bad cigar). You would not want to spend time on hold -- for any reason -- waiting to talk to a real person. You would not want to prepare for a tax audit.

But mostly, you would not want to be in a position where you still have to put your affairs in order, where you have to think about every little detail, and wonder about every dollar; where you have to rush into decisions that are filled with the emotion that comes from your own terminal condition and looming deadline.

"People need to understand," he told me, "how big a blessing it is to know -- when their time comes -- that they have everything in order, that they don't need to stress or worry about how things they worked their whole life for are going to turn out. ... I would not want to waste a minute of my life now having to do estate planning or worrying that I live long enough to get documents filed or whatever garbage comes with it."

He was comforted knowing that Eileen didn't have the financial and estate concerns added to her burdens at his time of need.

"Eileen didn't want to go meet the lawyers and set everything up, because it was focusing on death and dying at a time when everything was good and happy," he said. "But focusing on death and dying while you are living, that's easy; having to focus on death when you are dying, that would be unimaginable. ... Tell people not to let that happen."

I'm sure my critics will say Rob, in his own way, was shilling for lawyers, life-insurance agents and financial planers, but nothing could be further from the truth. As the director of the California State Summer School for the Arts, he was an educator and he looked at every challenge as something from which you could learn something. The disease taught him the value of doing estate planning right in a way that normal life never could.

He did worry about his death near the end; together, he and I and his friend Joe wrote his eulogies -- a last gift of love for Eileen, the kids and the family -- and he worried about having the time to say the things he needed to say. Then he went out and said those things. He found the entire passage, from the point where he knew that his condition was terminal to the outpouring of love from friends, family, former students and strangers (including the MarketWatch community), "life-affirming."

That he was able to make that journey without mundane financial worries was a blessing. He hoped that you, too, would have that peace when your time comes.

God bless you, Rob; you were one of a kind.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/brothers-death-brings-money-lessons-to-life-2010-07-22?siteid=nwhpf

Friday, July 23, 2010

Transfer Your Life Insurance and Decrease Your Estate Tax

If you don't own your life insurance policy, it's not part of your taxable estate.

First things first: I fully expect Congress will reinstate the Estate Tax starting in 2011. Once back on the books the estate tax will affect people who die leaving a taxable estate of more than a million dollars.

Now most people laugh when asked if they are aware of Estate Tax considerations. Surely they don't have that kind of money. But you might be surprised what is included...

  • Stocks and bonds
  • Real estate and property
  • Business interests
  • Cash, savings, and checking accounts
  • Annuities
  • Qualified retirement plan accounts such as 401(k)s and profit-sharing plans
  • Life insurance proceeds owned by the deceased

But...a modest estate, seemingly below the taxable minimum of a million dollars can easily leap well past that point in size when insurance policy proceeds are counted.

Note that all property that you leave to your spouse, including insurance proceeds, is not subject to estate taxes when you die. But if you are single or your spouse predeceased you, your life insurance proceeds would be taxed as part of your estate if the beneficiaries of the policy are your children, friends, or relatives.

Whether or not life insurance proceeds are included in the taxable estate depends on who owns the policy when the insured person dies. If the deceased person owned the policy, the full amount of the proceeds are included in the federal taxable estate; if someone else owned the policy, the proceeds are not included.

It follows that if you want your life insurance proceeds to avoid federal estate tax, you may wish to transfer ownership of your life insurance policy to another person or entity. There are two ways to do it. You can transfer ownership of your policy to any other adult, including the policy beneficiary. Or, you can create an irrevocable life insurance trust, and transfer ownership to it. In any event it is best to consult with your attorney and accountant.

Example: Mary is a widow with two adult children who are her beneficiaries. She lives in a modest home that has been paid off for years. The current value is $250K. She also has $100K in an individual retirement account she inherited from her late husband. Several years ago she purchased a $100K annuity to provide an income stream to supplement her social security. Mary has some mutual funds worth $50K. Three certificates of deposit worth $10K each, and she owns a life insurance policy with a face amount of $500K. The life insurance policy was intended to provide money for Mary's three grandchildren. Guess what? Mary's children will owe Estate Tax. If someone else owned the life insurance policy then no Estate Tax would be due.

As always, consult with your tax and legal advisor before making these estate decisions.

6 midyear tax moves to make

It's finally summer, time to take a well-deserved work break. But when it comes to tax breaks, you can't take a vacation.

In fact, with the year half over, it's a perfect time to make some tax moves. You have a good idea of what your income and associated taxes will be, and you still have plenty of time to take advantage of some easy tax-cutting strategies.

A few tax moves will require you to stay on top of your taxes for a bit longer, since Congress is still working on some tax laws, including the potential resurrection of tax breaks that have expired or are scheduled to soon disappear.

So before too much more time passes, let's look at six midyear tax moves.

Prepare for the possibility of higher rates

The tax breaks we've been enjoying for almost a decade are set to expire at the end of the year.

Although some of the provisions, such as the 10 percent tax bracket and the $1,000 child tax credit, have a good chance of living beyond 2010, some taxpayers will likely owe Uncle Sam more money next year.

This is particularly true if you're in the highest tax bracket, scheduled to go from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Also slated to increase are the tax rates on capital gains, currently at 15 percent for most investors.

You're especially vulnerable if you make more than $250,000. That's the earnings level at which most Washington, D.C.-watchers expect 2011 tax increases to kick in.

The best move for wealthier individuals is to accelerate income into this year so you'll owe taxes on the money at today's lower tax rates.

Talk to your employer about moving any bonuses or commissions into 2010.

It's also is an ideal time to cash in some long-term winners in your portfolio so you can take advantage of today's lower capital gains tax rates, says Jim Keller, senior tax analyst for the Tax & Accounting business of Thomson Reuters.

Convert to a Roth IRA

In 2010 more people became eligible for a Roth IRA, the retirement account in which earnings and distributions are tax-free.

Now anyone, regardless of income, can convert a traditional IRA to a Roth. Even better, the government is encouraging us to convert by allowing us to pay the tax on this money over two years -- 2011 and 2012.

But if you decide to postpone any tax bill, remember the likelihood of higher rates in 2011 and beyond.

Another impending tax, the Medicare tax on high earners, also has created more incentive to convert to a Roth. This tax is part of the health care reform law and will apply to investment income of higher earners starting in 2013.

"A Roth comes out tax-free, so when taking out this money, it wouldn't count toward that tax," says Mark Luscombe, principal tax analyst with tax publishing company CCH in Riverwoods, Ill.

So explore whether moving to a Roth is right for you. And run the numbers to determine whether you should pay all your Roth conversion taxes this year at lower rates.

Make home energy improvements

Does your home need a little bit of improvement? Uncle Sam wants to help if your upgrades are energy-efficient.

As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, otherwise known as the stimulus package, common energy upgrades such as installing storm windows and doors, adding insulation, and buying a new energy-efficient air conditioner or heat pump, could get you a $1,500 credit when you file your tax return.

This tax break is good for improvements made through the end of the year. Be careful, however, if you claimed the maximum credit on last year's return; this tax break is limited to a total $1,500 claim, not that amount every year.

However, if you make more ambitious energy improvements, such as installing solar energy, wind power or geothermal systems, the tax break is even better. These home energy upgrades could qualify for a tax credit equal to 30 percent of the cost, including installation, without any cap on the credit amount.

Be aware of possible tax changes

Some popular tax breaks are up in the air, such as the state and local sales tax deduction, the tax break for educators who buy classroom supplies with their own money and the ability to deduct some property taxes without itemizing.

These, along with countless other tax benefits, are part of what is known as the tax extenders bill. As Congress struggles with ways to pay for the continuation of these tax benefits, it's not unusual to see the bill's passage postponed until the very end of the year.

This uncertainty could affect some of your tax and financial moves. For example, if you're unsure about buying a new car or boat or mobile home, you might want to hold off to see if you can include the vehicle's sales tax on your 2010 tax return.

Take advantage of the usual tax breaks

There are several tax moves you can make each year to reduce your tax bill.

If your workplace offers a 401(k), enroll or bump up your contributions. This money comes out of your paycheck before taxes are calculated and tax on the earnings is postponed until you take it out in retirement.

While signing up for your retirement plan, make sure you employer has your correct withholding information. If you get a large refund or owe the IRS a lot each April, adjust your withholding.

You don't have to wait until the end of the year to donate to your favorite charity. Most nonprofits would love to get some cash or useful property during the summer when donations tend to drop off. As long as you make the gift during the tax year, you can deduct it when you itemize your expenses.

Your donations are just one part of a bunching strategy, in which you look at qualified deductions and make plans to maximize them. Set that up now.

And if you haven't created a tax filing system yet, do it now. Being organized is the easiest and best way to make sure you don't waste any tax breaks.

https://news.fidelity.com/news/article.jhtml?guid=/FidelityFeeds/pages/6-smart-tax-moves-now&topic=taxes

2011: The Year Of The Tax Increase

By: Michael Snyder

Unless the U.S. Congress acts, there is going to be a massive wave of tax increases in 2011. In fact, some are already calling 2011 the year of the tax increase. A whole host of tax cuts that Congress established between 2001 and 2003 are set to expire in January unless Congress chooses to renew them. But with Democrats firmly in control of both houses that appears to be extremely unlikely.

These tax increases are going to affect every single American (at least those who actually pay taxes).

But this will be just the first wave of tax increases. Another huge slate of tax increases passed in the health care reform law is scheduled to go into effect by 2019. So Americans that are already infuriated by our tax system are only going to become more frustrated in the years ahead. The reality is that the U.S. government will soon be digging much deeper into our wallets.

  • The lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 10 percent to 15 percent.
  • The next lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 25 percent to 28 percent.
  • The 35 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 39.6 percent.
  • In 2011, the death tax is scheduled to return. So instead of paying zero percent, estates of $1 million or more are going to be taxed at a rate of 55 percent.
  • The capital gains tax is going to increase from 15 percent to 20 percent.
  • The tax on dividends is going to increase from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.
  • The "marriage penalty" is also scheduled to be reinstated in 2011.
  • Dozens of health care reform taxes
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/2011-year-of-the-tax-increase-2010-7#ixzz0uVv1LvJl

Existing-home sales fall 5.1% as tax credit ends

By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Resales of U.S. homes fell 5.1% in June to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.37 million as a federal subsidy for home buyers wound down, the National Association of Realtors estimated Thursday.

Sales that closed in June were eligible for the federal tax credit, and the credit could cover a few more sales through the end of September if the closing was significantly delayed. To qualify, a buyer had to sign a sales contract by the end of April.

"With housing demand pulled forward and current indicators lackluster, it is likely house sales and house construction will remain weak over the remainder of the summer," wrote Kurt Rankin, an economist for PNC.

Sales were at the lowest seasonally adjusted level since March, but higher than the 5.10 million annual pace expected by economists surveyed by MarketWatch.

Inventories of unsold homes increased 2.5% to 3.99 million in June, representing an 8.9-month supply, the highest since August 2009.

In coming months, the supply is expected to rise above 10 months, putting downward pressure on prices, said Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the real estate agents' lobbying and advocacy organization.

If inventories remain "very high" over many months, prices could fall further, Yun said. Prices have already overcorrected, so further declines should be modest, he said.

The median sales price rose 1% in the past year to $183,700 in June, the NAR said. Prices through the first six months of the year are essentially unchanged from the first six months of 2009.

In a separate report, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said its price index of repeat sales rose 0.5% in May compared with April. National home prices were down 1.2% compared with a year earlier, FHFA said.

"It's only a matter of time" before the double dip in sales leads to a double dip in prices, said Brian Levitt, an economist with OppenheimerFunds.

That would put more pressure on households and banks. "The biggest asset for most people has become their biggest liability," Levitt said.

Economic uncertainty is clouding the outlook for the market, Yun said. Fundamentals are now paramount: Job growth, income growth, interest rates, home prices and household formation. Rates for a 30-year fixed mortgage were at a record low 4.74% in June.

Sales are expected to pause for three to four months following the tax credit, the NAR economist said. "Only when jobs are created at a sufficient pace will home sales return to sustainable healthy levels," Yun said.

The government has been supporting sales and home prices for more than two years, providing up to $8,000 to qualified buyers. But the tax credit has essentially ended. To qualify, a buyer must have signed a sales contract by April, and must close the sale by Sept. 30, an extension from the original June 30 deadline.

The NAR data on existing-home sales are based on closings, which usually occur a month or two after the sales contract is signed. Sales contracts fell about 30% in May.

Most economists believe the tax credit pulled forward sales that would have taken place later. Sales of existing homes surged last fall with the first tax credit and are up 9.8% compared with a year ago.

The expiration of the tax credit has devastated the housing market. Housing starts fell 19% combined in May and June. New-home sales plunged 33% in May.

  • Sales of single-family homes fell 5.6% in June, while sales of condos dropped 1.5%.
  • Sales fell in three of four regions: Sales fell 9.3% in the West, 7.5% in the Midwest and 6.5% in the South. Sales rose 7.9% in the Northeast.
  • Distressed sales accounted for 32% of sales, little changed from recent months. The mix of distressed sales has shifted, however, with fewer foreclosures and more short sales, the NAR said.
  • First-time buyers bought 43% of the homes in June, down from 46% in May. All-cash buyers accounted for 24% of sales, compared with 25% in May. Investors bought 13% of homes.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

As credit card holders play it safe, issuers increase non-penalty service fees

By Ylan Mui, Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 22, 2010

After the recession forced credit card companies to purge their rosters of the riskiest loans, the industry is facing a new problem: customers who are too good.

Card issuers have long found their bread and butter in penalty fees and high interest rates paid by consumers who carry a balance. But that business model has been upended by the legions of consumers who were overwhelmed by debt when the recession hit, forcing the industry to write off billions of dollars in loans. In addition, new federal laws limit how much card companies can charge risky customers.

Now, frugal-minded consumers are charging less on their credit cards, paying down their balances and steering clear of penalty fees -- steps that are financially responsible but have the industry scrambling to find new ways to make money.

"The only true deadbeat customer is someone who has a card and never uses it," said Curtis Arnold, who runs the credit comparison site CardRatings.com. "Just having good credit alone in today's market is not enough for that customer to be profitable."

A new study found that annual fees and service fees have increased over the past year while penalty charges -- which are subject to the new federal regulations -- remained largely unchanged. Meanwhile, some cards are encouraging customers to charge more by offering enhanced rewards, allowing the issuer to capture "swipe fees" paid by merchants. And one issuer even allegedly threatened to reject consumers with high credit scores because they didn't boost the bottom line.

Issuers typically generate revenue from two sources, interest rates and fees. Congress has clamped down on both of those channels this year, including banning interest rate hikes on outstanding balances and curtailing penalty fees for late payments and over-limit purchases. The new rules are estimated to cost the industry at least $12 billion annually and issuers have long warned that customers in good standing could wind up paying the bill.

Many issuers have homed in on fees that typically accompany rewards cards as a potential moneymaker. About 14 percent of bank credit cards have annual fees, about the same as last year. But the median annual fee for the 12 largest banks' cards rose 18 percent, to $59, over the past year. The cost of cash advances and balance transfers also rose from 3 percent to 4 percent.
Some consumers say they feel penalized for what they thought was good behavior. D.C. resident Alanna Sobel said she pays her balance in full each month and was surprised to get a letter from Chase, the nation's largest card issuer, notifying her that the annual fee on her Freedom card would be $30. The letter stated that the fee had been waived the previous year and would allow her to receive 3 percent cash back on gas and grocery purchases. If she did not pay the fee, she would have to settle for fewer perks.

But ultimately card companies won't be able to hang too many fees on the strongest customers, because that may drive them to do business elsewhere.

Issuers are also trying to entice customers to use their cards more often, allowing banks to collect fees from merchants, which must pay roughly 2 percent of the purchase price each time a card is swiped. The interchange fees, or "swipe fees," have also come under congressional scrutiny, and the Federal Reserve is slated to craft new regulations within nine months limiting card swipe fees for debit cards. That makes credit card swipe fees even more crucial to card companies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106378.html?hpid=topnews

New financial regulations may end era of free checking

By Alistair Barr, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- The sweeping financial regulation signed into law Wednesday by President Barack Obama may have a direct and visible effect on millions of bank account holders in the U.S.

The new rules may end the era of free checking accounts.

Wells Fargo, which reported more than $3 billion in quarterly profit Wednesday, scrapped free checking for new customers, imposing a $5 monthly fee for new basic accounts starting this month.

Bank of America is launching a new account in August that will be free if customers bank online and use ATMs, but will cost $8.95 a month if they want a paper statement and use a teller for routine transactions.

More big banks will likely follow the lead of Wells and Bank of America because the financial reforms limit the amount of fees they can charge and the way they levy them.

"That's going to be pretty common across the board. Lots of big banks are starting to do that," said Jeff LaFrance, an analyst at Gradient Analytics, in an interview Wednesday. "New financial regulations are taking away their ability to make profits elsewhere on deposit accounts, so they're charging fees."

One big change is the regulation of so-called interchange fees on debit cards, which Bank of America recently warned could knock $1.8 billion to $2.3 billion off annual revenue generated by its Global Card Services business, starting in the third quarter of 2011.

Banks have been experimenting with new pricing techniques as the financial-reform bill worked its way through Congress, Richard Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities, wrote in a recent note to investors.

"The simplest is to place a monthly maintenance charge on each account," he said. "The amount might vary from $8 per month to $12 per month."

Bove says this extra cost could force some poorer depositors to shut their bank accounts, leading to the loss of roughly 14 million accounts. These people may struggle to find other more affordable bank accounts, he added.

"This is a very rough estimate but it is likely to be low not high," Bove wrote. "This bill is going to harm the very people it supposedly helps."

Wells Fargo Chief Executive John Stumpf also criticized the new financial-reform bill on Wednesday, although he didn't specifically address checking accounts and fees.

"We remain concerned that some aspects of regulatory reform may have unintended negative impacts for America's financial system, consumers and businesses," Stumpf said in a statement.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-bank-regulations-may-end-era-of-free-checking-2010-07-21?siteid=nwhpf

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Congress Overhauls Your Portfolio - Retirement Plans

By Eleanor Laise

Stable-value funds, the most conservative investments in many 401(k) plans, are left in a regulatory gray zone.

These funds typically consist of a diversified bond portfolio and bank or insurance-company "wrap" contracts, which allow investors to trade in and out at a relatively steady value. As the bill was being hammered out, the stable-value industry lobbied hard to keep these wrap contracts from being categorized as "swaps," a type of derivative subject to a slew of new rules. Instead of making a final decision, lawmakers called for regulators to study the issue within 15 months.

A swap designation would make stable-value wrap contracts more complex to issue and more costly, stable-value experts say, ultimately dragging down 401(k) participants' returns. That outcome "would have an immediate and very troubling effect on 401(k) plans across the country," says Kent Mason, partner at Davis & Harman LLP and outside counsel to the American Benefits Council. The regulatory uncertainty itself could potentially make issuers more hesitant to offer the contracts, he says.

Stable-value contracts are in short supply already, since issuers became more reluctant to offer them in the wake of the financial crisis. But since demand for the contracts remains strong, fees for these wraps have increased significantly.

Congress Overhauls Your Portfolio - Mutual Funds

By Eleanor Laise

With all the talk of "systemic risk" and "too big to fail," small investors might assume that the landmark Dodd-Frank financial overhaul bill has little bearing on their portfolios.

They would be wrong.

Buried in the bill's 800-odd pages are the most sweeping regulatory changes for ordinary investors in decades, affecting everything from mutual funds and retirement plans to single-stock investments and other holdings.

The legislation has the potential to make brokers more accountable to their clients, shine light on hedge funds and improve the transparency of the complex derivatives on which many mutual funds and pension plans rely to hedge their risks.

What's more, the bill's full effects on small investors likely won't be known for some time. Many provisions call for regulators merely to study certain issues or give them the power, but not the obligation, to make certain rule changes.

But in the meantime, investors can prepare for some significant changes in their mutual funds, hedge funds, retirement plans, brokerage accounts and single-stock holdings. Here are the important factors to watch:

Though mutual funds are barely mentioned in the Dodd-Frank bill, the legislation could affect everything from funds' bond and derivatives holdings to how these products are advertised to investors.

Mutual Funds

For bond funds, the bill creates some uncertainty and could even boost volatility in certain types of holdings, managers and analysts say. That is because it gives the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which can seize troubled financial institutions, leeway to pay investors holding identical bonds issued by that institution differing amounts. If investors aren't sure how they will be treated in such a scenario, they may demand higher yields, which means lower bond prices, or dump the bonds at the first sign of trouble, money managers say.

The provision "can have all sorts of unintended effects," says Bob Auwaerter, head of fixed income at mutual-fund firm Vanguard Group. If mutual funds are trying to sell bonds as the issuer tumbles toward default, the potential for unequal treatment of bondholders "will reduce liquidity and lower the price," Mr. Auwaerter says.

One little-noticed provision in the bill could be critical for mutual-fund investors prone to poor market-timing decisions. It calls for the Comptroller General to study mutual-fund advertising, including the use of past performance data, and recommend ways to improve investor safeguards. Academic research suggests that "short-term performance ads really do drive investor dollars, and unfortunately not in a good way," says Ryan Leggio, fund analyst at investment-research firm Morningstar Inc. "Those usually lead investors to the hot fund of the month or the year."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704682604575369750342795016.html?mod=WSJ_PersonalFinance_PF2

Monday, July 19, 2010

China Tops U.S. in Energy Use

By Spencer Swartz & Shai Oster

China has passed the U.S. to become the world's biggest energy consumer, according to new data from the International Energy Agency, a milestone that reflects both China's decades-long burst of economic growth and its rapidly expanding clout as an industrial giant.

China's surging appetite has transformed global energy markets and propped up prices of oil and coal in recent years, and its continued growth stands to have long-term implications for U.S. energy security.

The Paris-based IEA said China consumed 2.252 billion tons of oil equivalent last year, about 4% more than the U.S., which burned through 2.170 billion tons of oil equivalent. The oil-equivalent metric represents all forms of energy consumed, including crude oil, nuclear power, coal, natural gas and renewable sources such as hydropower.

China's economic rise has required enormous amounts of energy—especially since much of the past decade's growth was fueled not by consumer demand, as in the U.S., but from energy-intense heavy industry and infrastructure building.

China's rapidly expanding need for energy promises to have major geopolitical implications as it hunts for ways to satisfy its needs. Already, China's rising imports have changed global geopolitics. Chinese oil and coal companies have been looking overseas in their quest to secure energy supplies, pitching the Chinese flag in places like Sudan, which Western companies had largely abandoned under international pressure.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720504575376712353150310.html?mod=e2fb

Sunday, July 18, 2010

To retire comfortably, under-40 workers need to seriously bulk up savings

By Jonathan Kern
Special to The Washington Post
Sunday, July 18, 2010

If your junior-high soundtrack was more Bangles or Britney than Beatles, I am going to try to scare some sense into you with three words about life in retirement, based on personal experience: The paychecks stop.

I retired last year after 30 years as a broadcast journalist. Unlike most baby boomers who have retired, I do not receive a pension. This surprises and appalls my fellow early retirees, who are either enjoying income from a spouse who's still working or receiving checks from old employers.

If you're, say, under 40 -- and especially if you're under 30 -- you probably have worked only at firms or agencies that offered 401(k)s or their nonprofit cousin, the 403(b). That means that when you finally do retire 25 or 35 years from now, you will be responsible for providing for your own income. No pension for you!

Much has been written telling you how to prepare for that day -- namely, to save every cent you can.

A recent study shows that most people ignore that advice. In the wake of the recession, the Employment Benefit and Research Institute found that, among other things, fewer workers are saving for retirement, a quarter of those surveyed have nearly no savings (i.e., less than $1,000), most workers don't know how much they'll need to retire and more than half say their total savings is less than $25,000.

Clearly, all those thoughtful lectures about the need to prepare are falling on deaf ears.

So I'll say it again: The paychecks stop. Every day, every week and every month of your retirement, you'll use up some of the money you accumulated while you were working.

Specifically, imagine that every week you have to pay for food with cash from savings. And it's the same with your electricity, cable, phone, gas, credit card and other recurring bills. Because your health care is no longer subsidized by your employer, you write a big check each month to an insurance company as well. If you earn a few bucks on the side, even the taxes have to come out of your savings; no one else withholds federal and state tax from every paycheck.

Sure, if you work until you can collect Social Security, you'll get some money from the government, but it's a fair bet that your No. 1 source for retirement is going to be you. If you are not saving assiduously now, you are going to be much, much poorer in retirement. Restaurants, cable TV, BlackBerry service, travel abroad -- even things like beer, fast food and haircuts -- all will be fond memories of youth.

Retirement does not have to be this way.

I glimpsed my own future more than 20 years ago, when my wife and I worked for the federal government. In 1987, it introduced the Thrift Savings Plan -- basically a 401(k) for government employees. When we left government service, we withdrew our contributions and invested the money ourselves. My next employer offered no pension, only a 403(b).

In other words, although we are both baby boomers -- born in 1946 and 1953, respectively -- we are living the Gen X or Gen Y retirement.

Over the past year, I have learned a few things about how to retire successfully without a pension.

First, take a moment to think about how much money you will need each year after you stop working. Start by itemizing your usual expenses. Estimate your rent or your mortgage and property tax. Make reasonable assumptions about what you spend on food, utilities, essential travel, clothing, car repairs and so on. I assumed that my single biggest expense would be health insurance and budgeted more than $10,000 a year.

Whatever figure you come up with -- let's say, $50,000 -- consider it a minimum. Divide it by 26 to come up with your biweekly retirement income -- about $1,925. Your figure will probably be much less than the usual 80 percent of your current income that most financial advisers say you'll need. We're talking about getting by; any extra will only make life better.

So without a pension, how much do you need to get $50,000 (before inflation) each year? Simply put: a bundle. If you plan to retire at 65 and hope to have at least 30 years in retirement, you'll probably need something like $1.5 million in today's dollars. Even a little inflation could push that to $3 million if you're two or three decades from retirement. For the moment, let's leave inflation out of the calculation.

In other words, if you have saved just $25,000 -- and remember, that describes about half of all workers -- you are less than 2 percent of the way toward your goal. Your future definitely doesn't include cable.

Here's more bad news: Just saving a lot isn't going to be enough. Let's say you're 30 years from retiring, you earn $100,000 now and you guess that your income will go up by about 3 percent a year. Even if you earmark 10 percent of every paycheck for your retirement and your employer adds another 5 percent, you'll have set aside only about $713,000 by the time you stop working. That's half of what you'll need for that $50,000 annual income.

To live comfortably in retirement, whatever you save has to grow -- and its growth has to beat inflation by at least a percent or two. Here's where time is your ally. Take the example above, where you're earning $100,000 a year: That first $10,000 you set aside in 2010 will have become more than $30,000 in 2040 if it grows by 4 percent each year. If it grows by 6 percent, you'll have more than $50,000. And whatever your employer put in will have tripled or quintupled as well.

The bottom line is that the only way to ensure that decades from now you will have enough money to live on is to invest wisely.

So it's imperative to educate yourself. You should understand what a bond is, how to select a mutual fund, how inflation affects your investments and so on. Even if you turn to a financial planner, you'll need to evaluate the advice and make your own decisions about where to put your money. Bernie Madoff's clients wouldn't have been so easy to scam if they'd understood that it's simply impossible to get 12 percent returns, year after year, in vastly different economic climates.

That's a key point: Economic conditions change, and you will need to take advantage of those changes. If the next 30 years are even remotely like the past 30, inflation will swing from low to high and back. There will be stock market booms and crashes. As an investor, I've endured the crash of 1987, the bursting of the tech bubble in 2000 and the terrible bear market of 2008-09. I've also seen 13 percent annual inflation, which gave us 16 percent mortgages but also money markets with yields of 15 to 20 percent.

So do a little research about when it's smart to buy bonds -- and whether they should be Treasuries, corporate bonds or municipals -- and when it's better to invest in stocks, bank certificates of deposit or commodities. Learn how to recognize when investments overseas are strong. Over 20 or 30 years, you'll want to diversify and rebalance your investments so that the inevitable market tsunamis create relatively small waves in your portfolio. You're surrounded by this information. Read books about how the markets work, go to Web sites with primers on stocks and bonds or just watch business channels on TV.

Finally, even when times are tough -- especially when times are tough -- don't ignore that quarterly 401(k) statement. That's when you can see whether all your planning is working -- cushioning the blow of a bad stock, bond or real estate market -- or whether you need to explore different investments.

Think of all these do's and don'ts as a warning from your (not-so-distant) future. You can't just cross your fingers and hope that things turn out, or that someone else will take care of it. Start thinking about retirement now. Your life -- or at least your future standard of living -- depends on it.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

"...an account has been set up..."

How many times do you watch the news and see a family struck by tragedy? Tragic and untimely death or disability of a parent or spouse. More and more those stories are followed by "...an account has been set up..." to help the survivors meet funeral and living expenses.

Then what?

In the event of your own family tragedy (God forbid...) do you want your family to rely on the charity of others to make ends meet? Will their standard of living drop them below the poverty line? Will they have to give up the house for an apartment?

For many people, the cost of a decent life insurance policy would be less than a monthly cell phone bill. A small price to pay for the piece of mind of knowing you and your family will not need "...an account has been set up..."

Friday, July 16, 2010

Despite money fears, few hire a financial adviser

By Rebecca L. McClay, MarketWatch

While more Americans are concerned about their finances now than they were two years ago, they're not flocking to financial planners for help, according to a survey by the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, released Tuesday.

More than 43% of Americans said that financial planners are "more important" since the financial crisis hit, but the overall use of planners has been almost stagnant. About 28% of the population uses a planner now, down from 29% two years ago, according to the survey of 1,002 respondents.

People may be overwhelmed at taking the first step in choosing someone to manage their money during a volatile time, or they may have the impression that financial planners are just for the wealthy, said Robert Glovsky, chairman of the CFPBS and president of Mintz Levin Financial Advisors in Boston.

"We would have expected to see people going to financial planners," Glovsky said. "People are realizing they need help, but they don't know where to turn. It's hard to find someone to trust and work with."

About 65% of Americans said they're more worried about their money now than they were two years ago, according to the survey. Still, about 37% said they expect to see their situation improve in the next six months, while 46% said they expect to hold onto what they currently have and 16% expect to lose money in the next six months.

When asked about the overall economy, about 44% of respondents said they expect it to improve in the next six months, while 28% said things will get worse, and 22% said they expect no change.

The top three financial planning issues for Americans are retirement, education costs, and savings, according to the survey.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/despite-money-fears-few-hire-a-financial-adviser-2010-07-14?siteid=nwhpm

Thursday, July 15, 2010

How the expiring Bush tax cuts affect you

Higher tax rates for all

You may have been led to believe that only individuals in the top two brackets will face higher federal income taxes when the Bush cuts go bye-bye. Not true! Unless Congress takes action and President Obama goes along, rates will go up for everyone -- not just a sliver of the wealthiest Americans. The current six rate brackets of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% will be replaced by five new brackets with the higher rates of 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%. Just a few months ago, it seemed like a safe bet that Congress would make a fix to keep the existing 10%, 15%, 25% and 28% rate brackets to help out lower and middle-income folks. That bet is now looking iffy.

Higher capital gains and dividends taxes for all

Right now, the maximum federal rate on long-term capital gains and dividends is only 15%. Starting next year, the maximum rate on long-term gains will increase to 20%. The maximum rate on dividends will skyrocket to 39.6% unless action is taken to limit the rate to 20%, as the president has repeatedly promised. Plan on 39.6%, and hope I’m wrong.

Right now, an unbeatable 0% rate applies to long-term gains and dividends collected by folks in lowest two rate brackets of 10% and 15%. Starting next year, those folks will pay 10% on long-term gains and 15% and 28% on dividends (compared with 0% now) unless a change is made. Otherwise, taxes on long-term gains and dividends will go up for everyone.

Return of the marriage penalty

Right now, the standard deduction for married joint-filing couples is double the amount for singles. For this, we can thank the Bush tax cuts, which included several provisions to ease the so-called marriage penalty. The penalty can force a married couple to pay more in taxes than when they were single. Starting next year, the joint-filer standard deduction will fall back to about 167% of the amount for singles unless Congress takes action and the president approves. We don’t know if that will happen. If not, lots of lower and middle-income couples will face higher tax bills.

Now, the bottom two tax brackets for married joint-filing couples are exactly twice as wide as those for singles. That ratio helps keep the marriage penalty from biting lower- and middle-income couples. Starting next year, the joint-filer tax brackets will contract, causing higher tax bills, unless a change is made.

Return of phase-out rule for itemized deductions

Before the Bush tax cuts, a nasty phase-out rule could eliminate up to 80% of a higher-income individual’s itemized deductions for mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations. The rule was gradually eased and finally eliminated this year. Next year, it will be back in full force unless Congress takes action -- which is unlikely. So if you itemize and have adjusted gross income above about $170,000 ($85,000 if you use married filing separate status), be ready for this phase-out rule to take a toll.

Return of phase-out rule for personal exemptions

Before the Bush tax cuts, another nasty phase-out rule could eliminate some or all of a higher-income individual’s personal exemption deductions. The rule was gradually cut back and finally eliminated this year. But it will be back with a vengeance next year unless Congress blocks it. So be ready for another tax hike if your adjusted gross income exceeds about $252,000 if you file jointly; about $168,000 if you’re single; about $210,000 if you’re a head of household; or about $126,000 if you use married filing separate status. (For 2010, personal exemption deductions are $3,650 each, and they will be about the same next year.)

The bottom line

The Bush tax cuts don’t just offer tax relief to the wealthiest Americans. They offer it to just about anyone who pays federal income taxes. Their scheduled demise next year will raise the tax bill of nearly every taxpayer, unless Congress makes changes and the president jumps on board.

https://news.fidelity.com/news/article.jhtml?guid=/FidelityFeeds/pages/expiring-bush-tax-cuts-and-you&topic=taxes

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

7 stupid retirement myths exposed

By Liz Pulliam Weston

Half of American workers haven't tried to figure out how much they need to save for retirement.

Nearly one-third aren't currently saving for retirement, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute's latest retirement confidence survey, and half of those who have saved have less than $25,000.

It's a pretty sorry state of affairs, especially if any of the following myths are what's preventing you from saving:


Myth No. 1: 'I've got plenty of time'

It's later than you think.

If you don't start saving by age 35, you'll have a tough time accumulating enough for a typical retirement. You'll have less time to accumulate cash before you quit work, and what you save has less time to earn compounding returns. The earlier you start, the better: Someone who begins at age 22 could have 30% more in her retirement kitty than someone who starts even five years later.

That doesn't mean you won't be able to retire if you start late, but either you'll need to save a prodigious amount of your current income (20% or more) or you're likely to have to live on less in retirement.

Myth No. 2: 'I won't live to see retirement'

If you're alive now, the chances are overwhelmingly good you'll make it to your 60s and beyond. Eight out of 10 males and nearly nine out of 10 females born in the U.S. make it to 65. Sixty percent of men and 73% of women are still alive at 75.

Death is unlikely to release you from your obligation to save for retirement, so you'd better get started. For more, read "Yes, you will live to be 80."

Myth No. 3: 'I won't ever want to retire'

You may not have a choice, honey. The typical retirement age hovers around 62, and nearly four in 10 retirees say they were forced out of work earlier than they'd planned because of layoffs, poor health or the need to take care of a loved one, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute.

Social Security is experiencing a surge in applications for benefits as laid-off workers seek early retirement, even as others are trying to work as long as possible to restore depleted retirement accounts.

Even if you love what you do, it pays to accumulate a "Plan B" retirement fund.

Myth No. 4: 'I need to pay off my debt first'

It could take you years to pay off what you owe. In the meantime, you're missing out on valuable tax breaks, company matches and the power of compounded returns. Every $1,000 you fail to save this year could cost you $10,000 to $20,000 in lost future retirement income.

That's why saving for retirement needs to be the top priority for most people, and other goals should be made to fit around it. Yes, that means it will take you longer to pay off your credit cards, because the money that could pay down that debt faster is going into your 401k. But ultimately, you'll be richer for it.

Myth No. 5: 'I don't make enough money to save'

If you're living at or near the poverty line, this may be true -- but some people manage to save even on small incomes. How do they do it? By making savings a priority. The one factor that explains most of the variation in household savings isn't income, but the amount households choose to save.

Freeing up money for savings may require some lifestyle changes and serious spending adjustments, but your elderly self will thank you for making the effort. For more on constructing a budget that allows you to save, read "How much you should spend on . . ."

Myth No. 6: 'Investing in this market is too scary'

The stock market's a roller coaster, all right, but most of us will need the inflation-beating returns stocks offer if we want to retire comfortably one day. The good news is that the market will eventually recover and rise; in every 30-year period since 1928, stock market returns have averaged out to at least an 8% annual increase.

If you're new to investing, consider a "lifestyle" or "target date maturity" fund that distributes your money among stock, bond and cash options. (Bonds and cash help insulate your investments from stock market gyrations.) If you really can't handle the idea of investing in stocks at all right now, you should still be contributing to your retirement funds. Just choose one of the low-risk, low-return options such as money market funds or stable value funds, until you educate yourself enough about investing to try equities.

Myth No. 7: '401k's are a rip-off because of their high fees'

Some plans do have egregiously high fees, and investors pay the price: For every 1% increase in fees you pay, you can wind up with 17% less cash in retirement. If you work for a large company, however, your 401k plan often gives you access to institutional funds that actually charge less -- sometimes much less -- than similar funds offered to retail investors.

In any case, the solution to high fees is not to boycott your plan, because you'll miss out on tax breaks, matches and compounding. The solution is to contribute and agitate for change.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/RetirementandWills/CreateaPlan/weston-7-stupid-retirement-myths-exposed.aspx

Sunday, July 11, 2010

401(k) Midyear Review

Now that 2010 is half over, review your 401(k) plan and be sure you're still investing wisely. Worth considering:

Rebalance if necessary
. Is the stocks/bonds mix still the way you want it? If it's at least 10 points off (say you wanted to be 50/50 in stocks and bonds but it's now 60/40), reallocate money around to get back on track.

Max your match. Your company's match is as close to free money as you'll find. Take advantage of it.

Put your raise to work. If you were lucky enough to get a raise, pour some of your increase into your 401(k). You'll never miss the money, since you didn't have it before.

Watch your lineup. Your employer may have merged or replaced one of your 401(k) funds. You might be put into a money-market fund or a new fund. So be sure you're in the fund you want. Also check for new additions in the potential investment menu.

Research your holdings. Just because you may have three mutual funds does not mean you are diversified. Those mutual funds might all have the same stocks in their portfolio. Spread your money across different sectors and opportunities.

Review beneficiaries. If you remarried, divorced or had a child since January, double-check that your beneficiaries are up to date.

Take possession of it. If you are no longer working for that employer, it is always in your best interest to take the 401(k) with you and convert it into an Individual Retirement Account. That way you have control and not your former company.

Friday, July 9, 2010

Dividends And Buybacks Surge Higher

by Eric Fox

Although the "Chicken Little" attitude on the economy may be paramount in the minds of investors, corporate treasuries are brimming with record amounts of cash, and should be able to withstand a downturn much better than the last one. Many companies have used some of this cash to increase both dividends and buybacks.

The Data
The Federal Reserve reported that non-financial corporations held $1.84 trillion in cash and liquid assets as of March 30, 2010. This was up 26% year over year and was the largest increase ever recorded, according to the Wall Street Journal. Although data for the second quarter is not yet available, this amount almost certainly increased as companies continue to keep costs down and have not yet initiated major hiring or expansion plans.

Dividends
Dividends by companies in the S&P 500 were up by 2.4% over the same quarter in 2009. June 2010 dividend payments were up an even stronger 5.7% over June 2009. During the quarter ending June 30, 2010, only 34 companies reduced its dividend, while 335 S&P 500 companies increased dividend payments.

Stock Buybacks
Stock buybacks by companies in the S&P 500 totaled $55 billion in the quarter ending March 31, 2010. This was up sequentially from the $48 billion in the last quarter of 2009, and year over year from the $31 billion in the first quarter of 2009.

Data has not yet been released for the second quarter of 2010, but several major companies also announced buybacks during the quarter. Yahoo (Nasdaq:YHOO) was the latest company to find its own stock attractive for purchase, and will spend up to $3 billion to buy back its stock from "time to time" over the next three years.

The Bottom Line
Corporate America is hoarding cash as it continues to worry about a second economic contraction. Many companies are using some of this cash to increase dividends and stock buybacks rather than resume hiring and expand capacity.

http://stocks.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2010/Dividends-And-Buybacks-Surge-Higher-BP-TGT-YHOO-PKW0708.aspx?printable=1

Learn The Stock Market Reality

Learn The Stock Market Reality

Most investors know that the stock market is a not a living breathing thing and has no idea who any individual investor is. Yet many investors behave as if the stock market was alive and well, working to attack their investment ideas. In fact the stock market is neither friend nor foe - it exists to serve the buyer and seller of securities. Emotion is the greatest enemy the investor faces.

Have No Fear
The best way to overcome emotion is to combat it with data and research. Armed with your own analysis based on the company and industry data, you are less likely to fail victim to your emotion. Let's go back to the 1970s when an unknown investor named Warren Buffett began buying shares in the Washington Post. In 1973 Buffett began buying the Washington Post when the market cap was $80 million. Buffett's research and data led him to conclude that the assets of the Post - newspaper, cable, magazines - were worth over $400 million. So Buffett began buying loads of the Post. Shortly thereafter, the market value declined to under $50 million.

To the emotional investor, such a decline would have likely led to a sale of the position. Buffett, armed with his data and analysis, concluded that the Post was even cheaper and bought more. He did not care about the stock market, the stock price of the Post, or what other investors thought. He remained independent. The rest is history: that original $10 million investment is now worth nearly $1 billion.

No Emotional Garbage
Even today, despite the economy, investors should all be thinking in a similar fashion. Let the data determine whether or not a business is an attractive investment at the current price. Consider a company like waste management business Republic Services which doesn't appear on many value radar screens. Depression, recession or expansion, waste management is a necessity. Landfill space is becoming very rare and company's like RSG and Waste Management, the two largest waste management businesses, own lots of them. In addition, in many locations, citizens only have one or two choices of which waste management company to use. So in essence both have certain monopolistic-like characteristics. Not surprisingly, the stable nature of these businesses appeals to Buffett as he continues to buy shares in Republic Services for Berkshire Hathaway.

Valuable Lessons
Few lessons in investing are more valuable than understanding the realities of the stock market. It a simple lesson to understand but far more difficult to execute.

http://stocks.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2010/Learn-The-Stock-Market-Reality-WPO-RSG-WM-BRK-A0708.aspx?printable=1

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

The unstoppable chip revolution

By Louis Navellier

RENO, Nev. (MarketWatch) -- How many e-mails did you send yesterday? Did you use an ATM to deposit a check, undergo a digital medical test or use a GPS device to find a friend's house? If you did any of these things, you used those tiny pieces of silicon that have revolutionized the way we live.

Electronic devices keep getting smaller, faster and more versatile with each passing day. And this simply could not happen without continued innovations based on rapid advances in microprocessors and semiconductors.

With each passing day, the uses for these chips continue to grow. At the beginning of June, worldwide semiconductor sales have soared 67.1% after bottoming out in February 2009, led by an 89.7% surge in New World sales (a.k.a. the Asia-Pacific region). Semiconductor bookings are nearly six times above the level of a year ago, while shipments have more than tripled over the same period.

With Apple Inc.'s red-hot iPad spurring the next generation of personal electronics, along with other high-tech innovations such as 3-D televisions and electric cars, we are right in the middle of a semiconductor revolution.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/three-semiconductor-stocks-for-july-2010-07-01

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Investors Still Buying and Selling at Wrong Times

By Stan Luxenberg

In recent years, shareholders have become smarter fund shoppers, said speakers at the Morningstar Investment Conference, which was held in Chicago last week. Most investors favor low-cost funds with solid track records. But too many shareholders buy and sell at the wrong times, says Don Phillips, Morningstar’s managing director. “Many people are buying good funds, but they are using them badly,” he said.

Phillips said that in 1986, the 10 largest fund families included names such as Dean Witter and Kemper, which charged high expense ratios and delivered poor returns. Over the years, those companies faded away as investors became savvier and switched to low-cost companies, such as Vanguard and American Funds.

But despite their increasing sophistication, millions of investors persist in buying the latest hot funds. In the late 1990s, shareholders dumped bond funds and bought stocks funds. That proved an ill-timed choice, said Phillips. During the decade that began in 2000, bond funds returned 7 percent annually, while stock funds stayed about flat. Many stock investors suffered poor results because they bought at the top of the market. After suffering through a downturn, they sold near a trough.

During the past year, investors have been dumping stock funds and buying bond funds. As a result, some shareholders missed the rally that began in March 2009. Among the big beneficiaries of the trend toward bonds is PIMCO Total Return, the giant bond fund, which has had huge inflows in recent months. Phillips says PIMCO is an example of a good fund that is being used badly. “PIMCO Total Return is the poster child for the mistake that investors are making,” he said. “It is a great fund, but this money is going into bonds at a time when yields are low.”

To estimate the impact of poor timing, Morningstar calculates a figure that it calls investor returns. This represents how much the average dollar in a fund actually returns. If investors buy at the peak and sell at the trough, the investor return will be low. In contrast, total returns indicate how much you would have gotten if you invested at the beginning of a period and stayed put.

To appreciate the importance of investor returns, consider that CGM Mutual returned 4.1 percent annually during the decade ending in May. But individual shareholders did not fare so well. Because they bought at peaks and sold at troughs, the investor return for the fund was only 2.6 percent.

Karen Dolan, Morningstar’s director of fund analysis, estimates that the average fund’s investor return is 1.63 percentage points lower than the total returns. “That is a big number,” said Dolan, speaking at the Morningstar conference. “We are losing more money because of poor timing than we are from expense ratios.”

Dolan suspected that load funds might have better investor returns because advisors would encourage clients to avoid selling at the wrong times. To check the hypothesis, she examined investor returns for all kinds of funds, including loads, no-loads, and institutional class shares that are only bought by large investors. She found no difference in the results. “This is a call for action for the entire financial community,” she said. “We need to find better ways to use funds.”

Phillips said that many companies encourage bad investor behavior by launching funds in hot sectors. This induces investors to buy near peaks. But some companies are working to reduce destructive trading. He cited the example of American Funds New World, an emerging markets fund. The company launched it in 1999, just after the Asian financial crisis decimated the sector. Investors who bought then did not arrive just as the fund was peaking. To further reduce risk, the fund has held bonds and cash. That has cushioned losses in downturns and helped investors stay aboard for the long term.

http://registeredrep.com/news/investors_buying_selling_good_funds_wrong_timing0628/

Monday, July 5, 2010

Will Your Money Last Through Retirement?

It’s the unanswerable question every investor eyeing retirement, and his financial advisor, seek an answer to—How many years do I have to live? The term of retirement is obviously a key factor in calculating how much money must be put away to ensure a nest egg can last. Now new genetic research from the Boston University Schools of Public Health and Medicine and the Boston Medical Center may narrow the variety of possible answers to that question significantly. Researchers say they’ve identified a group of genetic markers that can predict “exceptional longevity”—those who will live into their late 90s and older—with 77 percent accuracy.

The findings, based on a study of more than 1,000 centenarians and several control groups, were published in this week’s issue of the journal Science. The Wall Street Journal today also reports that the Boston researchers are working on a test that could indicate whether someone falls into that long-living group. In a statement on the research, Boston University cautioned that the predictive quality of the research was not perfect, and that environmental qualities such as lifestyle also contribute to one’s longevity. Before a test could be marketed, the college added, an understanding of the implications of the models’ use in a general population would be needed.

Some financial advisors say the information could be helpful in the often-nebulous effort to determine the length of a client’s retirement. “People are usually pretty confused about how long they have,” says William Baldwin, president of Pillar Financial Advisors in Waltham, Mass. and chairman of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors. When Baldwin sits down with clients, he asks standard questions about their health, whether their parents are alive and, if so, how their health is doing. Actuarial tables can then be consulted, and Baldwin likes to run a Monte Carlo simulation to determine probability ranges for whether a client’s money will last until the estimated time of their death.

Planners probably never get the estimate right, says Robert Glovsky, president of Mintz Levin Financial Advisors in Boston and chair of the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards. “You’re sitting here trying to project out somebody’s life expectancy, somebody’s asset base. There’s a lot of assumptions, mortality being just one of them. It’s modeling. You can’t look at it and say, ‘I know definitively what is going to happen.’”

The test that researchers are developing would be useful, Glovsky says, because it would help investors think about how long they need to plan for, perhaps stretching out the assets for a longer period of time. Conversations over long-term care insurance and annuities might play a bigger role in planning, he says. And test results that showed someone would not have the genetic markers for longevity would be useful as well, he adds. “It’s a conversation you have with your client. Are you comfortable planning for less, now that you know?”

The prospect of knowing how long you have could have other implications as well. Glovsky wonders if insurance companies would price products higher or reduce benefits if they understand their clients’ longevity prospects better. Over the last decade, the life expectancies have risen, and most financial planners have adjusted financial plans accordingly, says Anthea Penrose, spokeswoman for Raymond James Financial.

Baldwin suggests that some investors may prefer not knowing how long they have. “Most of our clients don’t really like this stuff,” he says. “They just want to feel comfortable and they want us to say to them, ‘You’re OK at this level,’ or ‘You’re not.’ And that’s why it’s our responsibility. We can’t assume they know they’re making a mistake when they’re overspending their money.”

http://registeredrep.com/news/will_your_clients_money_last_through_retirement_researchers_find_answers_in_genes_0702/