Feeds:
Posts
Comments

By JEFF SOMMER - NYTimes.com

WHEN the Dow Jones industrial average climbed back to 10,000 this month, the achievement was widely noted but barely celebrated, and for good reason.

“Haven’t we done this several times before?” asked Edward Yardeni, the economist and investment strategist.

In fact, we had. The Dow had crossed 10,000 on more than 20 occasions, starting in late March 1999, when the market was so hot that stock-picking seemed to have become the national pastime. In that year, the book “Dow 36,000” confidently declared that stocks were “actually less risky than bonds” and that the Dow would more than triple in value within a few short years.

As investors know all too well, the financial history of the last decade turned out a bit differently. Stocks proved to be extremely risky. Despite the recent rally, in the 10 years through September, most stock investors lost money.

What may be less widely understood is that over that same 10 years, while the stock market’s overall returns were disappointing, the bond market produced handsome gains. Bond rallies have not generated the hoopla that the stock market customarily receives, but over the last 10 years, investors have had more reason to celebrate if they held bonds, not stocks, in their portfolios.

Calculations performed for Sunday Business by Morningstar, using data from its Ibbotson Associates subsidiary, show that the stock market underperformed important bond categories over the 10 years through September — with an annualized loss of 0.2 percent for the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, versus annualized gains of 8.1 percent for long-term government bonds and of 7.8 percent for long-term corporate bonds.

What’s more, the S.& P. 500 underperformed long-term government and long-term corporate bonds over the last 20 years as well. Over longer periods — 30 years, 40 years, and in an 83-year stretch from 1926 to 2009 — the Ibbotson numbers indicate that stocks did outperform bonds, sometimes by more than three percentage points, annualized. But bonds were far less volatile throughout. And the further back in history you go, the less directly comparable is the data.

Writing in the May-June issue of the “Journal of Indexes,” Robert Arnott, chief executive of the investment firm Research Affiliates in Newport Beach, Calif., declared that bonds had been neglected by the financial press and by many investors. He reviewed market returns going back 207 years, and found that stocks outperformed bonds by only 2.5 percentage points, annualized. This “2.5 percentage point advantage over two centuries compounds mightily over time,” he said. But for very long stretches, bonds have done better than stocks.

The wild ride of the last decade or so does not mean that stocks will underperform bonds in the months or years ahead. If only it were that simple.

For one thing, past returns never provide a clear guide for the future — especially when technology, innovation and government policies are changing the structure of financial markets and transforming the global economy as rapidly as they are right now.

For another, it can be argued that the recent stretch of relative stock market weakness and bond market strength is precisely why stocks are likely to do better than bonds. Jeremy J. Siegel, a finance professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and the author of “Stocks for the Long Run,” advocates stock holdings for people with long horizons but acknowledges that some periods have been painful for equities.

He says that the environment is auspicious again. “Historically, whenever you’ve had long periods when bonds outperform stocks, that sets up an excellent time to invest in stocks,” he said. “So looking forward, things look very favorable for stocks and not favorable for bonds, certainly not Treasury bonds.”

In part because of market intervention by the Federal Reserve, yields on long-term Treasury bonds remain extremely low, and prices, which move in the opposite direction, are high. When and if the economy recovers, bond yields are likely to rise and prices are likely to fall. Low yields, meanwhile, make it cheaper for many companies to finance their operations, which could help generate outsize profits.

Laszlo Birinyi, president of Birinyi Associates, a stock market research firm in Westport, Conn., who says he believes that we are in the middle of a vigorous bull market for stocks, has studied the long-term returns of many asset classes. He has found that from 1970 to 2008, emerging-market stocks outperformed the S.& P. 500, the bond market and alternative assets like oil, gold, real estate and diamonds.

But Mr. Birinyi recommends sticking mainly with domestic stocks and bonds, perhaps adding a sprinkling of foreign stocks that “don’t replicate your domestic stock holdings.”

“My issue with diversification beyond that,” Mr. Birinyi said, “is that an incremental or arithmetic increase in the number of decisions you make leads to a geometric increase in the degree of difficulty.”

The logic for treating domestic stocks and bonds as the two central asset classes was outlined in the 1930s by Benjamin Graham and David Dodd, the fathers of value investing. In their classic work, “Security Analysis,” they emphasized safety — favoring bonds, and only those of the highest quality, as far more suitable for small investors than stocks, which attracted “speculators.”

Because shares of common stock are much riskier than bonds, they need to have the potential for a much higher return to induce investors to hold them, Mr. Graham and Mr. Dodd said. But they wouldn’t have been surprised by long stretches of bond market outperformance.

LD Lowe Sr. Financial Advisory

Through a proper balance of investment options, we seek to produce outstanding results for our clients. From stocks and bonds to alternative investments that often increase return and lower risk, our recommendations come conflict-free. We build your financial future with professionals who are independent and unbiased. We welcome you to sign up for your complimentary consultation with us. You can easily and quickly request a no-fee consultation by using our convenient online form HERE or by calling
972-335-2523.

On October 15, 2009, the IRS issued news release IR-2009-94 announcing cost-of-living adjustments to dollar limitations for pension plans. Items addressed for 2010 include:

Elective deferrals

  • The annual elective deferral limit for 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, 457(b) plans, SAR-SEPs, and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan remains unchanged at $16,500
  • The annual elective deferral limit for SIMPLE plans remains unchanged at $11,500

Employee “catch-up” contributions for individuals age 50 or older

  • The annual limit on additional catch-up contributions to 401(k), 403(b), and Section 457(b) plans remains unchanged at $5,500
  • The annual limit on additional catch-up contributions to a SIMPLE plan remains unchanged at $2,500

Other key figures

  • The dollar limit on annual additions to a defined contribution plan remains unchanged at $49,000
  • The dollar limit on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan remains unchanged at $195,000
  • The annual compensation limit for qualified retirement plan purposes remains unchanged at $245,000
  • The annual compensation amount used in the definition of a highly compensated employee remains unchanged at $110,000
  • The annual compensation amount used in the definition of a key employee in a top-heavy plan remains unchanged at $160,000
  • For purposes of determining a qualifying employee under a simplified employee pension (SEP) plan, the minimum amount of annual compensation remains unchanged at $550

For more information, see IR-2009-094.

www.ldloweplan.com

UPCOMING SEMINAR INFORMATION

“STOP GIVING YOUR RETIREMENT MONEY AWAY!”

HOSTED BY LLOYD LOWE SR.

DECEMBER 18TH, 12:00PM TO 1:00PM

at the DALLAS FISH MARKET (1501 MAIN ST. DALLAS, TX 75201)

JOIN US AS WE DISCUSS: Trade up to a better pension. Stop giving your retirement money away! Understand your 401k and make it work better.

We keep these lunches small to communicate one on one and answer any questions you might have. If you would like to join us for a Lunch and Learn please RSVP as soon as possible – 972-335-2523 or use the form below. Seats fill up quickly.

Come have a great lunch and learn how we can help you reach Financial wHealth.

If you are a current client, please plan to bring a friend or co-worker. 

www.ldloweplan.com/seminars.htm

 

On October 15, 2009, the IRS released inflation adjustments for 2010 (Rev. Proc. 2009-50). This revenue procedure applies to taxable years beginning in 2010, and transactions or events occurring in calendar year 2010, where applicable.

Because of the low inflation rate over the past 12 months, most items remain unchanged.

The full text of these changes can be found in IRS Rev. Proc. 2009-50.

www.ldloweplan.com

Costs increased in every category–here are the highlights:

Four-year public colleges (in-state students):

  • Tuition and fees increased an average of 6.5% to $7,020
  • Room and board increased an average of 5.4% to $8,193
  • Total average cost for 2009/2010: $19,388

Four-year public colleges (out-of-state students):

  • Tuition and fees increased an average of 6.2% to $18,548
  • Room and board increased an average of 5.4% to $8,193
  • Total average cost for 2009/2010: $30,916

Four-year private colleges:

  • Tuition and fees increased an average of 4.4% to $26,273
  • Room and board increased an average of 4.2% to $9,363
  • Total average cost for 2009/2010: $39,028

“Total average cost” includes tuition and fees, room and board, books and supplies, transportation, and other miscellaneous costs.

The report also notes that “average cost” is not necessarily representative of what most students pay. Not only is there considerable variation in price among institutions, but almost two-thirds of undergraduate students enrolled full-time receive grants that reduce the actual price of college. For the 2009/2010 year, private college students will receive an estimated average of $14,400 in grant aid from all sources (colleges, federal government, state governments, employers, and other private sources) and federal tax benefits (American Opportunity and Lifetime Learning tax credits and tuition expenses deduction) and public college students will receive an estimated average of $5,400 in grant aid from all sources and federal tax benefits.

In its Trends in Student Aid report, the College Board notes that as of March 2009, there were 11.2 million existing 529 plan accounts, and that 85% of these are college savings plan accounts while 15% are prepaid tuition plan accounts.

www.ldloweplan.com

 

The short answer is yes.
During the stock market
declines of 2008-2009,
many 529 plan participants
made investment changes in their accounts.
But the rules for doing so depend on whether
the change is for future contributions or existing
contributions.
Future contributions. Typically, most 529
plans allow you to change your investment
allocations for your future contributions at any
time. Some plans let you do this online in a
matter of minutes, while other plans require
you to mail in a form with your new investment
preferences. (Note that this seemingly inconsequential
difference may be an important
one if you want to act quickly.)
Existing contributions. The rules are more
restrictive when it comes to changing investment
allocations for your existing contributions.
Generally, under federal law, 529 plans
are permitted (but not required) to allow you to
change the investment allocations for your
existing contributions once per calendar year.
But for 2009 only, 529 plans may allow you to
do so twice per year. (No word yet on whether
the IRS will extend this “twice-per-year” rule to
2010 and beyond, though the 529 industry is
sure to lobby for it.)
If you’ve already made two investment
changes this year but want to make another,
there is a workaround: most 529 plans allow
you to change your investment allocations for
your existing contributions whenever you
change the beneficiary of the account.
But if you don’t want to change the beneficiary
of your account and you’re still unhappy with
your investment allocations, you have one
more option: you can jump ship to a different
529 plan. Under federal law, you can roll over
your existing 529 plan account to a new 529
plan (college savings plan or prepaid tuition
plan) once every 12 months without any federal
tax penalty and without having to change
the beneficiary.

LD Lowe Sr. Financial Advisory
A Registered Investment Advisor

info@ldloweplan.com
www.ldloweplan.com

9723352523
Referring a friend to us is the
greatest compliment we can
ever receive. We appreciate
each and every referral and will
treat them with the utmost
care.

It can be. The investment options for 529 college
savings plans have broadened dramatically
since their inception in 1996. And with
the market turmoil of the past year, many
states have expanded the conservative investment
options in their 529 college savings
plans as more families look to protect their
college savings from financial risk.
For example, Colorado is offering a stable
value fund in its 529 plan paying 3.35% interest
through the end of 2009, and a few other
states are offering principal-plus-interest options
that guarantee a minimum rate of interest
while protecting your principal. And as 529
account holders funnel more money into conservative
investment options, the list of states
offering such options in their 529 college savings
plans is likely to grow.
You might be asking why you should bother
with a 529 plan when you could earn a comparable
rate of interest on your own. Well,
even if you could earn a similar rate outside of a 529 plan, you would generally
have to pay income
taxes on the earned interest
at ordinary income tax
rates. By contrast, any
interest and capital gains
earned in a 529 plan account
are completely free
of federal (and typically state) income tax,
provided the withdrawal is used for the beneficiary’s
qualified education expenses. However,
any withdrawal not used for such expenses
is subject to income tax and a penalty.
Note: Investors should consider the investment
objectives, risks, charges, and expenses
associated with 529 plans before investing.
More information about 529 plans is available
in each issuer’s official statement, which
should be read carefully before investing.
Also, before investing, consider whether your
state offers a 529 plan that provides residents
with favorable state tax benefits.

info@ldloweplan.com
www.ldloweplan.com
LD Lowe Sr Financial Advisory

972-335-2523

Referring a friend to us is the
greatest compliment we can
ever receive. We appreciate
each and every referral and will
treat them with the utmost
care.

Each month we present complimentary financial seminars or “lunch and learns”. These seminars provide opportunities for you to learn more about our investment philosophy as well as our ability to meet your investment needs.

UPCOMING SEMINAR INFORMATION

Join us for a Lunch & Learn at the Dallas Fish Market!

Friday, October 16, 2009

12:00pm to 1:00pm

1501 Main St. Dallas, TX 75201

Join us to discuss the following topics:

Understanding the benefits of your financial plan

Avoiding a “Ponzi Scheme”

Planning for a Life Change

Alternatives to investing in the stock market

& More!

Find out for yourself why we were chosen one of the Top 10 Wealth Managers in Texas for the third year in a row as seen in Forbes magazine. We keep these lunches small to communicate one on one and answer any questions you might have. If you would like to join us for a Lunch and Learn please RSVP as soon as possible – 972-335-2523 or use the form below. Seats fill up quickly.

Come have a great lunch and learn how we can help you reach Financial wHealth.

www.LDLowePlan.com

The term “stretch IRA” has become a popular way to refer to an IRA (either traditional or Roth) that has provisions that make it easier to “stretch out” the time that funds can stay in the IRA after the death of the owner. A stretch IRA is not a special type of IRA under the Internal Revenue Code. It’s just a traditional IRA or Roth IRA that has language (in the custodial or trust document that governs the IRA) giving a beneficiary (and backup contingent beneficiaries) the option to take distributions from an inherited IRA over the beneficiary’s life expectancy. This language also generally allows successor beneficiaries to be named, facilitating the continued tax-deferred growth of the IRA over (possibly) more than one generation. There’s nothing really dramatic about this “stretch” language; any IRA provider can include it. The fact is, though, many don’t. Absent the “stretch” language, IRA funds might have to be distributed on a more aggressive basis upon the death of the IRA owner or the original beneficiary.

 

Tip: Although the “stretch” moniker has caught on, financial institutions offer IRAs with similar provisions under a variety of names including legacy IRAs, multigenerational IRAs, extended IRAs, and super IRAs. In fact, any IRA, even without an impressive adjective in its name, can contain the language necessary to “stretch out” IRA funds as described here. And even when different financial institutions use the same terminology, they can mean slightly different things, so you need to look closely at the details.

 

Why is “stretching out” IRA distributions important?Earnings in an IRA grow tax deferred. Over time, this tax-deferred growth can help individuals accumulate significant funds within their IRAs. For individuals fortunate enough to have adequate funds to support themselves in retirement without the need to tap into their IRAs, continuing this tax-deferred growth for as long as possible may be a priority. These individuals may want their heirs to benefit–to the greatest extent possible–from this tax-deferred growth as well.

 

Example(s): John, age 60, has $500,000 in an IRA. John has non-IRA funds that are more than adequate to provide for a comfortable retirement, and doesn’t want to take any funds from his IRA unless he is required to do so. John names his spouse Jenny (who is 10 years younger) as beneficiary. Together they agree that, should John die, Jenny will not take any distributions from the IRA unless required, leaving the IRA to their grandchildren. John dies 10 years later at age 69. His IRA is worth $895,424 at that time (it has grown 6 percent per year). Jenny rolls over the funds to a new IRA in her name, and does not take a distribution until she is required to at age 70½. By then, the IRA has grown to $1,603,568 (again, growing at 6 percent per year).

Caution: The above example is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the performance of any specific investment.

Caution: Distributions from a traditional IRA are subject to federal income tax. If nondeductible contributions have been made to a traditional IRA, a portion of any distribution will not be subject to federal income tax. Qualified distributions from Roth IRAs are free from federal income tax.

 

You can only stretch so farHow long funds can stay in a tax-deferred IRA is limited by the required minimum distribution rules.

 

Caution: The rules regarding required minimum distributions are complicated. The explanation that follows is a summary of the provisions most relevant to the concept of stretch IRAs.

Caution: The Worker, Retiree, and Employer Recovery Act of 2008 waives required minimum distributions for 2009. If an individual who reaches age 70½ in 2009 dies on or after April 1, 2010, the RMD for the individual’s beneficiary will be determined using the rules that apply on or after the individual’s required beginning date (generally, based on the beneficiary’s life expectancy). For beneficiaries receiving RMDs from a decedent’s account under the “five-year rule,” the five-year period is determined without regard to calendar year 2009. For example, for an account with respect to an individual who died in 2007, under the provision, the five-year period ends in 2013 instead of 2012.

 

Required distributions during the IRA owner’s lifetime

Lifetime required minimum distributions, often referred to as RMDs or minimum required distributions, are amounts that the federal government requires you to withdraw annually from a traditional IRA after you reach age 70½. You can always withdraw more than the annual minimum amount from your IRA, but if you withdraw less than the required minimum in any year, you will be subject to a federal penalty equal to 50 percent of the amount not distributed as required. These RMDs are calculated to distribute your entire interest in the IRA over your life expectancy. The purpose of the RMD rules is to ensure that people use their retirement accounts to fund their retirement and not simply as a vehicle of wealth transfer and accumulation. This is true for all traditional IRAs, whether or not they have “stretch” provisions.

 

In fact, though, lifetime required minimum distributions can be spread over a significant period of time. Depending upon the performance of the investments within the IRA, it is possible for an IRA to continue to grow in overall value for a number of years despite required distributions.

 

Example(s): John has $500,000 in a traditional IRA when he reaches age 70½ (Year 1). John determines his required minimum distribution for Year 1 is $18,248. If John’s IRA investments grow at 6 percent per year, by the time John takes his first required minimum distribution (assuming he does so by the end of Year 1), his IRA will be worth $530,000. In fact, if John’s investments within the IRA were continue to grow at an annual rate of 6 percent, each year his IRA would increase by an amount that is greater than John’s required minimum distribution for the year–until Year 13, when John is 82 years old and the IRA is worth $597,425 (and by that time, John has taken a total of over $300,000 from the IRA in required distributions).

Caution: The above example is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the performance of any specific investment.

Tip: There are no lifetime required minimum distributions for Roth IRA owners.

 

Required distributions after the IRA owner dies

All IRAs, including Roth IRAs, are subject to required minimum distribution rules after the death of the IRA owner. How and when the distributions must occur after a death depends on a number of factors including who the owner names as beneficiary and backup beneficiaries, and whether the owner dies before or after he or she begins taking lifetime required minimum distributions.

 

If the IRA owner has named someone other than his or her spouse as beneficiary of the IRA, the beneficiary may have a few options upon the death of the owner . One of these options will generally be to take annual distributions over a fixed period of time based on the beneficiary’s life expectancy at the time of the IRA owner’s death (in some cases the period of time can be based on the remaining life expectancy of the IRA owner, if this results in a longer period of time). Young beneficiaries with long life expectancies can spread distributions over a substantial period of time, keeping the maximum amount allowable in the tax-deferred IRA.

 

Caution: While you might appreciate the value of tax-deferred growth, your beneficiary might prefer instant gratification. There’s little to prevent your beneficiary from simply taking a lump-sum distribution when he or she inherits the IRA, rather than “stretching out” distributions over his or her life expectancy. It is possible, though, to name a trust as the beneficiary of the IRA to establish some control over how distributions will be taken after your death.

If the IRA owner has named his or her spouse as beneficiary, then the spouse has additional options upon the death of the owner. A surviving spouse will commonly opt to roll over inherited IRA funds into his or her own IRA. Or, if your surviving spouse is your sole beneficiary, he or she may opt to simply leave the funds in an inherited IRA and treat that IRA as his or her own. With either of these options, the surviving spouse names his or her own beneficiary. At some point, the spouse is required to begin taking lifetime required minimum distributions. When the spouse dies, the beneficiary has the option to take distributions based on his or her life expectancy, as described above.

 

 

Key “stretching” provisionsBecause financial institutions use different terminology, it’s important to focus on the actual language in the IRA documents. As discussed below, to maximize the time over which distributions can be taken after your death, you should be sure the agreement provides for post-death distributions based on the life expectancy of your beneficiary, and determine whether your beneficiary is able to name his or her own beneficiary.

 

 

Beneficiary allowed to take distributions over his or her own life expectancy

If you die with funds in an IRA, the required minimum distribution rules allow your beneficiary to take distributions from the inherited IRA over a period of time based on the beneficiary’s life expectancy. However, even though the distribution rules allow your beneficiary to “stretch out” distributions, your IRA provider may not. The IRA documents might provide that beneficiaries must take a lump-sum distribution, or require that the funds must be distributed within 5 years. You’ll want to check with your IRA provider to make sure that your IRA allows your beneficiary the option of taking distributions over his or her life expectancy.

 

Tip: Even if an IRA doesn’t allow a beneficiary to take post-death distributions over his or her life expectancy, the beneficiary can still effectively accomplish this by directly transferring the IRA to another financial institution when the IRA owner dies. To do this, your beneficiary would set up an IRA at a new financial institution in the name of the deceased IRA owner, “for the benefit of” the beneficiary, clearly stating that the account is an IRA. For example, “John Owner IRA, deceased January 1, 2009, F/B/O John Beneficiary.” The first financial institution would then directly transfer the IRA funds to the new financial institution in a plan-to-plan transfer. Distributions would then be based on the new IRA document language.

 

Beneficiary allowed to name his or her own beneficiary

Here’s where things get slightly confusing. Let’s say that a beneficiary inherits an IRA, and–wanting to keep as much in the inherited IRA as possible–elects to take distributions over his or her life expectancy. What happens if the beneficiary dies a few years later, with funds still in the inherited IRA?

 

Example(s): Benny, age 35, inherits an IRA worth $500,000. Benny elects to take distributions over his life expectancy, which according to the appropriate life-expectancy table is 48.5 years. Benny takes an initial required minimum distribution in the amount of $10,309.28 ($500,000 / 48.5). The IRA grows at an annual rate of 6 percent, so even after taking his first required distribution, the IRA has grown to $519,691. And even after Benny takes his second required distribution of $10,940.86 ($519,691 / 47.5), the account has grown to $539,931.60. Benny dies before taking his third required minimum distribution, leaving a significant balance in the inherited IRA.

Caution: The above example is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the performance of any specific investment.

This is where the IRA language becomes crucial. If, as is commonly the case, the IRA language doesn’t address what happens when the beneficiary dies, then the IRA benefits are paid to the beneficiary’s estate. This would also be true if the IRA language specifically requires payment to the beneficiary’s estate (also not uncommon). However, IRA providers are increasingly allowing an original beneficiary to name a successor beneficiary. In these cases, if the original beneficiary dies, the successor beneficiary “steps into the shoes” of the original beneficiary and can continue to take required minimum distributions over the original beneficiary’s remaining distribution schedule.

 

Caution: This is a common point of misunderstanding. The successor beneficiary’s age and life expectancy are not relevant–the distribution period is fixed at the point that the original beneficiary began taking the annual distributions.

Example(s): To continue the last example, if Benny had named a successor beneficiary (because the IRA language so allowed) the successor beneficiary would be able to continue taking required minimum distributions based on Benny’s original distribution schedule. After Benny’s death, the successor beneficiary could take required minimum distributions calculated by dividing the IRA balance at the end of the prior year by Benny’s remaining life expectancy (reducing the life expectancy by one year each year).

Caution: IRA providers often allow IRA owners to name a contingent beneficiary. Look at such language carefully, however. Generally, such IRA language provides that a contingent beneficiary is entitled to the IRA only if the original beneficiary predeceases the IRA owner. This would not allow the contingent beneficiary to “step into the shoes” of the original beneficiary after your original beneficiary’s death if your original beneficiary survives you.

 

Some IRA illustrations may stretch the underlying assumptions usedThere’s no question that it is possible to “stretch” IRA funds over a considerable period of time, sometimes over generations. This long period of time combined with the tax-deferred compounded growth of an IRA can lend itself to some incredibly powerful sales presentations. However, the thought of turning a $200,000 IRA into a $2,000,000 inheritance for your grandchildren can be so appealing that you might not take the time to understand the underlying assumptions that are being used. These assumptions may be completely valid, but may not always apply to your situation. In a few cases, though, the assumptions themselves may be a stretch. Some things to consider:

 

First, almost all stretch illustrations assume that you will not make withdrawals from the IRA until age 70½, and that after 70½ you will only withdraw the minimum required amount each year. This isn’t really misleading because these IRAs are intended for individuals who don’t need to tap their IRAs for retirement, and want to keep the maximum amount in the tax-deferred IRA environment. If you will need to withdraw more than the minimum amounts from your IRA or need to start withdrawals before age 70½, just understand that the more you withdraw from the IRA and the earlier you withdraw it, the greater the impact on the overall growth.

 

Second, to demonstrate the ability of IRA funds to pass from generation to generation, illustrations often assume that the original beneficiaries die before they reach their full life expectancy. This doesn’t really impact the total period of time over which funds are distributed (since successor beneficiaries “step into the shoes” of the original beneficiaries), but it does tend to show the funds ultimately in the hands of the successor beneficiaries, which may or may not happen. Successor beneficiaries only get the IRA funds if the original beneficiaries die before they reach their full life expectancy.

 

Caution: A FINRA Investor Alert cautions that, in addition to the two assumptions above, stretch IRA illustrations also typically assume that: (1) tax laws do not change (remember, these projections typically show the IRA growing over a very long period of time); (2) there is no inflation reflected (which would erode the purchasing power of your investment); and (3) the underlying investments within the IRA will grow at a constant and predictable rate.

Caution: You should also make sure that you understand and account for any estate tax issues relating to your IRA. This is particularly important in the case of IRAs with significant balances. Be sure to get estate planning advice on the naming of primary and backup beneficiaries to get the full benefit of a stretch IRA.

www.LDLowePlan.com

Complimentary consultation available.

If you own a traditional IRA or Roth IRA, you may be able to withdraw funds from these accounts to pay for your child’s college expenses, or to pay for your child’s elementary or secondary school expenses. But the effect of taxes and penalties should be considered.

A traditional IRA is a personal savings plan that offers tax benefits to encourage retirement savings. A Roth IRA is another type of personal savings plan that offers tax benefits to encourage retirement savings. Parents who save with either a traditional IRA or Roth IRA can always withdraw their savings, but the general rule is that any withdrawals made before age 59½ are subject to taxes and a minimum 10 percent early withdrawal penalty.

 

However, there are some instances when the early withdrawal penalty doesn’t apply, even though the withdrawal is made before age 59½. One instance is when parents tap their traditional IRA or Roth IRA before age 59½ to pay their child’s qualified higher education expenses.

 

Tip: Qualified higher education expenses include tuition, room and board (if your child is enrolled at least half-time), fees, books, supplies, and equipment required for enrollment at a post-secondary school, including graduate school.

Caution: The exemption of college expenses from the 10 percent early withdrawal penalty does not apply to elementary and secondary school expenses; parents who withdraw funds for this purpose before age 59½ will owe a 10 percent early withdrawal penalty.

 

Drawbacks of using traditional IRA or Roth IRA for college expenses

You won’t pay a 10 percent early withdrawal penalty on withdrawals made from your traditional IRA or Roth IRA before age 59½ that are used to pay qualified college expenses. But you will be required to add any withdrawal (distribution) amount that was not previously taxed back into your taxable income for the year. This could have the undesirable effect of pushing you into a higher marginal income tax bracket.

 

This means that if you have made deductible contributions to a traditional IRA and taken full deductions every year, the entire withdrawal (contributions plus earnings) is included in your income for tax purposes. For traditional IRAs funded with nondeductible contributions, however, only that portion of the withdrawal that represents earnings and deductible contributions is included in income for tax purposes.

 

With a Roth IRA, if you are under age 59½ when you make a withdrawal to pay college expenses, your earnings will be subject to income tax (your contributions are never subject to income tax because all contributions to a Roth IRA are made with after-tax dollars). And if you are over age 59½ at the time you withdraw the funds, you generally won’t owe any income tax at all.

 

A second tradeoff of withdrawing from your traditional IRA or Roth IRA to pay education expenses is that you reduce your overall retirement nest egg. You may also miss out on potential growth that could have occurred had you not withdrawn the money. Obviously, parents of young children who withdraw IRA funds for elementary or secondary school expenses will have a longer period of time to make up the withdrawn money than parents of college-aged children who are closer to retirement.

 

 

Is this strategy right for you?

The answer probably depends on your intended use of the funds. If you are withdrawing from your traditional IRA or Roth IRA before age 59½ to pay elementary or secondary expenses, you will owe taxes and a 10 percent early withdrawal penalty.

 

Tip: If you need to pay elementary and secondary school expenses, consider withdrawing funds from your Coverdell education savings account.

But if you plan to use the money for college expenses, then tapping your traditional IRA or Roth IRA may be a viable option. If you are under age 59½, then the waiver of the 10 percent early withdrawal penalty may make withdrawing from your IRA comparable to borrowing from a bank or using your savings. You will need to compare interest rates and expected rates of return. However, most financial professionals recommend not tapping your retirement accounts to pay college expenses if other funds are available.

www.LDLowePlan.com

Complimentary consultation available.

Older Posts »