Showing posts with label Retirement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Retirement. Show all posts

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Pose Retirement Questions to a Financial Planner

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

You can pose your retirement questions to a certified financial planner for free on Wednesday, during two hourlong online sessions run by the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors and Kiplinger.

During the two Web sessions — at 10 a.m. Eastern time, and at 1 p.m. — you can ask your questions and have them answered by a member of the financial advisers group. Members of the association are fee-only financial advisers, meaning they earn fees from their clients only, rather than earning commissions from selling investments or other products.

The event is the second in a series. A transcript of the questions and answers from the previous session in October is available at Kiplinger’s Web site.

To participate, you can visit the Facebook pages of either the association or Kiplinger.

(You can also read questions and answers or submit questions via the association’s or Kiplinger’s Twitter handles, using the #JumpStartRetire hashtag).

If you miss Wednesday’s session, you can try again at another session on Dec. 14.

Kiplinger and the association will also run two day-long “Jump Start Your Retirement Plan” sessions on Jan. 12 and 17.



View the original article here



Peliculas Online

Friday, May 25, 2012

Target-Date Retirement Funds Offer a Strategy Spectrum

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Assets in these funds have more than quadrupled since 2007. For employees, the funds appear very straightforward, requiring only the choice of an expected retirement date. Once a fund with an appropriate target date is chosen, investment professionals take charge. They decide on a mix of assets that gradually becomes more conservative as the employee nears retirement.

“Workers are delegating back to their employer the asset-allocation decision,” says Stephen P. Utkus, principal of the Vanguard Center for Retirement Research. Put another way, workers are delegating to their employer, who is then delegating to the plan provider it has hired, to run a target-date fund within a 401(k). The T.D.F is typically comprised of a mix of mutual funds run by the plan provider.

There is a very wide range of T.D.F.’s, and that may be a problem because they have a whiff of the old Wild West about them: just about anything goes. For example, Morningstar found that among three dozen funds with a target retirement date of 2025, the percentage of fund assets invested in stocks ranged from 38 to 86 percent, with an average of 70 percent. The retirement investment industry and Washington regulators have basically left it to investors to figure out what their T.D.F.’s contain, and to decide if their plan dovetails with their risk and return expectations.

These funds are also not immune to some well-worn fund and 401(k) maladies, including possibly high fees and a presumptuous belief that active management can consistently beat passive indexing.

But what T.D.F.’s do quite well is distance investors from their worst enemy: themselves. By hewing to a long-term investment allocation strategy and rebalancing whenever the markets throw the portfolio off that strategy, they insulate investors from many emotional and psychological barriers that can make it hard to stick with a given approach.

“It’s akin to a stereo system,” said Meir Statman, professor of finance at Santa Clara University in California and author of “What Investors Really Want.” “Rather than having to purchase all the individual components and figure out how to make it work together, a T.D.F. is like buying a single, integrated system. Maybe you give up some flexibility, but that’s still a good trade-off for many investors.”

That idea offers some comfort to many investors. A recent ING survey of 401(k) investors found that those who used a T.D.F. were more confident about their retirement prospects than investors who didn’t own such a fund.

Assets in target-date funds grew to $374 billion at the end of 2011 from $71 billion four years ago. The Employee Benefit Research Institute, a nonpartisan group that specializes in economic security issues, says that nearly half of workers hired in 2009 and 2010 who were enrolled in a 401(k) owned a T.D.F.; in 2006, just 28 percent of new hires did. Vanguard, a big manager of target-date funds, says it anticipates that 75 percent of employees enrolled in its plans will own such a fund by 2016.

The growing popularity has been aided by a big nudge from Washington. In 2006, the Labor Department allowed employers to automatically enroll employees in 401(k)’s, and when employees did not actively choose among the funds offered in a plan, employers could also automatically put them into a T.D.F. that matched their expected retirement age.

But automated simplicity isn’t a magic bullet. “The potential problem is that the T.D.F. you are given isn’t really that good,” Professor Statman says.

For example, a recent survey by Callan Associates, an investment consulting firm, found that 63 percent of such funds used actively managed funds and that an additional 17 percent used a mix of active and index-based funds. Historically, active management has been less effective than passive index-based investing.

“The fact is, after investment fees are subtracted, active management is a loser’s game,” says Tom Idzorek, global chief investment officer at Morningstar Investment Management .

On an asset-weighed basis, the average annual expense ratio charged on target-date funds is 0.61 percent, according to Morningstar. Vanguard, which has an average charge of 0.18 percent for its T.D.F.’s, is the only major manager that emphasizes index-based funds for them. Target-date funds that are actively managed tend to have annual expense charges above 0.70 percent — though many exchange-traded funds charge less than 0.30 percent.



View the original article here



Peliculas Online

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

The Annuity Puzzle for Retirement Investing - Economic View

Dave can count on a traditional pension, paying $4,000 a month for the rest of his life. Ron, on the other hand, will receive his benefits in a lump sum that he must manage himself. Ron has a lot of choices, but all have consequences. For example, he could put the money into a conservative bond portfolio and by spending the interest and drawing down the principal he could also spend $4,000 a month. If Ron does that, though, he can expect to run out of money sometime around the age of 85, which the actuarial tables tell him he has a 30 percent chance of reaching. Or he could draw down only $3,000 a month. He wouldn’t have as much to live on each month, but his money should last until he reached 100.

Who is likely to be happier right now? Dave or Ron?

If this question seems a no-brainer, welcome to the club. Nearly everyone seems to prefer the certainty of Dave’s pension to Ron’s complex options.

But here’s the rub: Although people like Dave who have them tend to love them, old-fashioned “defined benefit” pensions are a vanishing breed. On the other hand, people like Ron — with defined-contribution plans like 401(k)s — can transform their uncertainty into a guaranteed monthly income stream that mirrors the payouts of a traditional pension plan. They can do so by buying an annuity — but when offered the chance, nearly everyone declines.

Economists call this the “annuity puzzle.” Using standard assumptions, economists have shown that buyers of annuities are assured more annual income for the rest of their lives, compared with people who self-manage their portfolios. One reason is that those who buy annuities and die early end up subsidizing those who die later.

So, why don’t more people buy annuities with their 401(k) dollars?

Here’s one part of the answer: Some people think that buying an annuity is in some way a bad deal for their heirs. But that need not be true. First of all, a retiree can decide to set aside some portion of a retirement nest egg for bequests, either immediately or at a later date. Second, if a retiree chooses to manage his or her own money, the heirs may face the following possibilities: Either they get financially “lucky” and the parent dies young, leaving a bequest, or they are financially “unlucky,” meaning that the parent lives a long life, and the heirs take on the burden of support. If you have aging parents, you might ask yourself how much you’d be willing to pay to insure that you will never have to figure out how to explain to your spouse, or whomever you may be living with, that your mother is moving in.

There are other explanations for the unpopularity of annuities, but I think two are especially important. The first is that buying one can be scary and complicated. Workers have become accustomed to having their employers narrow their set of choices to a manageable few, whether in their 401(k) plans or in their choice of health and life insurance providers. By contrast, very few 401(k)’s offer a specific annuity option that has been blessed by the company’s human resources department. Shopping for an annuity with hundreds of thousands of dollars at stake can be daunting, even for an economist.

The second problem is more psychological. Rather than viewing an annuity as providing insurance in the event that one lives past 85 or 90, most people seem to consider buying an annuity as a gamble, in which one has to live a certain number of years just to break even. But, as the example of Dave and Ron shows, it’s is the decision to self-manage your retirement wealth that is the risky one.

The most complex and unknowable part of that risk is in predicting how long you will live. Even if there are no medical advances in the coming years, according to the Social Security Administration, a man turning 65 now has almost a 20 percent chance of living to 90, and a woman at this age has nearly a one-third chance. This means that a husband who retires when his wife is 65 ought to include in his plans a one-third chance that his wife will live for 25 more years. (A “joint and survivor” annuity that pays until both members of a couple die is the only way I know for those who are not wealthy to confidently solve this problem.)

An annuity can also help people with another important decision: when to retire. It’s hard to have any idea of how much money is enough to finance an appropriate lifestyle in retirement. But if a lump sum is translated into a monthly income, it’s much easier to determine whether you have enough put away to afford to stop working. If you decide, for example, that you can get by on 70 percent of preretirement income, you can just keep working until you have accrued that level of benefits.

IN the absence of annuities, there is reason to worry that many workers are having trouble with this decision. Over the last 60 years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the average age at which Americans retire has trended downward by more than five years, from 66.9 to 61.6. Of course, there is nothing wrong with choosing to retire a bit earlier, but over the same period, live expectancy has risen by four years and will likely continue to climb, meaning that retirees have to fund at least an additional nine years of retirement. Those who manage their own retirement assets can only hope that they have saved enough.

Annuities may make some of these issues easier to solve, but few Americans actually choose to buy them. Whether the cause is a possibly rational fear of the viability of insurance companies, or misconceptions about whether annuities increase rather than decrease risk, the market hasn’t figured out how to sell these products successfully. Might there be a role for government? Tune in next time for some thoughts on that question.

Richard H. Thaler is a professor of economics and behavioral science at the Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago. He is also an academic adviser to the Allianz Global Investors Center for Behavioral Finance, a part of Allianz, which sells financial products including annuities. The company was not consulted for this column.



View the original article here



Peliculas Online

Monday, May 21, 2012

Older Borrowers and Student Loans: Unexpected Burdens Near Retirement

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

May 09, 2012 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Many people think of medical bills and upside-down mortgages when considering reasons why senior citizens may want to consider filing for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Data from a recent consumer credit study shows that senior citizen student loan debt is causing significant and unprecedented burdens on elderly Americans.

The latest quarterly report on Household Debt and Credit from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York focused on American student loan debt as of the third quarter of 2011 and introduced new findings broken down by age group. Nationwide, outstanding student loan debt obligations are approaching $1 trillion and have surpassed both auto loans and credit card debt, and policymakers have begun to express concern about the implications for students and their parents.

The average balance is $23,300, and about one quarter of borrowers owe more than $28,000 -- a 25 percent increase over the past decade when other debt growth has been much lower. Out of 37 million total borrowers, just over five million (14.4 percent) have one or more past due accounts. Furthermore, the authors of the study suggest that delinquency rates are probably higher than 25 percent because of the forbearance or deferral status of many overwhelmed debtors.

An Increasing Burden for Older Borrowers

While people tend to think of student loan debt as a financial challenge for young recent graduates, borrowers under 40 make up only about two-thirds of the total. About one of every six Americans with student loan debt is 50 or older.

Student loan debt can haunt those seeking to get by on a limited income, particularly if they are already wrestling with the financial realities of retirement. Whether that debt came from obtaining a degree later in life or co-signing on loans for children or grandchildren, the growth in debt nationwide reflects the significant increases in tuition over the past generation.

The duration of debt creates many problems for those who took on student loan obligations in a much more promising economy. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner recently commented in a Senate subcommittee that higher education costs should reflect quality, and students have been unable to "earn a return that justifies the expense." When a default falls on the shoulders of parents, they may need to pursue options for debt relief.

Student Loans and Bankruptcy: What Is an Undue Hardship?

When borrowers must contend with escalating financial problems caused by student loan obligations, they may already be aware that government guaranteed student loans are not generally eligible for and Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection. Educational borrowers must demonstrate that they have made good faith efforts to keep up with payments and are experiencing an "undue hardship," meaning:
- They are unable to both repay the student loan and maintain a minimum standard of living, and;
- Their current financial difficulties are ongoing in light of employability and other factors

A recent survey by the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA) found that the vast majority of bankruptcy lawyers say that few clients are able to show an undue hardship that meets the legal standard for discharging college debt. However, bankruptcy can help still help applicants who are not able to discharge student loans by freeing up other resources.

In addition, other debt relief options can reduce monthly payments for the 80 percent of borrowers who have government-issued or guaranteed student loan debt. Late last year, the Obama administration implemented executive actions that limit monthly federal student loan repayment to 10 percent of a borrower's discretionary income. Another promising development is the recently introduced Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012, which would cap interest rates and provide further modifications to student loan repayment obligations.

Recent college graduates and other older borrowers alike can be caught unaware due to lowered income expectations and higher unemployment rates. A debt relief lawyer can explain how borrowers of all ages can seek relief from entrenched debt problems by exploring mortgage modifications, debt settlement plans and other alternatives to bankruptcy.

Article provided by Clark Law Offices
Visit us at www.clarklawaz.com

---
Press release service and press release distribution provided by http://www.24-7pressrelease.com

# # #

Read more Press Releases from FL Web Advantage:


View the original article here



Peliculas Online