Back When
James McGlynn | Sep 25, 2020
I BEGAN MY CAREER in investments as a junior analyst at a public endowment fund. It was 1980 and I'd just finished my last investment class at college, where I learned about Modern Portfolio Theory. Why, decades later, is it still called “Modern”? The Dow Jones Industrial Average was below 1000, versus today’s 27000. Men wore suits in 100-degree Texas heat. We had individual offices. We researched companies by reading brokerage reports, talking to brokers and requesting annual reports from companies. Those requests were typed up by our secretary and mailed to each company’s investor relations department. The Wall Street Journal had just one section. There was no electronic version. Brokerage firms were happy to provide us with “free” proprietary research, since trading commissions were extremely high. The arrival of fax machines was a real game-changer in delivering those research reports, which could be hugely valuable. Regulation FD hadn’t arrived, so brokerage firms often obtained information that hadn’t been fully disclosed to the public. If we liked a brokerage firm’s trade ideas, we’d buy or sell through the firm and its compensation was the commissions earned. Twice a day, we could see stock prices on our Quotron machines, which also provided trading volume. A year or two later, our first personal computer arrived. This was before the internet. The only stock market TV program was PBS’s Wall Street Week with Louis Rukeyser, who broadcast from Owings Mills, Maryland. CNBC and Bloomberg Television were nowhere in sight. Pensions were commonplace, while IRAs and 401(k)s were only just taking off. I remember sending checks to Fidelity Investments since its money market funds paid north of 15%. This was the era when Salomon Brothers’ economist Dr. Henry Kaufman warned us that budget deficits would lead to higher interest rates and President Reagan’s Budget…
Read more » Early Decision
James McGlynn | Jul 21, 2020
DELAYING SOCIAL Security until age 70 will get you the largest possible monthly benefit, and that’s the right strategy for many retirees. But what’s right for many folks won’t necessarily be right for you—and you may want to file at 62, the youngest possible age, so you maximize your total lifetime benefit. If you’re single with no dependents, you should probably file at age 62 if you’re in poor health or your family doesn’t have great genes, and you don’t expect to live to age 80. Over this relatively short period, the smaller monthly benefit starting at age 62 will likely prove more valuable than waiting to get a larger monthly check. Similarly, if you’re single and have no other income to live on, by all means start Social Security at 62. In both instances—poor health or no other income—beginning at 62 should be the right decision, provided you don’t live into your 80s. If you’re widowed, there may also be good reason to begin Social Security at age 62. Survivor benefits can typically start at age 60 and won’t get any larger if you delay beyond your full Social Security retirement age, which will be 66 or 67, depending on the year you were born. In some instances, a widow or widower might start her or his own benefit at age 62 and then switch over to survivor benefits at full retirement age, assuming the survivor benefit is bigger. Alternatively, those who are widowed might start survivor benefits at age 60 and then claim their own benefit—based on their own earnings history—at age 70, at which point it’ll be at its largest, thanks to the delay. Whether you’re married or not, if you have dependents, you might be eligible for Social Security family benefits, on top of your own…
Read more » The Taxman Cometh
James McGlynn | Oct 23, 2020
LATE LAST YEAR, Congress voted to kill off the so-called stretch IRA, which had allowed those who inherited retirement accounts to draw them down slowly over their lifetime. Many folks were surprised by the stretch IRA’s demise, but they shouldn’t have been. When a tax break or some other government provision benefits only a few folks, Congress often changes the law. Think back to 2015. That year, Congress eliminated the ability to “file and suspend” Social Security—another strategy that tended to be exploited only by a privileged few. I suspect we’ll see similar Congressional action in the years ahead. This election season, there’s been talk of reversing the tax rate reductions in 2017’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), especially for those who’ve benefited the most from those cuts. In any case, after year-end 2025, many of the TCJA changes sunset. The upshot: If Congress doesn’t act in the next five years, taxes will automatically increase. But it isn’t just the TCJA that’s in the political crosshairs. Here are five other key areas where we might see changes to the tax code: There’s discussion of eliminating the preferential long-term capital gains and qualified dividend tax rates for those with incomes above $1 million. Warren Buffett has often complained that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. This change would ease his conscience by boosting the capital gains and dividend tax rate from 20% to potentially 39.6%, but only for those with seven-figure incomes. The TCJA reduced corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%. There are proposals to increase that rate to 28% and to ensure all corporations pay a 15% minimum tax. I predict that, at some point between now and 2034, there’ll be changes to the payroll tax that funds Social Security or, alternatively, that other federal…
Read more » Don’t Get an F
James McGlynn | Nov 25, 2019
MEDICAL EXPENSES ARE a big worry for retirees—leading many to purchase supplemental insurance. But you need to think carefully about which Medigap policy you buy. What does this insurance get you? Medicare Part B, which covers doctor’s visits and other outpatient care, typically only pays 80% of the expenses that retirees incur. To plug this and other coverage gaps, many folks buy a Medigap insurance plan. Want to keep your current doctors and not be restricted to the network of medical professionals offered in a Medicare Advantage plan, otherwise known as Medicare Part C? You’ll want to stick with Medicare Part B and supplement it with a Medigap insurance plan sold by a private insurer. After signing up for Medicare Part B, most people have just six months during which they’re “guaranteed issue” for Medigap. “Guaranteed issue” means there’s no medical underwriting when choosing a Medigap plan. After those six months, you could be denied for health reasons. One potential pitfall: If you opt for a Part C Medicare Advantage plan when you’re first eligible for Medicare, you may forever be locked out of the Medigap market if you later want to switch out of Medicare Advantage. The reason: Your health may have deteriorated and you can’t pass the medical underwriting. How do you decide which Medigap plan is best for you? There are 10 different varieties of Medigap plan. In 2018, Medigap Plan F was chosen by 54% of all enrollees. While Medigap plans are standardized in terms of the coverage they provide, costs can vary significantly. Even though Plan F is the most popular, Plan G is the fastest growing—for good reason. Plan G is less expensive than Plan F. The only difference between the two is that Plan F pays the Part B deductible of $185, whereas…
Read more » He Gets, She Gets
James McGlynn | Dec 15, 2020
IF YOU DESIGNATE beneficiaries for your retirement accounts, that’s usually a surefire way to pass those assets directly to your desired heirs without going through probate—but not always. Because those beneficiary designations are so important, you should verify your choices every year in case there’s a change due to, say, marriage, birth, divorce or death. Especially marriage and divorce. Which brings me to a crucial issue: When dealing with IRA and 401(k) beneficiary designations, there’s a key difference when it comes to your spouse. In general, a spouse who hasn’t been named beneficiary of an IRA isn’t entitled to inherit it. Unlike 401(k) plans, IRAs aren’t governed by ERISA—the Employee Retirement Income Security Act—so these accounts don’t have the same protections for spouses. You’re free to name whoever you wish as your IRA beneficiary, even if you’re married, provided you don’t live in a community property state. Indeed, IRAs are excluded from ERISA coverage, even if the funds originated in a 401(k). By contrast, under ERISA, if the owner of a 401(k) account is married when he or she dies, his or her spouse is automatically entitled to receive money, regardless of what the beneficiary designation says. The exact percentage seems to be a matter of some disagreement—some lawyers say 50%, while others put it at 100%. If there’s no beneficiary listed, the spouse is entitled to 100% of the account. The spouse can sign a waiver, giving up his or her claim to the account, but only if the spouse is at least 35 years of age. It isn’t enough just to name someone else on the beneficiary form that your employer gives you. The waiver must be filled out, with the spouse consenting to the participant’s choice of beneficiary. If your spouse signs the waiver, which should be…
Read more » Tempting Fate
James McGlynn | Mar 13, 2022
ONLINE SPORTS BETTING is currently legal in 30 states but eventually will be legal everywhere—because the tax revenue is simply too attractive. All this was made possible by the Supreme Court, which in 2018 struck down federal legislation prohibiting online sports betting. The sports leagues spent decades denouncing gambling, saying it threatened the integrity of the game. But my concern isn’t the “integrity” of the game. Rather, I worry about the individual bettor who ends up wagering too much. Fortunately, I’m stingy when it comes to betting, which has kept me out of trouble. Forty years ago, when I would gamble in Las Vegas, I would limit myself to losing $200 per trip. I never inflation-adjusted my limit and still hold myself to that $200 limit. I thoroughly enjoy many types of gambling: craps, Kentucky Derby, March Madness, the Super Bowl and even betting on local college sports teams—when they have a chance at a championship. I may seem like a degenerate gambler. But the key for me is to bet in such small amounts that, even if I lose money, it’ll have zero effect on me. The NFL is putting out public service announcements, with Coach Steve Mariucci advising gamblers to “bet responsibly.” Still, many folks will likely end up gambling too much—because the temptation will soon be everywhere. The NFL is now partnering with DraftKings, the online sports company. I’m a regular viewer of sports talk shows, and I’m bothered by the gambling advertisements that surround the screen when I’m trying to enjoy the broadcasts. HumbleDollar readers are well trained to buy index funds, while only occasionally “gambling” a little on active funds. The same should be true for actual gambling. If you have a limited amount of entertainment dollars set aside for gambling, that strikes me as…
Read more »
Costa Rica: The Richest Man On The River
Andrew Clements | Jul 22, 2026
One Person’s Luxury, Another’s Necessity
Mark Crothers | Jul 21, 2026
Buying a car in retirement
Julie C | Jul 11, 2026
Fear of the Unknown…
gnussen623 | Jul 22, 2026
Lessons on the Ground
ArticleDennis Friedman | Jul 18, 2026
FIFA Financials
R Quinn | Jul 19, 2026
Go While You Still Can
DavidHLancaster | Jul 22, 2026
Will Your Death Double Your Spouse’s Tax Bill?
achnk53 | Jul 15, 2026
A discussion on health insurance, premiums, profits and such- a 50 year perspective most people don’t want to accept
R Quinn | Jul 15, 2026
A Can of Worms
Dan Smith | Jul 17, 2026
K-shaped Economy
ArticleAdam M. Grossman | Jul 18, 2026
Many seniors think we paid for our Social Security benefits based on the FICA taxes we paid. Let’s dispel that myth- we didn’t
R Quinn | Jun 15, 2026