FREE NEWSLETTER

A long bear market is a retirement saver’s best friend—and a retiree’s worst nightmare.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Investing

Financial literacy is not the problem nor the solution.

"I think the crux of the matter is behavioral. People who have the personality of being able to see one’s future self, ie those who are able to delay gratification are those who will most likely be more successful building a sufficient retirement nest egg. Of course people who are wavering on the edge of this personality trait will have more difficulty in the American consumerism society, being constantly bombarded with messages that you “need” this or that. This has also recently been exacerbated by social media, influencers, and comparing one’s life to others."
- David Lancaster
Read more »

Taxes

Roth Conversions

AMONG THE MOST COMMON debates in personal finance is whether Roth conversions are a wise strategy. Especially as the end of the year approaches, it’s worth looking at both sides of this question. If you aren’t familiar with it, the idea behind a Roth conversion is that individuals can choose, at any time, and at any income level, to move money out of a pre-tax traditional IRA into a Roth IRA. There’s a catch, though: In the year that you complete a conversion, you must pay income tax on the amount that you convert. So, the bet you are making with a conversion is that your tax rate today will be lower than it will be in the future, when you otherwise would have taken those dollars out of your IRA. For example, if you could pay a tax of just 22% today to convert dollars from your pre-tax IRA to your Roth IRA, you would happily do that if you expected your tax rate down the road to be much higher—say, 32%.  This seems straightforward, but not everyone agrees. For starters, Roth conversions’ detractors point to the uncertainty inherent in the exercise. Predicting future tax rates is an imperfect science, and if rates end up going lower in the future, that could turn the benefit of a conversion upside down. You could end up paying a higher rate today than you would’ve in the future. Given the state of federal finances, it might seem unlikely to expect tax rates to go down, but no one can say that with certainty. Congress often changes the rules, and as recently as the late-1980s, the highest ordinary income tax rate was nine percentage points lower than it is today (28% vs. 37%). In addition, it can be difficult to predict our own future income with precision. Consider required minimum distributions (RMDs) from retirement accounts. They’re a key component of most retirees’ income, but because they’re dependent on future investment returns, the best any of us can do is to estimate this figure. Roth conversions, in other words, involve uncertainty along multiple dimensions. This is a point even supporters acknowledge. That’s why, to help manage this uncertainty, I look at Roth conversion candidates as falling into one of three categories. The first category: When a taxpayer’s marginal tax rate is currently in one of the two lowest brackets, either 10% or 12%, I see it as an easy decision to complete a conversion. That’s because it’s hard to imagine that their future tax rate would be any lower. At worst, in that case, a Roth conversion in one of these two lowest brackets might just be a wash. The second category: When a taxpayer’s marginal rate is over 30%, I see that as an easy decision as well, but for the opposite reason. Roth conversions rarely make sense at that level because it’s hard to make the argument that a taxpayer in a very high bracket might end up in a bracket that’s even higher. To be sure, it can happen—and I’ll describe one clear case below—but it’s hard to have confidence in that expectation. For that reason, a conversion at a rate over 30% typically doesn’t make sense. The third category: If your marginal rate is in one of the middle brackets—either 22% or 24%—that’s when the conversion decision doesn’t have an easy “yes” or “no” answer, and it’s worth examining other factors. When would a conversion in this middle range make sense? If the composition of your assets is such that you have significant balances in pre-tax accounts and you haven’t yet hit RMD age (either age 73 or 75), that’s when you’d want to sharpen your pencil. If your RMD based on your current pre-tax balances would push your income into a much higher tax bracket, then it would be safe to assume that, with some additional investment growth, your tax bracket will almost certainly be higher down the road. That’s a clear case for a Roth conversion. Similarly, if you have other income sources, such as a pension, that are guaranteed, that too would make the conversion decision easier. What if the comparison between your current and projected future tax rates isn’t conclusive? Suppose, for example, your taxable ordinary income today is $210,000. For someone married and filing jointly, that would translate to the 22% marginal tax bracket. Even if your income rose sharply in future years with required minimum distributions, up to $300,000, for example, the tax impact would be modest. Income of $300,000 would translate to a marginal bracket of just 24%. So a Roth conversion might not seem like an urgent priority. In that case, there’s another factor that might be a tie-breaker. If one spouse passed away, the surviving spouse would be subject to the tax brackets for single taxpayers. Continuing with this same example, $300,000 of income would result in a substantially higher marginal bracket of 35%. If that were the case, then a conversion today at 22% might make good sense. The upshot: If you’re doing Roth conversion math, and the results look inconclusive, consider what might tip the scales. Another potential tie-breaking factor to consider, if the math isn’t conclusive, would be the estate tax. At the federal level, a tax of 40% applies to assets over $15 million, or $30 million for a married couple. For someone with a balance sheet at that level, Roth conversions can make a lot of sense because they have the result of reducing the size of an estate without reducing the after-tax value of the assets. Consider a simple example: If you complete a conversion of $200,000 that results in $40,000 in taxes, that $40,000 is no longer in your estate, and thus no longer subject to estate tax. This is the only case in which I see an argument for conversions at rates over 30%, because any tax below 40% would still be less costly than the future estate tax levy. Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Saving

The Repair I Didn’t Need

"I can imagine your reaction to that $600 quote when you’d just replaced the plugs yourself for $36. Knowing your car’s service history certainly paid off there. You make a good point about checking the owner’s manual. I’d also ask the shop to show me what prompted the recommendation, especially if the work was done recently. In my case, getting a second opinion before saying yes saved us from replacing parts that were still fine. Thanks for sharing your experience."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

From HumbleDollar Founder Jonathan Clements

Behavior

Knowing Me

DOES OUR PERSONALITY help determine our financial success? It seems it does, or so says academic research. Psychologists have zeroed in on five key…
Read more »

Estate Plan

Protecting What We Built

SINCE RETIRING, WE’VE done a lot of traveling. One thing that continually stands out is just how crowded airports have become—even top-tier airline lounges are sometimes packed to capacity. Watching the endless stream of travelers, my wife often turns to me and asks, “Where do all these people get their money?” I suspect some of them, especially the older travelers, are “middle-class millionaires.” They didn’t build their wealth through massive salaries. Instead, they accumulated it gradually through home appreciation, retirement savings, disciplined investing, and decades of compound growth. That’s how my wife and I built our net worth. We grew our savings slowly over the course of our careers through patience and discipline. Now that we’ve reached a point where we feel we have enough, our focus has shifted from growing our wealth to protecting it. Here are three ways we are protecting our hard-earned savings while continuing to enjoy our retirement. Fortifying Our Liability Coverage Ever since a friend told me that his own son-in-law sued him after falling down his stairs, I’ve been concerned about our own liability exposure. I don’t consider us to live a lifestyle that would expose us to a particularly high risk of being sued. We don’t have a dog, swimming pool, rental property, or boat. Even though I consider our risk relatively low, I’ve become more conscious of how much we have to lose from an unexpected liability claim, such as a severe auto accident. I’m not an attorney or insurance professional, so I’m not suggesting that our approach is appropriate for everyone. But it did lead me to take a closer look at how our assets might be protected if we were ever sued and a judgment entered against us. In recent years, our modest California home has appreciated significantly alongside real estate values across the state. When I considered our home equity together with our taxable savings and other assets, we eventually concluded that our existing umbrella coverage was no longer sufficient for the amount of wealth we had accumulated. I also learned that California’s homestead exemption provides a certain amount of protection for equity in a primary residence, although the rules are more complicated than I had previously realized. The amount of protection depends on the circumstances and is subject to statutory limits and adjustments. For our home, I didn’t want to assume that all of our home equity would be protected from a judgment. Our IRAs also have statutory protection under California Code of Civil Procedure §704.115 based on what is deemed reasonably necessary for retirement support. Learning this gave me some comfort, but it also reinforced the fact that different types of assets can have different levels of protection. Our taxable brokerage account, however, does not have the same type of statutory protection. It remains exposed to potential legal claims. We ultimately purchased additional umbrella coverage through a specialty insurer. Securing that extra layer of protection provides us an invaluable peace of mind. Adopting a Moderately Conservative Asset Allocation  Now that we’re in our 70s, we feel we can afford to be less aggressive in the stock market. Our portfolio is currently allocated 45% to stocks, 45% to bonds, and 10% to cash.  This asset allocation gives us enough exposure to growth to help combat inflation while providing some protection against a severe bear market. Consider a difficult scenario in which the stock market falls 40% and the bond market declines 10%. Under those conditions, our portfolio would lose roughly 22.5%. Alternatively, if our 55% allocation to bonds and cash holds its value while stocks absorb the full 40% decline, we would still have 82% of our portfolio’s value intact. This allocation gives us a larger cushion against a severe stock-market downturn. It would allow us to rebalance into stocks after a major decline, rather than being forced to sell stocks when prices are depressed. More importantly, this asset allocation has so far allowed us to maintain a comfortable lifestyle without worrying about market swings. Hiring a Financial Advisor I don’t recommend a financial advisor for everyone. In fact, if we were younger, we probably wouldn’t have one. But at age 75, I have to concede that I’m not as sharp as I used to be, and I can get emotional at times. Those aren’t ideal qualities to have in a world where scammers are becoming increasingly sophisticated. What I like about having a financial advisor manage our money is that I have to go through my advisor to access our funds. That extra layer of protection helps protect our portfolio from scams—and from ourselves. It gives us a chance to pause and think things through rather than make an emotional decision in the moment. At this stage of our lives, we’re paying for more than investment management. We’re paying for another layer of discipline and protection—and for the peace of mind that comes with knowing someone else is looking out for us. Focusing on Making It Last Now that we're retired and have accumulated enough to support the life we want, our priorities have changed. We don't need to squeeze every last dollar of growth from our portfolio. Instead, we're trying to make what we've built lasting—protecting it from lawsuits, market declines, scams, and, perhaps most importantly, our own mistakes.  Dennis Friedman retired from Boeing Satellite Systems after a 30-year career in manufacturing. Born in Ohio, Dennis is a California transplant with a bachelor’s degree in history and an MBA. A self-described “humble investor,” he likes reading historical novels and about personal finance. Follow Dennis on X @DMFrie and check out his earlier articles
Read more »

Taxes

A Roth Haiku

"The thing is people sometimes argue for one or the other. I have done the math and at best it might be a push. But being able to spend money up to the 12% marginal bracket is nice, but I still want to live my life and enjoy the fruits of my labor. If that means I need to pay IRMAA. That's a good problem to have because it means I have money...pay the IRMAA, pay 22%, live well, eat well, and sleep well."
- Mike Xavier
Read more »

Taxes

Tax Software 2026

"I frequently attend (usually monthly) continuing professional education classes put on by my local chapter of the Tennessee Society of CPAs. While I am now fully retired I enjoy trying to keep current on matters that interest me. One local attorney, whose practice has a focus on taxation, has done a presentation every every year to our TSCPA chapter for a long time. Many years back his topic was a new state law TN Code § 35-17-101. That law was the Community Property Trust Act which changed available tax law in Tennessee. Tennessee is not a community property state. My understanding for people who live in one of the nine community property states is the tax basis modification that a surviving spouse receives, including jointly owned assets, when the first spouse dies results in the surviving then having a tax basis of full fair market value as of the date of death of the deceased first to die spouse for many classes of assets. What I understanding the Community Property Trust Act does is provide for the optional creation of a type of trust which then allows for a couple to title certain assets into a single trust with the expected result being the step up in basis to the full value at the death of whichever spouse is the first to die. This effectively allows the trust and the surviving spouse trust beneficiary to have a low or no taxable gain if the trust assets are subsequently sold shortly after the death of the first spouse to die. I am not an attorney and do not offer legal advice. For the right people a Community Property Trust might make good tax sense but such a trust is not needed for my wife and me. The costs to create the trust, transfer assets, maintain and eventually close such a trust currently has no expected tax benefit to us. Trusts can be great financial vehicles but like so many matters discussed on this forum I think a careful consideration of benefits and costs should drive our financial decisions. Those are my thoughts about a Community Property Trust."
- William Perry
Read more »

In Retirement

Should One Liquidate in Retirement?

"I think it’s a good plan. I am somewhat younger than you but nevertheless, I am trying to get my affairs in order, first of all by getting rid of a timeshare that served our family well for 50 years but would be a hassle for my kids to inherit. I want to stay in my small house, about a two-hour drive from the nearest child. until age 80 or 85, if possible and depending upon my health. Then I hope to sell and likely purchase a co-op near my daughter in her neighborhood with a beautiful view of NYC harbor and better health care than in my more rural area. If I should need assisted living, moving closer to my son in a less expensive part of the country is a possibility. When one is blessed to have one or more children with whom you have good relations, I think it’s important to try to make their caregiving as easy as possible. For those without children, the Continuing Care Retirement Communities frequently discussed here sound like an excellent option for those with and without children. One near me is owned and operated by the Methodist Church and is the option several of my friends have chosen, with others hoping to go there eventually."
- Linda Grady
Read more »

Happiness

Enough already?

"Thanks Andrew. Saying "thanks" certainly costs us nothing, but can have an oversized impact."
- greg_j_tomamichel
Read more »

In Retirement

Planning Without Predicting

"Mark, you raise some thought-provoking questions. I've often written about the uncertainty of the future and the importance of recognizing what we can and cannot control. AI is simply another reminder of how little we know about what lies ahead. Having been retired for more than a decade, I've witnessed enormous technological changes, but I can't recall another that has raised so many questions about the future of employment and even our sense of purpose. Like you, I wonder what the world will look like for the next generation. Your point about planning rather than predicting particularly resonated with me. We can prepare financially, diversify our investments, and make sensible decisions, but we cannot eliminate uncertainty. Perhaps the greatest benefit of having a sound financial plan is not knowing what the future holds, but having the confidence to face it. As I've learned, life rarely unfolds exactly as we imagine. The best we can do is prepare for tomorrow without forgetting to live today. Thank you for another thoughtful article."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

Investing

Financial literacy is not the problem nor the solution.

"I think the crux of the matter is behavioral. People who have the personality of being able to see one’s future self, ie those who are able to delay gratification are those who will most likely be more successful building a sufficient retirement nest egg. Of course people who are wavering on the edge of this personality trait will have more difficulty in the American consumerism society, being constantly bombarded with messages that you “need” this or that. This has also recently been exacerbated by social media, influencers, and comparing one’s life to others."
- David Lancaster
Read more »

Taxes

Roth Conversions

AMONG THE MOST COMMON debates in personal finance is whether Roth conversions are a wise strategy. Especially as the end of the year approaches, it’s worth looking at both sides of this question. If you aren’t familiar with it, the idea behind a Roth conversion is that individuals can choose, at any time, and at any income level, to move money out of a pre-tax traditional IRA into a Roth IRA. There’s a catch, though: In the year that you complete a conversion, you must pay income tax on the amount that you convert. So, the bet you are making with a conversion is that your tax rate today will be lower than it will be in the future, when you otherwise would have taken those dollars out of your IRA. For example, if you could pay a tax of just 22% today to convert dollars from your pre-tax IRA to your Roth IRA, you would happily do that if you expected your tax rate down the road to be much higher—say, 32%.  This seems straightforward, but not everyone agrees. For starters, Roth conversions’ detractors point to the uncertainty inherent in the exercise. Predicting future tax rates is an imperfect science, and if rates end up going lower in the future, that could turn the benefit of a conversion upside down. You could end up paying a higher rate today than you would’ve in the future. Given the state of federal finances, it might seem unlikely to expect tax rates to go down, but no one can say that with certainty. Congress often changes the rules, and as recently as the late-1980s, the highest ordinary income tax rate was nine percentage points lower than it is today (28% vs. 37%). In addition, it can be difficult to predict our own future income with precision. Consider required minimum distributions (RMDs) from retirement accounts. They’re a key component of most retirees’ income, but because they’re dependent on future investment returns, the best any of us can do is to estimate this figure. Roth conversions, in other words, involve uncertainty along multiple dimensions. This is a point even supporters acknowledge. That’s why, to help manage this uncertainty, I look at Roth conversion candidates as falling into one of three categories. The first category: When a taxpayer’s marginal tax rate is currently in one of the two lowest brackets, either 10% or 12%, I see it as an easy decision to complete a conversion. That’s because it’s hard to imagine that their future tax rate would be any lower. At worst, in that case, a Roth conversion in one of these two lowest brackets might just be a wash. The second category: When a taxpayer’s marginal rate is over 30%, I see that as an easy decision as well, but for the opposite reason. Roth conversions rarely make sense at that level because it’s hard to make the argument that a taxpayer in a very high bracket might end up in a bracket that’s even higher. To be sure, it can happen—and I’ll describe one clear case below—but it’s hard to have confidence in that expectation. For that reason, a conversion at a rate over 30% typically doesn’t make sense. The third category: If your marginal rate is in one of the middle brackets—either 22% or 24%—that’s when the conversion decision doesn’t have an easy “yes” or “no” answer, and it’s worth examining other factors. When would a conversion in this middle range make sense? If the composition of your assets is such that you have significant balances in pre-tax accounts and you haven’t yet hit RMD age (either age 73 or 75), that’s when you’d want to sharpen your pencil. If your RMD based on your current pre-tax balances would push your income into a much higher tax bracket, then it would be safe to assume that, with some additional investment growth, your tax bracket will almost certainly be higher down the road. That’s a clear case for a Roth conversion. Similarly, if you have other income sources, such as a pension, that are guaranteed, that too would make the conversion decision easier. What if the comparison between your current and projected future tax rates isn’t conclusive? Suppose, for example, your taxable ordinary income today is $210,000. For someone married and filing jointly, that would translate to the 22% marginal tax bracket. Even if your income rose sharply in future years with required minimum distributions, up to $300,000, for example, the tax impact would be modest. Income of $300,000 would translate to a marginal bracket of just 24%. So a Roth conversion might not seem like an urgent priority. In that case, there’s another factor that might be a tie-breaker. If one spouse passed away, the surviving spouse would be subject to the tax brackets for single taxpayers. Continuing with this same example, $300,000 of income would result in a substantially higher marginal bracket of 35%. If that were the case, then a conversion today at 22% might make good sense. The upshot: If you’re doing Roth conversion math, and the results look inconclusive, consider what might tip the scales. Another potential tie-breaking factor to consider, if the math isn’t conclusive, would be the estate tax. At the federal level, a tax of 40% applies to assets over $15 million, or $30 million for a married couple. For someone with a balance sheet at that level, Roth conversions can make a lot of sense because they have the result of reducing the size of an estate without reducing the after-tax value of the assets. Consider a simple example: If you complete a conversion of $200,000 that results in $40,000 in taxes, that $40,000 is no longer in your estate, and thus no longer subject to estate tax. This is the only case in which I see an argument for conversions at rates over 30%, because any tax below 40% would still be less costly than the future estate tax levy. Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Saving

The Repair I Didn’t Need

"I can imagine your reaction to that $600 quote when you’d just replaced the plugs yourself for $36. Knowing your car’s service history certainly paid off there. You make a good point about checking the owner’s manual. I’d also ask the shop to show me what prompted the recommendation, especially if the work was done recently. In my case, getting a second opinion before saying yes saved us from replacing parts that were still fine. Thanks for sharing your experience."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

From HumbleDollar Founder Jonathan Clements

Behavior

Knowing Me

DOES OUR PERSONALITY help determine our financial success? It seems it does, or so says academic research. Psychologists have zeroed in on five key…
Read more »

Estate Plan

Protecting What We Built

SINCE RETIRING, WE’VE done a lot of traveling. One thing that continually stands out is just how crowded airports have become—even top-tier airline lounges are sometimes packed to capacity. Watching the endless stream of travelers, my wife often turns to me and asks, “Where do all these people get their money?” I suspect some of them, especially the older travelers, are “middle-class millionaires.” They didn’t build their wealth through massive salaries. Instead, they accumulated it gradually through home appreciation, retirement savings, disciplined investing, and decades of compound growth. That’s how my wife and I built our net worth. We grew our savings slowly over the course of our careers through patience and discipline. Now that we’ve reached a point where we feel we have enough, our focus has shifted from growing our wealth to protecting it. Here are three ways we are protecting our hard-earned savings while continuing to enjoy our retirement. Fortifying Our Liability Coverage Ever since a friend told me that his own son-in-law sued him after falling down his stairs, I’ve been concerned about our own liability exposure. I don’t consider us to live a lifestyle that would expose us to a particularly high risk of being sued. We don’t have a dog, swimming pool, rental property, or boat. Even though I consider our risk relatively low, I’ve become more conscious of how much we have to lose from an unexpected liability claim, such as a severe auto accident. I’m not an attorney or insurance professional, so I’m not suggesting that our approach is appropriate for everyone. But it did lead me to take a closer look at how our assets might be protected if we were ever sued and a judgment entered against us. In recent years, our modest California home has appreciated significantly alongside real estate values across the state. When I considered our home equity together with our taxable savings and other assets, we eventually concluded that our existing umbrella coverage was no longer sufficient for the amount of wealth we had accumulated. I also learned that California’s homestead exemption provides a certain amount of protection for equity in a primary residence, although the rules are more complicated than I had previously realized. The amount of protection depends on the circumstances and is subject to statutory limits and adjustments. For our home, I didn’t want to assume that all of our home equity would be protected from a judgment. Our IRAs also have statutory protection under California Code of Civil Procedure §704.115 based on what is deemed reasonably necessary for retirement support. Learning this gave me some comfort, but it also reinforced the fact that different types of assets can have different levels of protection. Our taxable brokerage account, however, does not have the same type of statutory protection. It remains exposed to potential legal claims. We ultimately purchased additional umbrella coverage through a specialty insurer. Securing that extra layer of protection provides us an invaluable peace of mind. Adopting a Moderately Conservative Asset Allocation  Now that we’re in our 70s, we feel we can afford to be less aggressive in the stock market. Our portfolio is currently allocated 45% to stocks, 45% to bonds, and 10% to cash.  This asset allocation gives us enough exposure to growth to help combat inflation while providing some protection against a severe bear market. Consider a difficult scenario in which the stock market falls 40% and the bond market declines 10%. Under those conditions, our portfolio would lose roughly 22.5%. Alternatively, if our 55% allocation to bonds and cash holds its value while stocks absorb the full 40% decline, we would still have 82% of our portfolio’s value intact. This allocation gives us a larger cushion against a severe stock-market downturn. It would allow us to rebalance into stocks after a major decline, rather than being forced to sell stocks when prices are depressed. More importantly, this asset allocation has so far allowed us to maintain a comfortable lifestyle without worrying about market swings. Hiring a Financial Advisor I don’t recommend a financial advisor for everyone. In fact, if we were younger, we probably wouldn’t have one. But at age 75, I have to concede that I’m not as sharp as I used to be, and I can get emotional at times. Those aren’t ideal qualities to have in a world where scammers are becoming increasingly sophisticated. What I like about having a financial advisor manage our money is that I have to go through my advisor to access our funds. That extra layer of protection helps protect our portfolio from scams—and from ourselves. It gives us a chance to pause and think things through rather than make an emotional decision in the moment. At this stage of our lives, we’re paying for more than investment management. We’re paying for another layer of discipline and protection—and for the peace of mind that comes with knowing someone else is looking out for us. Focusing on Making It Last Now that we're retired and have accumulated enough to support the life we want, our priorities have changed. We don't need to squeeze every last dollar of growth from our portfolio. Instead, we're trying to make what we've built lasting—protecting it from lawsuits, market declines, scams, and, perhaps most importantly, our own mistakes.  Dennis Friedman retired from Boeing Satellite Systems after a 30-year career in manufacturing. Born in Ohio, Dennis is a California transplant with a bachelor’s degree in history and an MBA. A self-described “humble investor,” he likes reading historical novels and about personal finance. Follow Dennis on X @DMFrie and check out his earlier articles
Read more »

Taxes

A Roth Haiku

"The thing is people sometimes argue for one or the other. I have done the math and at best it might be a push. But being able to spend money up to the 12% marginal bracket is nice, but I still want to live my life and enjoy the fruits of my labor. If that means I need to pay IRMAA. That's a good problem to have because it means I have money...pay the IRMAA, pay 22%, live well, eat well, and sleep well."
- Mike Xavier
Read more »

Taxes

Tax Software 2026

"I frequently attend (usually monthly) continuing professional education classes put on by my local chapter of the Tennessee Society of CPAs. While I am now fully retired I enjoy trying to keep current on matters that interest me. One local attorney, whose practice has a focus on taxation, has done a presentation every every year to our TSCPA chapter for a long time. Many years back his topic was a new state law TN Code § 35-17-101. That law was the Community Property Trust Act which changed available tax law in Tennessee. Tennessee is not a community property state. My understanding for people who live in one of the nine community property states is the tax basis modification that a surviving spouse receives, including jointly owned assets, when the first spouse dies results in the surviving then having a tax basis of full fair market value as of the date of death of the deceased first to die spouse for many classes of assets. What I understanding the Community Property Trust Act does is provide for the optional creation of a type of trust which then allows for a couple to title certain assets into a single trust with the expected result being the step up in basis to the full value at the death of whichever spouse is the first to die. This effectively allows the trust and the surviving spouse trust beneficiary to have a low or no taxable gain if the trust assets are subsequently sold shortly after the death of the first spouse to die. I am not an attorney and do not offer legal advice. For the right people a Community Property Trust might make good tax sense but such a trust is not needed for my wife and me. The costs to create the trust, transfer assets, maintain and eventually close such a trust currently has no expected tax benefit to us. Trusts can be great financial vehicles but like so many matters discussed on this forum I think a careful consideration of benefits and costs should drive our financial decisions. Those are my thoughts about a Community Property Trust."
- William Perry
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 52: WE SHOULD aim to become homeowners—not because homes deliver handsome capital gains, but because owning locks in our housing costs and, with every mortgage payment, forces us to save.

Truths

NO. 122: IT’S HARD to make money on a house unless we stay put for at least five years, and preferably seven years or longer. Why? It costs so much to buy and especially sell real estate. Add up title insurance, mortgage-application fees, the commission when selling, local transfer taxes, legal fees and other expenses, and the roundtrip cost could total 10% of a home’s value.

think

DURATION. This is a measure of a bond or bond fund’s sensitivity to interest rate changes. A bond fund with a duration of five years would fall 5% in price if interest rates rose by one percentage point and climb 5% if rates declined by one percentage point. A rule of thumb: Avoid owning bonds whose duration is longer than your investment time horizon.

act

MAKE QUALIFIED charitable distributions. In your 70s or older and want to give to charity? Consider donating directly from your IRA. You won’t get a tax deduction. But you also won’t owe taxes on the distribution, which will likely mean a smaller tax bill and lower Medicare premiums, plus the sum counts toward your required minimum distribution.

College-bound kids?

Manifesto

NO. 52: WE SHOULD aim to become homeowners—not because homes deliver handsome capital gains, but because owning locks in our housing costs and, with every mortgage payment, forces us to save.

Spotlight: Advisors

The Right Tools

WE RECENTLY UPGRADED our home with smart locks, which open with a keypad code or cellphone command. After a bunch of research, we settled on Yale Assure Locks, which I’d also seen on an episode of This Old House. I’ve installed many locksets in the…
Read more »

Keep it Simpler

I recently had my quarterly review with my financial advisor at a well-known national RIA with an office in my city. They prepare a thorough presentation with economic updates and detailed performance on all my holdings. While I follow my portfolio regularly, these meetings are…
Read more »

Matters of Trust

WHEN MY WIFE AND I got married, she had a credit card with an outstanding balance. Back then, you could write off the interest on your tax return. Still, I hate debt and I paid off her balance. Ever since, she’s continued to maintain a…
Read more »

Finding a flat-fee financial advisor

My wife and I are a year or two away from retirement.  We have been with a financial advisor for 2o years.  The advisor is calling all the shots.  Our retirement accounts have done very well.  We are currently paying a 1% assets under management…
Read more »

“A Complex Portfolio, a Modest Account”

Question: If someone has a relatively small IRA—say, around $54,000—do they need to be as diversified as someone managing a much larger retirement portfolio? Here’s what prompted the question. My neighbor recently lost his wife. She had taken the lead on their finances, working closely…
Read more »

No TIME Left For You

On my way to better things (No time left for you) I found myself some wings (No time left for you) Distant roads are callin' me (No time left for you) - The Guess Who It had been a while since I had been mailed…
Read more »

Spotlight: Lim

Fed Up

IS THE U.S. ECONOMY strong or weak? If you believe it’s strong—and apparently many investors do, judging by the U.S. stock market’s all-time highs—why is the Federal Reserve keeping the federal funds rate at zero? These days, it seems like we take the Fed’s policy of 0% short-term interest rates for granted. Yet such policy measures are truly extraordinary and…
Read more »

12 Financial Sins

FINANCIAL MARKETS are often quick to punish investment sins. By contrast, if we err with our borrowing, spending and other personal-finance issues, problems might not show up until years later—but the damage can be just as great. Here, to complement last week’s list of 12 deadly investment sins, are 12 deadly personal-finance sins: 1. Pride: Keeping up with the…
Read more »

How Low? Too Low

IT’S WIDELY ASSUMED that the Federal Reserve, our nation’s central bank, has two mandates: maximum employment and stable prices. But a closer look at the Federal Reserve Act of 1977 on the Federal Reserve’s very own website reveals a third mandate, namely “moderate long-term interest rates.” Does a 1.7% yield on 10-year Treasurys and 2.15% on 30-year Treasurys count as…
Read more »

Funny Money

DO YOU SEE THINGS clearly when it comes to money? Here’s a test to find out. Which of the following scenarios would you prefer? A 5% raise, but the inflation rate is 10%. A 3% salary cut, but the inflation rate is 0%. If you chose the 5% pay raise, you’ve fallen victim to a “money illusion.” This term describes…
Read more »

Time Can Take a Toll

IT’S A COMMONLY HELD belief that market risk is a function of time in the market. Simply put, risk falls as our holding period lengthens. This is the notion behind time diversification—the idea that more time allows us to diversify across different investment periods, resulting in reduced risk. For example, the S&P 500 has historically generated positive returns in nearly…
Read more »

Three Thoughts

"THE UNEXAMINED LIFE is not worth living," warned the Greek philosopher Socrates. What has my examination turned up? Here are three recent thoughts on life and how money fits in: 1. What’s measurable isn’t always meaningful. It’s easy to get tunnel vision when it comes to our personal finances. We—along with our financial advisors—tend to focus on the size of…
Read more »
HumbleDollar · https://humbledollar.com/ · printed Nov 10, 2026

Log in