Leverage and Retirement

Over the years I have written about the topic of retirement planning, I have witnessed some incredibly crazy thinking. Many of those thoughts have come home to roost often too late for the investor to do anything to fix the situation. We plan, we tell ourselves, to retire at a certain age with a certain amount of money based on a certain withdrawal rate.  But those plans are often dashed by unforeseen events that, in hindsight we should have anticipated.

Recent reports have pointed towards an increase in employee contributions to their 401(k) plans. These upticks, however slight lead many to conclude that we are starting to get the message. But which message are we holding on to? Is it the need to simply save more because we know the chances are we will need more or is it the result of some other encouraging news? I'm inclined to go with the second choice.

Retirement planning is a whole package endeavor. In other words, simply putting money away for retirement is not enough. Numerous other pieces of the puzzle come into play and this is what is often ignored. The effort is noteworthy only if you have developed a budget that is actually less generous, forcing you to face the reality of an income in retirement that is not the same as the one the you had while working.

This income reduced budgeting is practiced by too few close-to-retirement planners. At no time in the history of retirement planning - and I'm going way back to the generous days of the defined benefit plan or pension - was the payout at retirement designed to replace 100% of what you live on now. The number was actually closer to 70% replacement and that was only if you had worked within the confines of that pension for thirty years or more (and it was not impacted by changes from the company). The remainder was to be supplemented by Social Security.

But with advent of the defined contribution plan (401(k), 403(b)), with the responsibility for funding your retirement placed squarely on your shoulders, we were forced to face the possibility that 70% of our current income would not be replaced. In order to get those kinds of post-work rewards, we would have had to invest 12-15% of our pre-tax income, every year without fail, in good markets and bad. For too many people with this plan, that sort of budget-busting restriction was simply too much to embrace.

We are to be forgiven for our human-ness however. We make mistakes and follow the herd - when they sell, we sell and when they pile in, we follow. In both instances we turn our backs on the whole concept of retirement planning: steady and ever-increasing contributions without consideration for what the overall market is doing.

Our employers didn't help much either. They gave us matching contributions, took them away or reduced them, and when they re-introduced them, they were far smaller. And we misinterpreted this as a sign that they knew something we didn't and mimicked their actions: we reduced our contributions when the matches were lowered and increased them when they were raised. As I said, we can be forgiven this tendency but we won't be absolved of this sin of remission when we begin thinking about retirement.

One of the other keys to the seemingly good news about an increase in contributions in 2011 is backlit with some additional news. Auto-enrollment helped to raise the account balances of the overall plan (and as employment improves, so will the news that we are using the plans in a more robust way). But those auto-enrolled new hires were placed squarely in the plan's target date fund of choice.

Long-time readers know about my reservations with these funds. New readers should note: target date funds are often less transparent than stand-alone funds, the underlying portfolio can be suspect, the target date may not be far enough in the future to be realistic and to date, the rebalancing implied in the fund is not determined by any specific guidelines. In other words, those who are put in a target date fund via auto-enrollment would be wise to get into an index fund (or four raging across a variety of markets) as soon as possible.

Those folks, the youngest among us who are the most likely candidates for these auto-enrollment options can make changes that will get them much closer to the goal. Older workers, however don't. And they know it. But they have some advantages, at least in their mind that the younger worker doesn't: equity.

And that equity in their homes, combined with the historically low interest rate environment has given many Baby Boomers a second option: to borrow against their homes and take the refinanced money and put into their retirement accounts. Is it a good idea or one that is bound to backfire?

Three things make it risky. One the equity in your home may not recover. Older homeowners who tap their home's equity are doing so at the risk of increasing their mortgages at a time when additional debt, no matter how inexpensive is not prudent. Two: They are eliminating a safety valve that could be used if retirement got too rough: the reverse mortgage. And third, if they are forced to or simply want to sell, the equity in their property is not there to give them a downpayment for new housing.

Leveraging your home to finance your retirement account does come with some tax advantages though. Just because one account increases as one is leveraged doesn't necessarily give you a balanced approach. In other words, there are "veiled risks".

You will still need to allocate your portfolio to perform better than the cost of the new loan and the interest rate you pay. This means that year-over-year, you will need to do much better than you may have calculated. A four percent mortgage added into the cost of the refinance (another one percent) added to the rate of inflation (another three percent if it holds steady) means your portfolio will need to return north of eight percent year over year - without fail.

The only way to give your retirement income any sort of sure footing is to increase your contributions by a much wider margin than what has become known as the average - 8% - and pay down your mortgage.

Fifteen percent is still the optimum contribution rate and even that number will give you only 75% of your current income in retirement - provided you saved for twenty years or more. Paying down the mortgage reduces your overall cost of debt service while increasing your equity.

How Going Back to College Impacts Your Retirement

When you send your son or daughter off to college this year, the person sitting next to them in that lecture hall is more likely now than ever before to be your age, or close to it. If the rates of college borrowing are any indication, forty year olds and older are finding themselves back in school. While attending college has been touted most recently as a way to add ten-years to your life, or at least your mental health, these students are more interested on improving their chances at getting a job. Not a better one; any job.

The stress facing an older worker or recently unemployed person turned student can be monumental. There may be numerous reasons why you didn't complete college in the first place or find yourself with a worthless piece of paper from your previous go-around. None of those matter. You have decided, and the experts suggest that this is correct, that getting more training is better than not.

But college at forty or older comes with its own unique problems. Not the least of which is the worth of the education. College tuitions are increasing as parents of children in the typical age group know all too well. When you make the decision to return to school as an older worker, the cost may be offset by some prior attendance experience or work-life experience.

One of the easiest ways to offset the tuition cost is to challenge the course, suggesting to over 2,900 accredited colleges that you know what that course offers and don't need to take it for the credit. This challenge not only save money but time that could be better spent getting the education sooner to allow you to get back in the hunt for employment.  CLEP, the College Level Exam Program, is the most widely accepted "life experience" challenge exam program and the one every older student should use. The CLEP program features 32 single-subject college exams and five general exams. (For more information about CLEP exams, contact: The College Board, 800-257-9558.)

There are other ways to help in getting your degree quicker and for less cost. Your employer might have in-house programs designed to finance higher and continuing education. If you are not employed, research and study what you know as much as possible before taking these tests.

You have three things that are to your advantage and three things working against your success.

The three things in your favor. First: you probably have the focus to do well. College isn't your first experience with independence. Of course I'm not suggesting that all-students entering or in college aren't focused; they just have a higher degree of potential available distractions to take them off course. Two: you know how much this is really costing. You have a better concept of what these dollars cost against what they can return. Three: Your work ethic comes from actually working and should be transferrable, at least in your head, to a better framework of organization. In other words, you can place the most important tasks first and that ability to prioritize is probably something you didn't even realize you possessed.

The three things working against you. One: Your focus to do well may actually overload your ability to do as well as you would have hoped. Taking on too much will find you in conflict with the rigors of what your daily life has become. This is certainly not insurmountable. Experts agree that you should get as much sleep as possible and find a scheduled time to study and prepare. That advice is given to twenty year olds as well. But it is doubly important for the older student.

Two: You have a much firmer grasp of time and the time you have left to not only pay back the loan but to do so with enough of an income to make it worthwhile. And like younger students, you need to balance the loan to potential income. According to the STudent Loan Network: "By keeping your borrowing to one year's salary, you're effectively dedicating 10% of your future income to repayment, which is a manageable amount of debt. Statistically speaking, graduates who have 10% or less of their income dedicated to debt repayment are able to manage their debts; those who exceed 15% of their income tend to default." And for the older worker, this calculation is incredibly difficult to make. There is no guarantee that you will get adequate compensation when you do get a job upon graduation.

Three: Your work ethic will actually work against you. You may have previously sleep-walked in your previous job, focused on  the daily grind with the least amount of energy. Re-prioritizing your life will come without the usual support groups afforded the younger student, you will need to build a self-centered support and wedge it into your regular routine. College for the older student requires an enormous amount of focus. There are some things that can help you keep the objective in reach and not lose your forward momentum. They include: staying organized, getting more sleep than you afforded yourself when you were working, and studying. The last may take a little re-learning so be sure to give yourself time to learn how to learn again.

If you are still working, don't become complacent. Continue to improve your chances and opportunities even if life has become somewhat complicated. Spending a little at a time is far wiser than borrowing a huge sum to attend college full-time. If you aren't working, keep in mind that even the best degrees don't always end up in the best paying jobs. Get as much counseling as you can before picking a course of study. Some job choices are fleeting or don't return in salary what you expect them to pay.

The popular notion is that we will work longer than our parents, postponing retirement beyond the age of 65. If that's the case, choose a career that gives you longevity in the workforce and not just something that provides a paycheck. And even if all it does is add ten-years to your mental health, it might be worth considering.

Will you self-direct your retirement?

Today on the Financial Impact Factor Radio with Paul Petillo, Dave Kittredge and Dave Ng we continue the discussion we began yesterday about self-directed IRAs. While having control over your retirement is important, how much risk is too much and who can handle the increased potential of loss or gain.

To listen to yesterday's show, click here.

Here are some outtakes from this conversation:

Yesterday we discussed a different corner of the retirement investment world when we talked about self-directed IRA. I suggested that “If there is one thing we all seem to be seeking and at the same time, remains as elusive it is control. Our investments often seem to want us to master its fate, as if simply involving yourself is enough.” T.S.Eliot seemed to agree although we all know he wasn’t talking about your retirement plans when he wrote: "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far it is possible to go."

Jim Hitt of AmericanIRA.com to discuss the IRA that you control. There is a lot left to be discussed it seems and little clarification is needed in advance. Jim is a third party administrator or TPA. We have had a few professionals who ply their trade as a go-between, somewhat detached from the other two parties but necessary in the legal and tax compliant execution of a retirement plan. Sometimes we need to be reminded that all retirement investments, 401(k)s, 403(b)s, IRAs in all their incarnations are essentially parts of the tax code. And I’d be willing to wager that when taxes are mentioned, there is a certain fear, perhaps caution that moves to the forefront. Self-directed IRAs are no different.

On numerous occasions, we have, in advance of a guest appearing on the show prepped the listening audience, discussed what we knew about the next day’s topic and did so in almost every instance, without the guest’s knowledge. Today, we’re going to look back.

Most of us have had out retirement plans nestled safely – and I’ll describe what I mean by safely in a moment – inside a 401(k). The way these plans are constructed give us a sense that someone else is watching over us. They choose the investments. They made the match. They suggested that they had a fiduciary responsibility to us. I asked Jim if he had just such a responsibility and he simply replied: no.

So we began the discussion there as I asked Dave and Dave if they would like to tell us what fiduciary responsibility is?

Now we all know that risk is something we need and knowing how much of a risk you can take is key in the way you execute your goals. But this is no easy task when it comes to this type of IRA. "Trust your own instinct, “ as Billy Wilder once said: “Your mistakes might as well be your own, instead of someone else's."

As Baby Boomers begin this massive wave of retirement, many are for the first time going to get their life’s retirement account to control. I was caught by one thing Mr. Hitt suggested as to the people who come to him: they come in good times and bad.

The risk of self-directing your IRA is there. Jim discussed using this money for real estate investment purposes, business opportunities and other investments such as gold, commodities, etc. And it all boils down to coordination.

Listen to Financial Impact Factor Radio with your hosts: Paul Petillo of Target2025.com/BlueCollarDollar.com and Dave Kittredge and Dave Ng of FinancialFootprint.com The show is broadcast daily, online at 6amPST/9amEST.