This article appears as part of Casey Weade's Weekend Reading for Retirees series. Every Friday, Casey highlights four hand-picked articles on trending retirement topics and delivers them straight to your email inbox. Get on the list here.
We so often hear stories of not having saved enough for retirement, but what about the other end of the spectrum? Read the article from Kiplinger below.READ THE ARTICLE
A tale of two strategies: This article proposes that any “leftover” money could be put to work by investing based on your kids’ ages to maximize returns, while still being kept in your name. By doing so, you create two retirement strategies: Your current, conservative strategy to support lifelong income, and a more aggressive strategy with increased risk, but potentially higher returns for heirs or a charity upon your passing. You have the financial peace of mind in knowing your needs will be met, and that extra money is able to ride the wave.
A look at the numbers: To provide context, the article goes on to explain a scenario in which a million-dollar-portfolio couple invests an extra $314,130 that’s sitting on the sidelines in their portfolio more aggressively. The projections show even under pessimistic terms that by age 100, the mother is able to leave behind a $1.6 million inheritance.
If this two-part strategy seems like a good fit for you, the next question is: Which account(s) do you split up? The planning here all boils down to what would benefit your beneficiary most, and as you might have guessed, that includes some strategic tax planning.
My advice: Follow the concept in this article, not the numbers. The sooner you determine how much “never-money” you have, the more you can maximize return on those funds. Furthermore, don’t just consider the market, but life insurance as a tax-free solution as well; which, won’t likely be suggested with a fee-only advisor. The market strategy only works out if you live long enough and your kids don’t cash it in early.