Where to Stash Cash
Divvy up your money in a way that makes sense to you -- even if it doesn't follow the rules.
By Janet Bodnar, Editor
From Kiplinger's Personal Finance magazine, June 2009
- Comments
- Email This Article
- Print This Article
- Order a Reprint
Advertisement
Americans have finally gotten religion when it comes to savings. After dropping to 0% in recent years, the personal-savings rate jumped to more than 4% early in 2009. Of course, that good news comes just as Americans are being encouraged to spend money to help lift the economy out of recession.
"So what's a patriotic American to do -- save or spend?" I wrote those words back in 1984, when the same conundrum presented itself.
The answer: Do whatever's best for you.
Assuming that Econ 101 hasn't been turned completely on its head (like so much else these days), people do tend to act in their own best interests -- especially if incentives don't push them one way or another. That's where we got off track over the past few years. With the country awash in easy credit, especially for home buying, the incentives were skewed toward borrowing.
Now, with so many people concerned about paying off debt and reining in spending, the incentives are tilted in the opposite direction. But eventually all those individual decisions should add up to an economist's beloved equilibrium.
Setting priorities
Kiplinger's readers have more-direct questions about saving. "Okay," you say, "we're convinced. But where do we find the money to put aside, and how should we parcel it out? Emergency fund? Retirement? College? What about paying off debt?"
The best way to save money is to have someone else take it right off the top -- through either a retirement plan at work or some other automatic savings program -- before it burns a hole in your pocket. That's the case whether you make $50,000 or $250,000.
The standard rule is to put your money where you'll get the best return, which usually means taking full advantage of an employer match (if you still get one) in a work-based retirement plan. But I recommend that you divvy up your "pot" of money in a way that makes sense to you -- even if it doesn't follow the rules.
Nowadays, for example, you get a psychological lift from having money in the bank, even at a relatively low rate of interest. And this may sound like heresy, but sometimes it's okay to ratchet back on retirement savings and pay off debt if it helps you sleep at night.
Let's say you make $80,000 a year and want to put aside a nice, round 10%, or $8,000. If your emergency fund is anemic, kick in $2,000. If your employer matches up to 6% of your annual salary, you could contribute up to $4,800 to capture the full match. Got kids? Add $800 to their college fund. Use the remaining $400 to fund a Roth IRA.
But consider this alternative if you have high-interest debt: Set aside the same $2,000 for emergencies and $800 for college. Then cut back your retirement savings to $4,000 and put $1,200 toward paying off your credit-card balances.
Every family is different, of course. But you can adapt blueprints like these to suit your needs.
Top rates
Wherever you put your savings, we'll point you toward top-yielding certificates of deposit and money-market funds. If you're willing to take a bit more risk, read Jeff Kosnett's Where to Find Top Yields. If your kids' college fund has taken a hit, Jane Bennett Clark offers valuable lessons on how to rebuild it. And get the Lowdown on CDs from Joan Goldwasser.
- Comments
- RSS
Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy


Reader Comments (11)
Posted by: Bob at 05/21/2009 09:10:55 AM
If you have high interest "credit card" debt, I would recommend being even more aggressive at paying it off. I had a coworker who had a lot of retirement savings but it was so offset by high interest debt, that he couldn't retire anyway. Debt is like fire. Properly used and controlled, it is a useful tool. If it gets out of control, it can destroy everything you worked so hard for.
Posted by: Darren Smith at 05/21/2009 10:39:13 AM
The U.S. has been incenting people to go into debt for a very long time. Interest on home loans is tax deductible, regardless of what the funds are used for. One can take out a HELOC and use up to $100K for whatever, tax deductible, though the rules are long and complicated. When you sell your house up to $500k is tax free if you are married. However, interest on savings accounts, CDs, bonds is taxable income. Even if you take advantage of a 401K or IRA you get taxed when you take the money out, including the gains, and you can't touch it for fear of penalties until you are 59 1/2 years old. There is no question as to why the savings rate hovers around 0%. If we REALLY wanted to improve our savings rate we would eliminate the income tax and switch over to a sales tax exclusively. This would punish consumption and not savings like we currently do, not to mention significantly simplifying the tax code. No need for 401Ks or IRAs.
Posted by: Alex at 05/21/2009 12:07:12 PM
What would encourage savings would be interest that exceeds the true cost of living increase rate. A paltry 2 or 3% annual return is dwarfed by actual inflation. Personally I'm getting out of all paper investments and into hard gold and silver.
Posted by: Chet at 05/21/2009 12:52:56 PM
But if we simplify the tax code, tens of thousands (if not more) of lawyers and CPAs will be out of jobs.
Posted by: JD at 05/21/2009 01:54:55 PM
Chet, read the wikipedia article on "Parable of the broken window". It debates the logic of doing pointless things just to stimulate the economy, as your lawyers and CPAs would do.
Posted by: Rick at 05/21/2009 02:25:25 PM
I agree with Darren. I've always been a saver and it's so frustrating to get taxed on interest - especially on a CD when it's only making about 2%. It's ridiculous. They need to make the contribution level of a Roth about 40k a year. 5K is just absurd.
Posted by: monkeyfurball at 05/21/2009 11:45:03 PM
I make over $600,000 a year and I'm a CPA. You can mash that tax code into a one item tax return and I'll still make $600k a year. I don't think your politicians can ever simplify the code. They will lose too many votes. They use the code to buy votes...Booyah.
Posted by: MD at 05/22/2009 07:11:28 AM
Why not put some savings into a short-term muni mutual fund. That takes care of your tax concerns with interest from CD's. Plus you can find some funds paying over 3.5% which has a tax equivalent yield over 4.5% if you are in the 25% tax bracket. Many of these funds have checkwriting priviledges so they are much more liquid than CD's.
Posted by: Brian at 05/22/2009 03:37:26 PM
CDs are a good idea, but Bankrate does a poor job of providing information about them. They seem to only cover a fraction of banks in any area, and only some of the products at those banks.
Posted by: Frank at 05/20/2010 12:29:30 PM
i am retired and have $12,000 in Credit Card Debit. interest rates low end 5% and high 8.5%. I am 63 yrs old and can draw from my 401k and make this go away. No penalties, but I would have to pay 20% Fed tax on the withdrawal. to get the $12m, I'd redraw about $15m. I want a clean record going forward is this a bad plan? What are the alternatives?
Posted by: Frank at 05/20/2010 06:18:49 PM
I recently retired with about 12,000 in credit card debt. I am 63 yrs of age and I am thinking about paying off these cards in lump sum from my 401k plan. I will not pay any penalties, but will pay $2400 in fed taxes. (which I will pay whenever I make a withdrawal). How will this impact my credit rating, and is there a better way to get this done?