Dolly Parton spent a lifetime turning contradictions into strengths.

She grew up with very little money yet became extraordinarily wealthy. She left the mountains of East Tennessee, yet never really left them behind. She created an image that was deliberately extravagant, while underneath the rhinestones was a remarkably disciplined businesswoman.

Her life offers a powerful lesson about wealth because she accumulated two very different kinds of it.

I define total wealth as the combination of financial wealth and wisdom wealth:

• Financial wealth includes income, investments, businesses, property and financial security.
• Wisdom wealth is harder to measure. It includes knowing yourself, understanding what matters, finding purpose, developing resilience, building meaningful relationships and having the courage to live according to your own definition of success.

Dolly Parton built an extraordinary amount of both.

Step outside your concrete box

Parton was the fourth of 12 children raised in rural Tennessee in a family with very little money. Her childhood later inspired "Coat of Many Colors," one of her most beloved songs. The coat itself had almost no financial value, but the love with which her mother made it gave it another kind of value. Its value came from relationships, love and gratitude.

That is wisdom wealth.

But being grateful for what we have does not mean accepting every limitation we inherit. I use the term "concrete box" to describe the invisible boundaries that family, circumstances, culture, fear and our own assumptions can construct around our lives.

Over time, we can become so accustomed to those walls that we stop seeing them.

Parton saw hers. The day after graduating from high school, she left for Nashville. She did not reject where she came from. She simply refused to allow her starting point to define her destination.

That may be the first lesson in building total wealth: Know where you come from, but don't let it tell you how far you can go.

Create income, but own assets

One of Parton's smartest financial decisions came long before she became a global superstar.

In the 1960s, before she had even achieved a Top 10 hit as a recording artist, she established a publishing company with her uncle Bill Owens. The decision allowed her to maintain control over the copyrights to the songs she wrote.

At a time when many famous musicians surrendered ownership of their work, Parton understood its long-term value.

Years later, Elvis Presley wanted to record her song "I Will Always Love You." It should have been a dream opportunity, until his business manager demanded half of the publishing rights.

Parton said no.

Imagine turning down Presley while you are still building your career. Yet Parton understood something every investor should understand: Income pays you today. Ownership can pay you for decades.

That decision became enormously valuable when Whitney Houston later recorded "I Will Always Love You," and the song became a worldwide phenomenon. Because Parton retained her rights as the songwriter, she participated in its enormous financial success.

Most of us will never own a music catalog, but the principle applies to everyone:

• A paycheck creates income
• Savings can purchase investments
• Investments create ownership
• Ownership, combined with time and compounding, can create financial freedom and even generational wealth

Don't only ask, "How much am I earning?" Also ask, "What am I owning?"

For many people, that can mean building ownership through diversified equities, real estate or a business. Starting early gives compounding more time to work.

Don't confuse your job with your potential

Parton also understood that one source of income does not have to define the boundaries of your economic life.

In the movie 9 to 5, she famously sang about pouring herself "a cup of ambition." She had plenty of it.

She did not remain simply a country singer. She crossed into pop music, acted in movies, wrote books, invested in businesses, licensed products and ultimately attached her name and capital to Dollywood.

Forbes valued her music catalog at about $120 million and estimated her net worth at about $450 million. Dollywood became an economic engine in the same region where she had grown up poor. A Tennessee study estimated its annual economic impact at $1.8 billion and associated it with 23,000 jobs.

There is a financial lesson here that goes beyond celebrity entrepreneurship: Diversification does not apply only to portfolios.

Your skills and career create human capital. Saving and investing can convert the income from that human capital into financial capital. With enough time and the power of compounding, your money begins working alongside you.

You do not need five businesses to follow Parton's example. You need a growth mindset and a commitment to save, invest and own.

Failure is an event, not an identity

Looking back, it might appear that Parton's extraordinary success was inevitable. It wasn't.

Projects failed. Her movie Rhinestone disappointed at the box office. A costly prime-time television show was canceled after one season. Separating professionally from Porter Wagoner resulted in an expensive legal settlement.

She kept going.

This is where wisdom wealth becomes essential to financial wealth. Investors experience bear markets. Entrepreneurs have failed ventures. Employees lose jobs. Careers stall. Retirement plans change. No financial plan can eliminate uncertainty or life's unexpected turns.

Financial wealth can give us the resources to withstand setbacks. Wisdom wealth gives us the resilience to begin again.

Sometimes wealth is the portfolio that carries you through a difficult period. Sometimes it is the mindset that prevents a difficult period from defining the rest of your life.

We need both.

Eventually, ask what money is for

Perhaps Parton's greatest investment cannot be measured on a balance sheet.

In 1995, she launched the Imagination Library, inspired partly by her father's inability to read and write. What began as an effort to provide books to children in her home county grew into an international literacy program that has distributed hundreds of millions of books.

Consider the circle her life completed:

• A girl grows up poor in Tennessee
• She steps outside her concrete box
• She turns talent into income
• She converts income into ownership
• Ownership creates financial wealth
• She uses that wealth to give millions of children opportunities that were unavailable to people she loved

That is total wealth creation.

We spend enormous amounts of time asking financial questions:

• How much should I save?
• What should I invest in?
• When can I retire?
• What return do I need?

Those questions matter. I have spent much of my professional life helping people answer them. But eventually, we should ask a bigger question: What is all this wealth for?

If money itself becomes the destination, the finish line keeps moving. There will always be someone with a larger house, a bigger portfolio or a higher net worth.

Wisdom wealth gives you the why — financial wealth provides the how

Dolly Parton understood both sides of wealth. She knew how to make money, protect ownership and build businesses. But she also knew where she came from, what mattered to her and what she wanted her success to accomplish.

She left her rural hometown to pursue her dreams, then used much of what she built to enrich the place she came from.

Perhaps that is her greatest wealth lesson: Don't simply build a bigger balance sheet. Build a bigger life.

Step outside your concrete box. Build financial wealth. Build wisdom wealth. Together, build total wealth.

Feroz Ansari, CFP®, is a portfolio manager at Compak Asset Management and an adjunct professor at the University of California, Irvine. He is the author of The Wisdom and Wealth Solution, published by Kiplinger Books and a USA Today national bestseller.

To learn more, visit wisdomandwealthsolution.com or subscribe to The Wisdom and Wealth Solution YouTube channel.

Related Content

• 5 Dolly Parton Quotes Retirees Should Live By
• The Biggest Obstacle to Happiness Isn't a Poorly Performing Portfolio — It's a Barrier You Haven't Even Noticed
• Want to Make Better Investment Decisions? Use This 8-Question Checklist, From a Financial Planner
• The Inheritance Your Kids Need More Than Money — and 5 Ways to Pass It On
• When a $1 Valet Tip Becomes $5: What Tipping Anxiety Says About Inflation and the Outdated Price List in Your Head

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Twenty years ago, a surviving spouse might have inherited a pension and a checking account.

Today, she's more likely to inherit multiple retirement accounts, taxable investments, trust assets, stock compensation, Medicare decisions and a Social Security claiming strategy, often all at once.

As a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER® Professional, I'm watching more of my female clients step into this role as the baby boomer retirement wave enters its final stretch. The role itself has become far more complicated than it used to be.

This isn't just about assets changing hands. It's a shift in financial leadership. Women aren't only inheriting wealth, they're inheriting responsibility, often while simultaneously managing retirement, widowhood or another major life transition.

Here are the six priorities I put in front of every client making this shift, and the order matters as much as the list itself.

1. Get a handle on access before anything else

Before touching investments, secure access to cash and liquidity. That means access to cash accounts, a clear picture of what's coming in and going out and a check for life insurance claims that might not have been filed yet.

That last one can relieve significant financial pressure at a moment when everything else feels uncertain.

A financial adviser can help identify every inflow and outflow so nothing falls through the cracks, and working with one before an unexpected event can make this process seamless.

This is the foundation everything else gets built on, and it's not a step to rush.

2. Reassess every income source, not just the obvious ones

Losing a spouse can change Social Security benefits, required minimum distributions, tax brackets, Medicare premiums and investment withdrawal needs, often all in the same year. I think of retirement income like an orchestra: When one instrument changes, every other player has to adjust.

Skipping this reassessment means leaving money on the table or worse, triggering tax consequences that could have been avoided with a little planning. Important to keep in mind, time matters here.

3. Update beneficiaries before anything else on the estate list

A major life transition, whether retirement, widowhood or divorce, should trigger a full estate review: Wills, trusts, healthcare directives, powers of attorney and transfer-on-death registrations.

But if I had to rank the list, updating beneficiaries on qualified accounts and life insurance, meaning IRAs, Roth IRAs, annuities and policies, comes first.

Skip this step, and those assets can pass to an estate instead of a person, which creates real tax problems for the people you meant to protect.

4. Match your investment risk to your new reality, not old assumptions

Retirement isn't a choice between growth and income; it's about giving each dollar a purpose. Some assets should provide dependable income, others should outpace inflation, and others exist to provide flexibility when markets get volatile.

One misconception I hear often is that holding a lot of cash is automatically the safe move.

Say a retiree is sitting on $200,000 in cash earning next to nothing. At 3% average inflation over 20 years, that same $200,000 loses more than half its real purchasing power, even though the number on the statement never drops.

That's the quiet risk that a "safe" allocation can carry. The conservative approach that felt right 30 years ago isn't automatically the right one for the next 30.

5. Plan for healthcare costs long before you need to

Healthcare isn't simply another line item in a retirement budget. It's one of the largest financial risks retirees face, largely because it's so hard to predict its timing or size, and it's also one of the biggest opportunities for strategic planning.

The clients who benefit most are the ones who start this conversation years before retirement.

There are strategies available well ahead of time that can meaningfully reduce taxes tied to future healthcare costs. It's worth having that conversation earlier than feels necessary.

6. Plan for 30 years, not 10

Women often live longer than men, and should plan for retirements lasting 30 years or more. Over that time horizon, inflation can be a bigger threat to a portfolio than short-term market volatility.

Planning only for today's expenses ignores what the same lifestyle might cost decades from now, so a portfolio built for a 30-year retirement needs to be designed with that stretch in mind from the start, not adjusted for it later.

I see this pattern often: A client is widowed unexpectedly, and my job is to be the bridge through that period without pressure or panic.

Because we'd already documented income sources, reviewed estate documents, updated beneficiaries and built a retirement income strategy together well before the transition, there were no dropped balls and no desperation.

She had the space to focus on her family, which is exactly where she needed to be.

Final thoughts

Financial confidence doesn't begin when life changes; it begins long before it has to. If you're approaching retirement, or you expect to take on this role someday, schedule time this year to walk through every piece of your financial picture, even if nothing feels urgent right now.

The clarity it provides tends to be worth far more than the time it takes.

Related Content

• 5 Retirement Tips to Help Women Take Control of Their Future
• I'm a Financial Planner: This Is How Smart Women Can Plan for Financial Freedom Despite Life's Curveballs
• 3 Financial Hurdles Coming Up for Women: How to Overcome Them, From a Financial Planner
• I'm a Wealth Adviser: These 10 Strategies Can Help Women Prepare for Their Impending Financial Power
• An Estate Planning Guide for Women: 5 Essential Moves to Prepare for When Life Happens

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

You've no doubt heard the saying, "There is nothing as uncommon as common sense."

There is a closely related issue in the form of several questions that we should ask ourselves, but often do not at times when common sense should prevail:

• If I do this, what are the likely consequences?
• Why am I even considering doing this?
• Who can I ask before I take the next step?
• Have I been here before, doing something that, when looking back on it later and the trouble it got me into, indicates I'm prone to asking for trouble?

'I am supposed to get 32 miles per charge'

Ideas for my articles are often handed to me by readers. Fortunately, most are asking for a legal opinion on some action they want to take. Frequently, the underlying basis, as we say in law, "assumes facts not in evidence."

This means a question or statement assumes something that hasn't been proven, but there is an assumption, a belief, that the statement is true, and they are about to act on it.

"Jackie," who lives in the South, sent this email that is the perfect illustration: "I purchased a new Chrysler Pacifica eHybrid from my local dealer in 2024. I am supposed to get 32 miles per charge. In March, I was only getting 28 to 32 miles per charge. The charge is also not lasting as long as it is supposed to.

"The local dealer, as well as Chrysler customer care, refuse to fix the problem. My car is within the warranty period. I want to put magnetic signs on my car telling people not to purchase vehicles from this dealer. Am I protected under the First Amendment? We live in a small city, and these signs would definitely make an impact."

Jackie signed her email, "A devoted reader."

Is Jackie's complaint valid?

I read online reviews of her vehicle, all confirming the EPA estimates 32 miles of electric-only range on a full charge. Industrywide, EV batteries normally lose about 2% range per year.

In any event, a 28- to 32-mile electric range is within normal variation for a 2024 Pacifica PHEV. Jackie's complaint about the dealer and Chrysler therefore lacks merit, as there is nothing to repair.

Legal issue: Defamation vs protected opinion

When it comes to criticizing a business, it is important to understand the difference between speech that is protected and speech that is unprotected — statements of opinion vs factual assertions.

So, Jackie could attach a sign to her car that states her opinions, such as:

• I believe the dealer misled me, and I would not buy from them again
• I do not like the mileage I am getting
• In my opinion, Chrysler isn't honoring its warranty

However, the following assertions could see her staring down the barrel of a defamation lawsuit if she's unable to support them with facts:

• Chrysler lied about the battery range
• My dealer knowingly sold me a defective vehicle and refused needed repairs
• My dealer is engaging in consumer fraud

The legal risks Jackie could be inviting

Jackie could be:

• Sued for business interference. If her local Chrysler dealer has proof that the signs she put on her car are costing them sales or other economic damage, they would likely file suit alleging intentional interference with prospective economic advantage and trade libel.
• Sued for defamation. Over the years, I have had more than one unhappy car owner march into my office, shaking like a leaf, holding a lawsuit they were just served with from an auto dealer that accuses them of posting defamatory signs, reviews and social media comments containing false factual assertions — meaning they stated a specific fact that can be proven false.

To a person, they thought that by causing embarrassment to the dealer, this would result in their complaint being dealt with. The result was anything but. None of them ever saw the possible legal consequences of engaging in what amounted to defamatory conduct.

They never remotely considered having to shell out a significant amount of money for attorney fees.

So, Jackie may put magnetic signs on her vehicle if they contain only her opinions, but she would almost certainly find herself in scalding-hot legal water if the signs contain false factual accusations about the dealer or manufacturer.

I am worried about Jackie

I do not know Jackie, but I wonder if this is a pattern with her. Is she reacting to a perceived wrong in a disproportionate way, revealing a grievance mindset? Is she psychologically invested in the idea that she has been wronged and someone must be held accountable?

That could explain why someone would consider putting a sign on her car even though doing so might lead to significant (and expensive) consequences.

Jackie lives in a small town and will need to have her vehicle serviced, so what does she get out of going to war with the dealer? Absolutely nothing!

There could very well be deeper issues at play, and this could be a time for a family meeting. Today, it is a non-issue with her vehicle, but she faces potential enormously high attorney fees if she defames the auto dealer and automaker.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield, Calif., and welcomes comments and questions from readers, which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993, or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1@gmail.com. And be sure to visit dennisbeaver.com.

Related Content

• What to Do When an Unhappy Customer Threatens to Ruin Your Rep
• Six Things Not to Do if You Want to Resolve a Conflict
• Eight Don’ts to Keep in Mind as You and Your Loved Ones Age
• Are Your Secrets Safe With a Law Firm's Receptionist? All About Attorney-Client Privilege (Though Kenny Is Clearly in Big Trouble)
• Loyalty Points and a Widow's Interaction with Customer Service: What Happens When a Company Forgets the Human Behind the Account

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Equity compensation can be a powerful wealth-building tool when deployed correctly. However, it can also quietly become one of the most misunderstood parts of your financial life.

Stock options, restricted stock units (RSUs), employee stock purchase plans (ESPPs) and other forms of equity compensation are an increasingly common benefit, yet many people manage them reactively. They make decisions on one vesting event or trading window at a time, without a clear strategy tying those decisions back to the big picture.

Equity compensation is often viewed separately from the rest of a household's finances, managed independently from investment accounts or retirement planning. However, it's not a standalone benefit; it's a meaningful part of the overall financial picture.

Decisions about exercising or selling company stock can meaningfully influence taxes, cash flow, portfolio risk and long-term outcomes just as investment and retirement decisions do.

When those decisions are made in isolation, you might be taking unintended risks, creating avoidable tax consequences or missing opportunities to align equity compensation with broader financial priorities.

Looking at equity compensation from the right perspectives

Concentration risk. Your career and your portfolio are linked. One of the most overlooked aspects of equity compensation is concentration risk. Your paycheck already depends on your employer.

When a large portion of your investments also depend on that same company's stock, your financial well-being can become more tied to the success of your company than you might realize.

This doesn't mean your company stock is "bad," or that you should sell it immediately. It does mean you should be intentional about understanding how much of your overall net worth depends on one company, one industry and one market cycle.

From there, the goal is to decide how much exposure you're truly comfortable with and how equity compensation fits alongside the rest of your investments over time.

When equity compensation is evaluated as part of your total portfolio rather than as a separate bucket, it becomes easier to make disciplined decisions about diversification, risk and timing.

Tax planning. Timing matters more than people realize. Equity compensation decisions are also tax decisions. The timing of exercises, sales and vesting events can impact how much of the value you ultimately keep after taxes are paid.

In high-income years, it might make sense to defer certain taxable events when flexibility exists. In lower-income years, the opposite could be true, and accelerating income can be advantageous.

For example, someone planning to retire at year-end might benefit from waiting to exercise stock options until the following year, when earned income is no longer part of the tax equation and lower tax brackets could apply.

Similarly, years with unusually large deductions or lower income in general can create an opportunity to exercise or sell more company stock while softening the tax impact.

Market conditions can also matter. If your goal is diversification, selling shares or exercising options during a market pullback can mean selling and re-investing at lower prices.

This typically results in a lower tax bill but allows the assets to recover over time in a more diversified portfolio.

In other words, you can accomplish your goal at a lower cost without giving up much overall value. The key is making these choices intentionally, rather than reacting to short-term market moves.

Maximizing net value, not just gross value. A rising stock price is exciting, but the goal isn't just growth. The goal is what you keep after taxes, risk and opportunity costs.

Holding equity indefinitely might maximize upside, but it can also increase portfolio risk and limit flexibility.

Conversely, selling too quickly could reduce long-term value. The right balance depends on your goals, cash-flow needs and overall financial picture.

Mitigating market risk through structured decisions. If you know you'll be exercising options or selling shares in a given time period, spreading those decisions out can help manage risk.

Planned quarterly, monthly or annual sales or exercises can smooth out market volatility, benefiting from upside if prices rise while reducing regret if prices fall later in the year.

Having a plan can also help avoid panic-driven sales during periods of market stress.

Best practices for managing equity compensation

Develop an overall plan. The most important step is having a plan for how you will handle your equity compensation over time. This includes understanding your choices, the terms of your options and the tax consequences and potential gains or losses from your exercise and sale decisions.

The challenge is that no single equity compensation decision exists in a vacuum. Each one affects taxes, liquidity and portfolio construction, all of which are key aspects of your financial life. A well-thought-out strategy considers:

• The type and expiration dates of your equity awards
• Tax implications of different exercise and sale timing
• Your long-term goals for equity (income, diversification, funding a specific objective)

Your goals matter here. If equity compensation is earmarked for a near-term or fixed-timeline goal, waiting until the last possible moment to sell introduces unnecessary risk and forces the full tax hit into one year.

If your primary goal is diversification, you can preplan periodic sales while staying flexible when conditions change.

Understand what happens if you leave your company — and plan ahead. Many equity-compensation plans have strict rules when employment ends. In some cases, vested stock options must be exercised within as few as 90 days after leaving the company, regardless of whether departure is due to retirement, resignation, disability or death.

These timelines can be short, so it's important that both you and your family understand what action might be required. Equity compensation shouldn't become a crisis simply because a deadline went unnoticed.

If you have flexibility around the timing of when you leave your company, understanding these conditions allows you to be more strategic.

• If you're retiring, the post-retirement exercise window could be negotiable
• If you're switching jobs, you have some control over your last day

For instance, if your next round of vesting is only a couple of weeks away, you can negotiate a start date with your new company that allows you to vest before leaving.

Final thoughts

Equity compensation can be an important driver of long-term wealth, but it needs to be managed intentionally. When decisions aren't made in the context of your full financial picture, opportunities can quietly become avoidable risks.

Our role is to help you move from reactive to intentional when it comes to equity compensation. That means building a strategy that fits your full financial picture, coordinating decisions around taxes, retirement and investment goals over time and ensuring that when key moments arrive, you're ready for them.

This material is intended for informational/educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, tax, or legal advice, a solicitation, or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or investment product.

Related Content

• Don't Let Your Equity Compensation Trip You Up: A Financial Expert's Guide
• Three Steps to Weave Equity Compensation into Your Financial Plan
• Employee Stock Options: Understanding the Benefits and Risks
• How to Unlock the Value of Your Employee Stock Options (and Help Avoid Taking a Financial Hit)
• Yay! You've Been Awarded Stock! Boo, the Tax Hit Is Massive: How to Avoid the Mistakes High Earners Make Before They Even Realize It

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Investing in U.S. Treasury securities has long been the financial equivalent of vanilla ice cream: Not the most exciting choice, but generally predictable and dependable.

That reputation has made Treasuries a cornerstone of countless investment portfolios and an important source of funding for a national debt that now exceeds $40 trillion.

About U.S. Treasury securities

What is a U.S. Treasury security? It is a loan you make to the U.S. government, with terms ranging from ultra-short (four weeks) to long-term (30 years). In return, the U.S. government promises to pay back the full amount of your principal, plus interest, at regular intervals.

Treasury securities have long been considered one of the safest investments because they're backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

But in recent years, some investors have questioned whether an investment in U.S. Treasury securities should continue to be categorized as the default "safe" investment.

What if, for example, the trust that worldwide investors have placed in these instruments breaks, and payments are either denied or deferred? What if a significant number of investors decide they no longer want to help fund the U.S. government, because a large portion of the debt is related to military spending or other policies with which they disagree?

If these concerns resonate with you, there's good news. There are other fixed income alternatives that could help you sleep better at night — options that put your capital to work in community infrastructure and local economies with risk profiles comparable to U.S. Treasuries and with similar or higher yields.

Choosing the right fixed income alternative for you depends on your values and financial situation.

Consider investing in a CDFI

A Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) provides capital to certified lenders in communities historically underserved by traditional financing opportunities.

CDFIs fund initiatives such as affordable housing projects, BIPOC-owned businesses, healthcare programs, rural development projects and community nonprofits.

Many CDFIs offer bonds with nonconcessionary or market-rate returns, so the investor doesn't have to sacrifice expected financial performance to make a positive impact.

However, investors should be aware that CDFIs are less liquid than U.S. bonds — meaning they can't be quickly converted to cash — because these investments are typically held for a set term and aren't traded on a public marketplace.

For those who don't need immediate access to their capital, however, this tradeoff can be well worth it.

The Opportunity Finance Network is a free tool you can use to find CDFIs based in rural, urban and Native communities across the U.S.

Explore opportunities to invest directly into a community project

One of the most direct and meaningful ways to make a lasting impact with your dollars is to invest in community projects. Private organizations pool investor capital to finance projects such as affordable housing, renewable energy, community facilities, healthcare centers, small businesses and more.

These investments can be a great way to diversify your portfolio.

As with CDFIs, these investments are less liquid because they're intended to be held until the loan reaches maturity, so they're not ideal for investors who need immediate access to cash.

They may also carry higher risk, depending on the issuer — however, they arguably bring the highest return in terms of community impact.

If you're interested in finding community projects seeking investments, donor collectives such as Solidaire Network or Women Donors Network, as well as community banks, can be wonderful resources for sourcing projects to invest in.

Support community infrastructure through municipal bonds

A municipal, or muni, bond is issued by a state or local government to finance infrastructure projects such as schools, roads, hospitals, water systems, transportation and parks.

In addition to providing essential services to local communities, muni bonds usually offer the highest rate of return available in the bond space, relative to the amount of investment risk.

They can also have potential federal and sometimes state tax benefits.

However, those advantages are generally reserved for investors in the highest tax brackets, making this option less suitable for some.

The Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) has a free tool to help investors view and compare municipal bonds.

Remember that your portfolio can be a direct reflection of your personal values

Regardless of what type of community investment vehicle you decide on, the important thing to know is that there are always options if you're looking to diversify your portfolio away from U.S. Treasury bonds. The right solution depends on your values, your personal appetite for risk and the timeframe you have for holding the investment.

Shifting your fixed-income strategy toward one that better aligns with your personal values is a significant step toward building a complete financial plan that fully aligns with the causes, communities and values that matter to you.

You shouldn't have to do it alone. Using a tool such as valuesadvisor.org can help you find a financial professional who cares about both the financial and ethical impact of your investments as much as you do.

Related Content

• For Your Fixed-Income Pot, Consider an Annuity That Behaves Much Like a Bank CD
• When Will Bonds Be Loved? What the Longest Bond Bear Market in History Can Teach Investors (Another Lesson From the School of Rock)
• Enough With 'Business as Usual' Financial Advice: When The World Feels Like It's Out of Control, This Is How I Reassure Clients
• 'Politics' Is a Dirty Word for Some Financial Advisers: 3 Reasons This Financial Planner Vehemently Disagrees
• I'm a Financial Planner: Here Are Three High-Impact Ways to Make a Difference With Your Dollars

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

For two generations, American investors lived by one rule that seemed to work across market conditions: Own stocks for growth, own bonds for safety, and let the two balance each other out.

The 60/40 portfolio became the default for retirement savings because, when stocks fell, bonds were supposed to rise and soften the blow.

That cushion is not what it used to be.

Investors got another reminder earlier this year. The S&P 500 gave back more than 4% in the first quarter, and the bonds meant to protect them did not ride to the rescue: Treasuries erased their early gains and turned slightly negative, and high-yield credit posted its first losing quarter since 2022. Stocks and bonds fell together for the second time in four years.

The 60/40 broke in the moment investors needed it to perform.

For most of the past two decades, when bonds and stocks tended to move in opposite directions, it made the balanced portfolio feel bulletproof. In retrospect, that hedge may have depended on a specific market regime: Low, stable inflation and a Fed with room to cut.

Insert a different inflation backdrop, like the one we see today, and the relationship can flip. The correlation between bonds and stocks has swung from deeply negative a generation ago to positive today, so the two halves of the portfolio can increasingly rise and, more painfully, fall together.

When that happens, an investor who believes they own two different things may discover they really own one bet wearing two labels.

The same erosion is now showing up inside the stock market itself. The S&P 500 trades near its richest valuations ever, close to the dot-com peak. And it has rarely been narrower: The 10 largest companies make up roughly 40% of the index, an all-time record, and technology also represents a nearly 40% weighting.

A broad index fund that appears to be 500 companies is really a concentrated bet on a handful of names priced for perfection. The listings on the horizon, such as the leading AI firms, may deepen that tilt, sitting in the same theme already driving the index, their value largely built while private.

Why alternatives could be the answer

So where can investors turn for the diversification they thought they already had? Increasingly, the answer is the one the most sophisticated institutions reached years ago: Private markets and other alternatives.

It helps to be clear about why alternatives can behave differently. Diversification only works when assets are driven by genuinely different forces, and that is what has gone missing from the traditional portfolio.

Public stocks and bonds now move on the same things: Interest rates, liquidity and sentiment. Many private investments do not. The income from a senior, secured loan depends on a borrower's cash flow and sits ahead of the equity.

A stake in an established investment firm earns based on the long-term growth of private capital itself. The gains in a private company come from years of operating work, not from a daily repricing on the headlines.

Structure matters, too. Investors often think of illiquidity as a disadvantage. But it also means that capital is not forced to react every time the markets panic. That has historically helped many private strategies avoid the sharp swings common in public markets.

It can even let a patient owner step in when others are forced to sell. Different drivers tend to produce different outcomes.

The typical university endowment now holds well over half its assets in alternatives, and the pension funds behind teachers, firefighters and police officers have leaned on private markets for decades to earn returns in a way public stocks and bonds alone could not. The teacher whose pension owns private markets cannot own that same exposure in her own 401(k).

Fortunately, the door is opening for investors. In 2025, an executive order directed regulators to widen access to alternatives inside workplace retirement plans, and in early 2026 the Department of Labor proposed a framework giving plan fiduciaries clearer protection when they add private markets to their lineups.

For the roughly $14 trillion in American defined contribution plans, including $10 trillion in 401(k)s held by more than 70 million people, the allocation to private markets today is close to zero. PwC estimates that even a 5% allocation could move more than $1 trillion into private markets by the end of the decade.

The largest asset managers are already building vehicles to meet this shift, and the best firms are doing more than repackaging old strategies. They curate around specific themes and design structures that give investors more liquidity, access and optionality than traditional private funds have historically offered.

Increasingly, how a vehicle is built can matter as much as what it holds.

New opportunities within reach

None of this means stocks and bonds disappear; they remain the core of how many people build wealth. But the idea that those two alone can diversify a portfolio is one that the last several years have challenged.

Alternatives are moving from the edge of the portfolio toward the center, and within reach of far more investors than before.

The investors who do best in moments like this recognize the regime has changed before they are forced to. The tools the most successful institutions have used for decades are becoming available more broadly than ever, and the door is open.

The 60/40 portfolio had a remarkable run. The next chapter will be written by the investors willing to look beyond stocks and bonds.

Related Content

• The 60/40 Portfolio Had Its Run: Here's Where I Keep My Money Now (and It's Not Bonds), From an Investing Pro
• Why the 60/40 Portfolio Is Flatlining: This Is How Alternatives Can Resuscitate It
• Is Private Equity Behind the Scenes in Your 401(k)? Here's What That Could Mean for Your Retirement
• General Partner Stakes: Why Investors Are Buying Into the Business of Private Equity
• How Private Equity in Your Portfolio Could Boost Returns

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

In the summer of 1960, the Everly Brothers released one of their signature hits, "When Will I Be Loved?" Written by Phil Everly (and made famous a second time by Linda Ronstadt in 1974), the song tells the story of someone wondering why they continue to be overlooked despite remaining loyal and dependable.

More than 65 years later, investors might reasonably ask the same question about one of the largest asset classes in the world.

When will bonds be loved again?

Why have bonds declined?

For most of my nearly 40-year career as a financial professional, bonds were among the most respected investments available. They generated income, reduced portfolio volatility and often rose when stocks struggled, becoming the foundation of the traditional 60/40 portfolio.

That belief was reinforced after the dot-com bust, 9/11, the Global Financial Crisis and the COVID-19 shutdowns. In each episode, Federal Reserve easing generally supported bond prices, reinforcing the idea that at least one part of a diversified portfolio could cushion periods of market stress.

Then came the post-COVID inflation hangover.

Massive fiscal and monetary stimulus, combined with supply-chain disruptions and labor shortages, produced the highest inflation in four decades. The Fed responded with one of the most aggressive interest-rate-hiking campaigns in modern history, raising short-term rates from essentially zero in early 2022 to more than 5% by mid-2023.

The consequences for the bond market were unlike anything most investors had experienced.

Because bond prices move inversely with interest rates, existing bonds declined as yields rose, with longer maturities suffering the largest losses. Investors who viewed high-quality bonds as stable suddenly experienced drawdowns few thought possible.

As of August 1, 2026, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index had experienced a drawdown lasting 72 months, making it the longest downturn in the index's history. The cumulative decline was nearly twice as large as the second-worst bond downturn on record and lasted almost five times longer than any previous decline.

What comes next?

History reminds us that every asset class eventually experiences a period when investors begin questioning its usefulness. Stocks faced that skepticism after the financial crisis. Gold experienced it after 1980. Energy investments endured it during the pandemic.

Not surprisingly, thoughtful investors have reached very different conclusions about what should come next.

Bob Pozen, an accomplished investor, academic, and former financial executive, recently argued in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece (paywall) that many affluent investors may hold too much in bonds and too little in equities.

For investors whose living expenses are adequately covered by other income sources, he suggested that a 90% stock, 10% money-market allocation could be more appropriate than automatically assigning 40% of a portfolio to bonds.

His argument reflects a broader reconsideration of the traditional 60/40 portfolio. Some investors favor market-neutral strategies, merger arbitrage or other investments that rely less on interest-rate direction. Others believe infrastructure and gold may deserve a larger role.

It is a thoughtful argument. But it is not the only thoughtful argument.

Investment writer Jared Dillian has reached almost the opposite conclusion. His view reflects one of investing's oldest principles: When an asset class becomes universally disliked, it may deserve a closer look rather than immediate dismissal.

Sentiment toward bonds is deeply negative. Many portfolios now hold less fixed income, and bonds receive little attention except when interest rates rise. That is exactly the kind of environment contrarian investors notice.

The fact that two respected thinkers can examine the same evidence and reach opposite conclusions reminds us that investing is less about certainty than about weighing probabilities with humility.

We can't predict, but we can prepare

Perhaps the larger lesson has less to do with bonds than with diversification itself.

For decades, many investors thought of diversification as simply owning stocks and bonds. That framework served investors exceptionally well, but markets continually evolve. Alternative and private investment strategies have become more widely available, giving investors more portfolio construction tools than they had a generation ago.

That does not make the 60/40 portfolio obsolete. It simply suggests diversification deserves thoughtful examination rather than automatic acceptance.

Many investors had experienced only one major bond environment before COVID: A nearly 40-year period of generally declining interest rates beginning in the early 1980s. Falling rates created one of the greatest bond bull markets in history, allowing bonds to deliver both attractive income and significant capital appreciation.

That experience was extraordinary. It was also historically unusual.

Interest rates tend to move in long cycles, sometimes lasting decades. Investors may forget that the period from 1982 through 2020 was every bit as unusual as the last several years, only in the opposite direction. What seemed normal was actually one of the most favorable environments bond investors had ever experienced.

Today's environment may not represent the death of bonds. It may simply mark a return to a more typical interest-rate landscape.

Inflation could remain higher than investors became accustomed to, making bonds less attractive than they once were. Or today's higher yields could produce stronger long-term returns than many investors expect.

Portfolio construction may evolve toward a broader mix of stocks, bonds, cash and alternative strategies. Or, after one of the longest periods of disappointment in history, bonds may quietly regain investors' affection.

Howard Marks often reminds investors that we cannot predict, but we can prepare. That may be the most important takeaway.

Rather than reacting to the past few years, investors should ask whether their portfolios are diversified enough to succeed across a wide range of economic environments. Eventually, every asset class has its turn in the spotlight.

Eventually, every asset class falls out of favor. The challenge is recognizing that today's least-loved investments can become tomorrow's favorites.

So perhaps the better question is not simply, "When will bonds be loved?" It is whether investors will remain disciplined enough to recognize the opportunities when they appear.

Related Content

• The 60/40 Portfolio Had Its Run: Here's Where I Keep My Money Now (and It's Not Bonds), From an Investing Pro
• Should You Buy Individual Bonds?
• The Best Bond ETFs to Buy
• A Lesson From the School of Rock (and a Financial Adviser) as the Markets Go Around and Around
• Does the Market Feel Like We Do? It Does Not, and This Is Why That Matters (Another Lesson From the School of Rock)

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

I've gotten pretty good at recognizing AI-generated emails. A client sent me one recently about their portfolio — formal, thorough and missing the person I knew on the other end. I asked about it.

Sure enough, they had fed their account information into an AI tool, asked a few questions and forwarded the result. They were thoughtful and proactive. They were also outsourcing a conversation that I would have preferred to be between the two of us.

I'm not here to argue that AI isn't useful. It is. I use it myself, and I'd encourage clients to use it too — as a starting point. It's a handy way to educate yourself and a tool for thinking more clearly before a conversation.

But there's a difference between a tool that helps you think and one that thinks for you. In financial planning, that difference matters enormously.

What AI does well, and where it falls short

AI can model a real estate transaction. It can simplify dense information. It can tell you the fastest path out of debt or project the growth of a retirement account over 30 years. It solves the blank-page problem: When you don't know where to start, it gives you somewhere to begin.

What it doesn't have is intuition, emotion, common sense or imagination. In my experience, those four things are what determine whether a financial plan actually works for the person who has to live it.

Consider something as straightforward as a mortgage. When interest rates were near historic lows, the math was clear: Keep the debt, invest the difference, earn a greater return. That spreadsheet was right.

But for some clients, the idea of owning their home outright matters more than any rate-of-return calculation. It's visceral. It's about security and identity and a feeling that no model captures.

I've learned not to fight it. When someone is choosing between two good options and one of them speaks to something deep, the right answer isn't always the optimal one.

The machine doesn't know you

Risk tolerance is another place where this shows up clearly. A portfolio model can tell you that, based on your age, timeline and assets, you should be fully invested in equities. And maybe you should.

But if you're the kind of person who can't sleep when markets fall — who will sell at exactly the wrong moment because the pain has become unbearable — that "optimal" allocation was never right for you to begin with. Human nature, in my experience, is undefeated. The best financial plan is the one you can actually live with.

I've also seen AI confidently deliver wrong answers, with no indication that anything was off, on things like tax situations, withdrawal strategies and rules that vary by state or year. The output is only as good as the question, and most people don't know what they don't know.

That's not a knock on the technology. It's a reminder that for high-stakes decisions, accuracy isn't enough. You also need judgment.

And then there's the kitchen table. So many of the financial decisions that shape a family's life happen in conversation — over a meal, in the car, in the quiet after the kids go to bed. Those conversations draw on decades of shared history.

You know what makes your spouse nervous and what makes them feel safe. You know what your parents modeled, what worked and what didn't, and what you want to do differently.

The machine doesn't know any of that. It can't ask the right follow-up question, sense that something is being left unsaid, or recognize that the numbers are only half the story.

A partner, not a substitute

Here's what I've come to believe: AI works best as a partner in this process, not a replacement for it. Use it to educate yourself, clarify your thinking, and to prepare for the conversations that actually matter.

But before any decision that carries real weight, like a retirement, an inheritance or a major life transition, bring it to someone who knows not just your portfolio, but your history, your family, your values, and what you actually want your money to do for your life.

The goal of financial planning has never been to produce the most mathematically elegant outcome. It's to help people build lives they feel good about. That work has always required something a machine can't replicate: The ability to understand a person, in full, and help them move toward what they actually want.

AI can build a budget. It can't build a life. That part is still ours.

Related Content

• 6 Ways to Use AI to Improve Your Financial Life
• How to Stop Second-Guessing Financial Decisions You've Already Carefully Made
• Feeling Too Guilty to Spend in Retirement? You Really Need to Get Over That
• Are You Hesitating to Spend Money You've Spent Years Saving? Here's How to Get Over It, From a Financial Adviser
• I'm a Financial Adviser: When Managing Your Wealth Feels Like a Pain, Simplify

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Most retired couples rely heavily on Social Security benefits. When one spouse dies, there's often a major loss of their benefits.

The surviving spouse will get either their own benefit or the survivor benefit (the deceased spouse's benefit), whichever is higher. If one spouse's benefits are low, the impact on income will be small.

But when both spouses are collecting substantial benefits, as is often the case, there will be a significant reduction that could last for many years.

That can cause a shortfall because living expenses may not decline very much. If the survivor stays in the same home, property taxes or rent, utilities, insurance and some other monthly expenses remain about the same.

For example, Jim Jones collects $2,500 a month, and June Jones gets $2,000. If one of them dies, the survivor will receive $2,500 a month — a 44.4% drop in total benefits. If both are getting $2,500, the drop would be 50%.

One way to offset a decline in future Social Security benefits is to buy a joint lifetime income annuity. It provides a stream of guaranteed income that continues after the death of a spouse. You must choose when your payments will start when you sign up. Some products, however, may allow you to change the start date.

A fixed indexed annuity with an income rider, a more complex product, also provides guaranteed lifetime income. The big advantage is flexibility: The starting date for income is not set when you buy the annuity. You can begin when you want.

A traditional lifetime annuity produces generous income "forever"

An income annuity can cover one person or both spouses. A joint income annuity pays the survivor the same income stream after one spouse has died. It can help fill the income gap that is created when Social Security benefits plummet after a spouse's death.

You can choose an immediate or a deferred annuity. With a deferred income annuity, the longer you defer payments, the greater they'll be.

How much income can you get?

For example, the Joneses are 67 years old and healthy. They deposit $200,000 in a joint deferred lifetime income annuity. They decide to start receiving payments at 80. With one of the highest-paying products on the market (as of August 2026), they will receive $3,758.07 a month for as long as either is living.

Of that amount, only $2,454.02 will be taxable, as the remainder is considered a non-taxable return of principal. If at least one of them lives long enough for the entire principal to be repaid, the income will continue but become fully taxable. This is where the insurance aspect kicks in and why an income annuity serves as longevity insurance.

Here's a different scenario. Jim is in bad health and doesn't expect to live more than a year or two. He wouldn't be eligible to buy more life insurance, but annuity companies don't care about a buyer's health.

The couple decides to purchase an immediate income annuity. If they buy a joint lifetime immediate annuity with a $200,000 deposit, they'll soon start receiving $1,237.65 a month (only $519.81 taxable) from one top insurer.

If Jim lives longer than expected, that's fine. If he doesn't, June will have a cushion to make up for reduced Social Security benefits.

Alternatively, Jim and June could put part of their money in an immediate annuity and part in a deferred income annuity, or they could purchase an income annuity payable only on June's life, which would provide a higher guaranteed income.

The traditional income annuity typically has no cash surrender value. You've traded your money for a stream of income — your own private pension.

Indexed annuity: Cash value plus guarantee gives flexibility

A fixed indexed annuity offers a different, more flexible path to guaranteed lifetime income.

These products guarantee a portion of the stock market's gains during up years while offering complete protection from loss during down years. They credit interest based on the growth of a market index, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average or S&P 500. So while you typically don't get all of the return when the market is booming, in return, you lose nothing in down years.

By adding a guaranteed lifetime-income rider, you can assure future income. Since the starting date for income is not set when you buy the annuity, you can start getting payments whenever you want to. This is a great feature because even a retiree in great health can die unexpectedly.

Have cake and eat it, too, but no free lunch

Normally, when you convert an annuity into an income stream ("annuitization"), its cash surrender value becomes zero. That's not the case if you add an income rider. You still own the full unused value of your annuity: You can "have your cake and eat it too."

But there's no such thing as a free lunch. Most insurers charge around 1% annually of the assets in the annuity to add an income rider. That's significant: Your money will grow more slowly than without the rider.

The lifetime income payment amount is determined by the income account value and your gender and age at the time you start receiving payments. The income account value typically grows at a guaranteed annual compounded rate of 4% to 8%, so the longer you wait, the greater the income.

The income account value and cash value of your contract are separate. The income account value is used only to calculate your guaranteed income payments. It has no cash value and cannot be withdrawn.

In contrast, the contract value can be withdrawn or passed to your heirs. After many years of guaranteed income payments/withdrawals, the contract value may fall to zero, but you'll still get the same income for life.

Another downside is fluctuating interest rates. If the market goes through a long bear cycle, you may earn nothing on your contract value for several years.

Nevertheless, having cash value and flexibility are powerful advantages that make indexed annuities worth considering for generating a strong stream of income.

There's no one approach that's best for everyone. The traditional income annuity and the indexed annuity plus income rider each have their pros and cons. For some couples, the former will fit the bill; for others, the latter will.

This article covered a basic scenario where each spouse is collecting Social Security. If one spouse is significantly younger, planning can be a bit more complex. Nevertheless, the same general principles hold.

Ken Nuss is the founder and CEO of AnnuityAdvantage, a leading online provider of fixed-rate, fixed-indexed, and lifetime income annuities. Ken is a nationally recognized annuity expert and widely published author. A free rate comparison service with interest rates from dozens of insurers is available at www.annuityadvantage.com or by calling (800) 239-0356. The firm also offers an income-annuity quoting service. There are no fees or charges for the firm's services; 100% of the client's money goes to work for them in their annuity.

Related Content

• What are Annuities? The Different Types and How They Work
• Five Annuity Mistakes to Avoid
• The Truth About Annuities: The Question Isn't 'Are They Good or Bad?' It's 'Are They Appropriate for You?'
• Income and Life Expectancy Not Adding Up? An Annuity Could Solve the Equation
• Why Annuities Sometimes Sound Too Good to Be True

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

I've lived in Florida for more than 30 years. In that time, I've watched thousands of people move here to retire — and I've seen a smaller but steady number of them get surprised by tax rules and costs they didn't know existed.

Most of these surprises are avoidable. You just need to know where to look before you need the answer, not after

As a wealth adviser, here's what I tell people at Evolution Retirement Services' seminars on retiring in Florida, boiled down to the basics.

'Snowbird' isn't a tax status

Spending winters in Florida and summers up north feels like the best of both worlds. But if you still own a home, register to vote or hold a driver's license in your old state, you may still owe that state income tax — even while soaking up the Florida sun six months a year.

Florida has no state income tax. That's a big reason people move here. But "no state income tax" only applies to Florida residents. If your old state still considers you a resident, too, you can end up filing (and owing) in both places.

The fix isn't complicated, but it does require some legwork:

• Spend more than half the year here. Most states use a 183-day rule. Keep a simple calendar or travel log — it matters more than people expect if you're ever questioned.
• Move your legal documents. Your driver's license, voter registration and vehicle registration should all point to Florida.
• File a declaration of domicile. This is a short form at your local county clerk's office that formally states that Florida is your permanent home. It costs very little and takes only a few minutes.
• Update your estate documents. Your will, power of attorney and healthcare directive should be reviewed by a Florida attorney, since some states have different requirements.
• Cut the cord, don't just add a state. If your old state's tax authority sees you keeping a home, a library card, a doctor and a bank account there, they may argue you never really left. Some states are aggressive about this; it's worth taking seriously.

Homestead exemption: Don't leave this money on the table

If Florida is your permanent residence and you own your home, you likely qualify for the homestead exemption. It reduces the taxable value of your home for property tax purposes — often by $50,000 or more.

It also caps how much your assessed value can increase each year (called the Save Our Homes assessment limitation), even if your home's market value jumps.

A few things people miss:

• You have to apply — it's not automatic. The deadline is typically March 1 of the year you want the homestead exemption applied.
• The exemption only applies to your primary residence. A vacation condo or rental property doesn't qualify.
• The exemption is tied to you, not the house. If you move, you'll need to reapply at the new home. (Florida does allow you to carry over some of the Save Our Homes benefit, however. This is called "portability.")
• Other exemptions. Widows, widowers, veterans and people with disabilities may qualify for additional exemptions on top of the standard homestead benefit.

Other traps we often see

Estate and inheritance tax exposure from your old state. Florida has no estate or inheritance tax. But if you still own property, a business interest or certain accounts tied to a state that does, that exposure may not disappear just because you moved.

Insurance costs catching people off guard. Florida's homeowner's insurance market has gotten more expensive and, in some areas, it's harder to find coverage at all. This isn't a tax, but it's a real cost of living here that surprises transplants used to lower premiums up north.

Flood insurance is a separate policy and separate cost — don't assume it's included.

Assuming "no income tax" means "no taxes." Florida makes up revenue through other channels — property taxes, sales tax and insurance costs among them.

For most retirees, the math still favors Florida, but it's worth looking at your full picture rather than assuming income tax is the only line that matters.

Timing the move around tax season. If you move midyear, you may owe part-year taxes in your old state. Working with your tax preparer to time the transition — and to gather the paperwork trail (utility bills, mail forwarding, that declaration of domicile) — can save real headaches if your prior state asks questions.

The bottom line

Florida can be a genuinely smart move for retirees, both financially and for quality of life. I've watched it work out well for most people who plan for it properly.

The retirees who run into trouble are almost never the ones who moved here for the wrong reasons; they're the ones who assumed the paperwork would take care of itself.

If you're planning a move to Florida or you moved here and aren't sure you've closed the loop on residency, it's worth a conversation with both a tax professional and a Florida estate attorney before your first tax season here.

Related Content

• Thinking of Retiring to Florida? These Hidden Costs Could Drain Your Budget
• The Rise of the 'Half-Back' Retiree: Why a Perfect Florida Condo Isn't Enough
• Are No Income Tax States Better to Live In?
• I'm a Financial Adviser: This Is the Real Secret to Retirement Success
• Is It Time for Retirees to Break Up With Bonds?

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

For decades, Social Security has served as a foundational piece of retirement income. But for younger generations, the program's outlook is changing, and those changes have significant implications for long-term financial planning.

With Social Security reserves expected to be depleted by 2033, millennials, Gen Z and subsequent generations will likely need to approach Social Security as an additional source of income rather than the cornerstone of a retirement strategy.

This article outlines practical strategies you can implement to help save enough for retirement, independent of Social Security.

Lifetime contributions may increase

To resolve funding shortfalls, policymakers may consider increasing payroll taxes or taxable wage bases. You may end up contributing more over your lifetime while receiving proportionally fewer benefits.

This is why effective tax-efficient planning is increasingly important. Focus on diversifying your retirement accounts, such as Roth, traditional pretax and taxable brokerage accounts, to help maintain flexibility under shifting policies.

Retirement timelines are becoming more dynamic

Another proposed solution is increasing the full retirement age, which could require younger workers to remain in the workforce longer before accessing full benefits.

Meanwhile, the costs associated with buying a home, paying off student loan debt and rising inflation are making it increasingly difficult to save for retirement.

You're facing a more complex financial background than previous generations and you should plan for a longer investment horizon. By staying invested for a longer period, you can help offset both delayed benefits and longer life expectancy.

Personal capital can help drive retirement success

For older generations, Social Security often covered a significant portion of retirement expenses. For younger generations, that dynamic is changing dramatically. Retirement outcomes are likely to rely heavily on consistent saving, disciplined investing and long-term portfolio growth.

Apart from getting started early, one of the best ways to help secure a comfortable retirement is to optimize your saving, investing and financial habits.

Maximizing the use of tax-advantaged accounts in the right order is one of the most efficient things you can do. The first step, if applicable, is to contribute enough to your workplace retirement plans to receive the full employer match.

From there, you should consider contributing to Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s, which can be beneficial during lower-income earning years, potentially allowing for long-term tax-free compounding. Health savings accounts (HSAs) can also offer additional tax-efficient advantages.

As income rises, increasing pretax contributions can help reduce taxable income while accelerating retirement savings. Combining these two strategies can help you work towards improving long-term outcomes and becoming financially independent.

Equally important is how you structure your investments. A high overall asset allocation in equities typically allows younger investors to leverage their time horizon to their advantage.

Behavioral discipline is also a key factor. If you can stay consistent, avoid emotional short-term market timing and maintain steady contributions, you will hopefully perform better over the long term compared to those who react to short-term volatility.

The bottom line

Social Security should still be part of your retirement picture — but not the foundation.

For younger investors, there is a clear shift from dependence on public benefits to ownership of private outcomes.

Those who recognize this early and invest accordingly may be better positioned to maintain control over their financial future, regardless of how the Social Security system ultimately evolves.

Ultimately, successful retirement planning is less about predicting changes and more about optimizing what you can control: Savings behavior, tax efficiency, investment structure and long-term discipline.

Related Content

• When Will Social Security Run Out of Money? And Medicare?
• I'm a Financial Adviser: This Is How You Can Adapt to Social Security Uncertainty
• Beyond 401(k)s: How Millennials Are Ditching Gen X Retirement Strategies. Will It Pay Off?
• Five Retirement Planning Traps You Can't Afford to Fall Into, From a Wealth Adviser
• I'm a Financial Planner: Here Are Five Smart Moves for DIY Investors

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Retirement often requires adopting a new mindset.

When you were saving for retirement, you were in the accumulation phase as you built wealth. Once you reach retirement, you move into the distribution phase where you begin spending those savings. This warrants a different approach to your financial decisions — and possibly a different adviser.

Just as doctors have specialties, so do many financial professionals. Those who concentrate on the accumulation phase are adept at helping you grow your money during your working years and finding ways to make the market work for you. Their view is long term — as it should be — because they are looking at your retirement from a distance.

Other financial professionals specialize in the distribution phase of retirement. They understand the strategies that can help you maximize your retirement income, improve tax efficiency and make your savings last. Their primary objective is to help you avoid the costly mistakes that can derail an otherwise well-planned retirement.

1. How much income will you really need?

As someone who works in the distribution phase, one of the first things I discuss with clients is what type of lifestyle they want in retirement.

Do they expect to be on the go, traveling to bucket-list locales or buying that boat they fantasized about for years? Or do they envision being a homebody, reading books, chatting with friends and babysitting the grandchildren?

Their answer helps determine how much income they will need, and income is the heartbeat of retirement. Without a sustainable income strategy, retirement plans can go awry.

That's why it's important to make sure your income aligns with your spending goals. Your sources of income may include Social Security, a pension, IRA withdrawals, dividends and interest, cash and rental property.

For example, if someone expects to spend $10,000 monthly in retirement, their withdrawal strategy should be tailored to that need. I always plan for the worst-case scenario and recommend budgeting for more than you will actually spend.

2. When will you claim Social Security?

One significant decision that affects retirement income is when you claim Social Security benefits. The federal government offers plenty of options but not a lot of guidance on this, so Social Security is another area where a conversation with an adviser who specializes in the distribution phase is helpful.

You can begin drawing Social Security as early as age 62 but at a reduced amount that remains reduced for life. There are also income limits if you plan to keep working.

If you wait until your full retirement age (67 for most people these days), you receive more money and there are no income limits. Finally, you can postpone Social Security up until age 70 and receive a larger monthly benefit.

Each claiming strategy has its own advantages and trade-offs, which is why there is no one-size-fits-all answer. The right decision depends on factors such as your health, life expectancy, income needs, tax situation and whether maximizing survivor benefits for a spouse is an important consideration.

3. Can you lower your tax burden?

Taxes may not have been a concern during your accumulation phase, but they could become one during the distribution phase. There are ways to reduce your tax burden in retirement, but if you're not careful, you could unintentionally increase it.

Roth conversions, for example, allow you to move money from taxable retirement accounts, such as traditional IRAs and 401(k)s, to a Roth account that isn't taxed.

It's better to start using them when you are still a few years away from your required minimum distribution age. You pay taxes when you make the conversion, but then your money grows tax-free and isn't taxed when you withdraw it in retirement.

Be careful about transferring too much money into a Roth in the same year, though. You could bump yourself into a higher tax bracket or even cause an increase in your Medicare premiums if your taxable income grows too high.

With the right planning, you can reduce your taxes, keeping more of your money to pay for your retirement needs and wants.

4. Have you thought about sequence of returns risk?

Sequence of returns risk is a potential shadow looming over many retirements — and it may be one of the most significant differences between the accumulation and distribution phases.

It's also another reason retirees need a financial professional who has distribution-phase experience.

Sequence of returns risk can be summed up this way: Before you enter retirement, the order in which your investment returns happen generally makes no difference.

For example, in a 20-year stretch, you can have weak years followed by strong years, or strong years followed by weak years, and at the end the total in your portfolio will be substantially the same.

This is not the case when you retire and are making withdrawals. If the market performs poorly in the first five to 10 years, that combination of market losses with withdrawals can severely drain your portfolio. By the time a recovery happens, you may not have enough in your accounts to capitalize on it.

On the other hand, if the market is strong in your first years of retirement and you are seeing growth even as you make withdrawals, you will be better poised to withstand a down market later on.

Sequence of returns risk is one reason people might want to revisit their investments as they approach retirement. One strategy is to reduce the level of volatility your portfolio faces.

5. And finally: Will you let yourself have some fun?

Many people are hesitant to spend money in retirement, watching pennies carefully and avoiding luxuries or anything even vaguely ostentatious. Remember what I said about retirement requiring a new mindset? That applies here as well.

People who lived frugally as they saved for retirement sometimes struggle to turn off that economical mental attitude when they reach the distribution phase.

They worry so much about running out of money that they risk missing out on the enjoyment these years they saved for can bring. I encourage them to spend that money, to reap the benefits of those years of frugality and to remember the adage they have heard their entire lives, "You can't take it with you."

Of course, they need clarity, structure and some level of comfort to make such a mindset adjustment. That's where the right financial professional comes into play, helping them achieve that comfort by discussing income plans, expenses and any legacy they want to leave behind for children, grandchildren or favorite causes.

The distribution phase can and should be the fun phase — if you let it.

Ronnie Blair contributed to this article.

The appearances in Kiplinger were obtained through a PR program. The columnist received assistance from a public relations firm in preparing this piece for submission to Kiplinger.com. Kiplinger was not compensated in any way.

Related Content

• How to Calm Your Retirement Nerves When It's Time to Shift from Savings Mode to Spending Mode
• The Retirement Bucket Rule: Your Guide to Fear-Free Spending
• Four Keys to Planning Your Retirement Income Distributions
• Retirement Can Scare You No Matter How Confident You Are: This Is How to Tame the Beast
• A Retirement Income Distribution Plan Is as Critical as Saving

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

"Should we move to Florida to save on taxes?"

As a CFP® and wealth adviser with more than 20 years of investment experience, I hear some version of that question from nearly every client approaching retirement in a high-tax state, and it's a fair one.

If you've spent decades building your savings, of course you want to keep more of it. States like Florida, Texas, Tennessee and Nevada have long attracted retirees because they skip state income tax entirely. Next to a high-tax state like Connecticut, New Jersey or California, the choice can look obvious.

After helping hundreds of families work through this decision, I've learned it rarely is. The tax savings are usually smaller than people expect, and the true cost of relocating is almost always bigger.

Recent changes in federal tax law have shifted the math even further. Before you list your house, it's worth running the numbers.

Here's what I walk clients through before they make the call.

The tax gap has narrowed

New federal legislation has changed how I evaluate a move for clients. A higher cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, a new bonus deduction for eligible older taxpayers and a permanent federal estate tax exemption of roughly $15 million per individual all reduce the federal tax burden for many retired households.

None of that eliminates state income tax. But it does mean the gap between staying in a high-tax state and relocating to a no-tax one is often smaller than it looked just a few years ago, especially for clients who assumed the old rules still applied.

I've started running this comparison earlier in the planning process for exactly that reason: The answer clients got two or three years ago may not hold up today.

Consider a hypothetical couple pulling $90,000 from IRAs, $45,000 in Social Security and $20,000 in investment income. Depending on their deductions and how that income is structured, moving to a no-tax state might save them several thousand dollars a year, which is real money but rarely the whole story.

The moving costs add up fast

Clients focus on the annual savings and forget the one-time bill: Real estate commissions, closing costs, movers, repairs before listing, furnishing a new home, temporary housing and the cost of rebuilding a healthcare and professional network from scratch.

I've seen these add up to tens of thousands of dollars before anyone accounts for the stress of starting over.

If a move saves $6,000 a year but costs $60,000 to pull off, that's a decade just to break even. I want clients to see that number before they call a Realtor, not after.

You're not just leaving a state

The cost that's hardest to put on a spreadsheet, and the one I push clients hardest on, is distance from family. I've watched clients move south for the weather, then start flying back for birthdays, grandchildren's games and Sunday dinners they didn't expect to miss. The airfare and hotel bills climb, and some eventually move back entirely.

There's also the team you leave behind: Your financial adviser, tax preparer, estate attorney, insurance agent, doctors. You can rebuild that team, but it takes time, and a physician who knows your history or an adviser who's worked with your family for years provides continuity you can't buy on day one in a new state.

I've had clients spend the better part of a year finding a new cardiologist or estate attorney they trusted as much as the one they left, and that search has a cost even if it never shows up on a spreadsheet.

Moving isn't the only lever

Relocating is one way to lower your lifetime tax bill. It's far from the only one.

I regularly help clients cut their tax burden through Roth conversions timed to lower-income years, coordinating retirement account withdrawals, managing required minimum distributions (RMDs), tax-efficient investing, charitable giving and smarter timing of Social Security.

Done well, these strategies can produce meaningful savings while letting clients stay exactly where they are.

When a move actually makes sense

None of this means relocating is a mistake. I have plenty of clients for whom it was the right call: Their family had already scattered, healthcare needs were easy to meet elsewhere, housing costs fit their goals better, or the long-term tax savings genuinely outweighed the cost of getting there.

The difference is that those clients ran the numbers first. Before you decide, ask yourself what you'd actually save after every tax year, what the total moving cost would be, how long it would take to break even, how often you'd travel back for family and whether better tax planning could get you a similar result without packing a single box.

Sometimes those questions confirm that moving is the right move. Just as often, they reveal that staying put is the smarter financial decision — you just hadn't run the full comparison yet.

Retirement isn't about finding the state with the lowest taxes. It's about building a life you won't spend the next decade second-guessing.

When I walk clients through taxes, income, healthcare, housing, estate planning and family togetherness, the answer usually gets a lot clearer, and it isn't always the one they expected when they first asked about moving to Florida.

Related Content

• Millions of People Are Leaving High-Tax States: Here's Where They're Moving and How Much They're Saving in 2026
• Bye-Bye, Snowbirds: Wealthy Americans Are Relocating Permanently for Retirement
• Should You Relocate to a New State for Retirement? The Ultimate Checklist for Those With a Pension and $1 Million-Plus
• Should You Rent or Sell Your Home When You Relocate? How to Decide
• Why Moving Near the Grandchildren Might Be Your Biggest Retirement Mistake

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Sudden wealth doesn't change who you are. It does reveal how prepared you are.

I recently read a news story in which a lottery winner who received a jackpot worth more than $167 million had reportedly been arrested four times within 14 months of receiving the money.

Such stories often generate headlines because they reinforce the belief that sudden wealth changes people.

After more than 25 years as a financial planner, I don't believe that's entirely true.

I believe sudden wealth reveals whether someone has developed the habits and discipline necessary to manage it.

While lottery winners capture the headlines, they're among the least common examples of becoming suddenly wealthy.

Sudden wealth typically arrives in four main ways:

• Inheritance
• The sale of a closely held business (liquidity event)
• A significant legal settlement
• On rare occasions, a lottery or other unexpected windfall

Although each situation is unique, they all have one thing in common. Money that was once unavailable suddenly becomes accessible. That transition is both psychological and financial.

People who accumulate wealth over time (commonly decades) become accustomed to seeing money in their accounts and formulating successful financial and emotional discipline.

• They watch retirement accounts fluctuate with the markets without panic
• They realize that consistent contributions, compounding returns and time is what it took to get to a particular level

The goal is to make work optional through having a balance sheet that yields enough to replace your income.

For some, their balance sheets aren't there yet, or maybe they were never working toward financial independence, then one day the inheritance arrives or the settlement comes in. Whatever the source, the money is available, and it is now a spendable currency.

Real-life examples

I've watched families respond to this moment very differently.

Years ago, I worked with a blue-collar worker and father who spent his entire working life doing everything right. He lived modestly, saved consistently and built a meaningful estate because he wanted to leave something for his three children.

After his passing, two of the children requested checks rather than seeking guidance or developing a long-term plan. Within a couple short weeks, their inheritance was spent on a trip to Las Vegas. The third sibling made some responsible decisions, but within a relatively short period, those funds had also been depleted.

It would be easy to conclude they simply made poor choices. I see it differently. They inherited the money. They never had the opportunity to develop the habits that created it.

I've also witnessed the opposite. A client's mother accumulated substantial wealth during her lifetime and explained not only what she hoped her daughter and son-in-law would receive, but what she hoped the wealth would accomplish.

Today, they continue to manage those assets thoughtfully, taking disciplined annual distributions while preserving the portfolio for future generations.

The difference between these two families wasn't as much about the size of the inheritance. It was the mindset, and the steps below can help anyone with mental framing and decision-making related to sudden wealth.

4 steps to staying wealthy after experiencing 'sudden wealth'

1. Do nothing.

When a significant amount of money suddenly appears on your balance sheet, resist the urge to act.

In most situations, I recommend making no major financial decisions for four to six months. Don't purchase a vacation home, quit your job or make large investments simply because the money is available. The assets aren't going anywhere.

What often changes during that time is your perspective.

2. Understand what you have.

Before making any financial commitments, determine the tax consequences and legal obligations associated with your newfound wealth.

Depending on how the assets were received, there might be income taxes, capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes, trust provisions, estate planning implications or other considerations that affect what's truly available.

3. Decide what this wealth is meant to accomplish.

Start with your own household. Does this wealth provide financial independence or greater flexibility?

Once your household is secure, consider whether you want to help family members, support charitable causes or strengthen your community.

Finally, revisit your estate plan so your own legacy reflects your new financial circumstances.

4. Create a sustainable spending plan.

What lump sum amounts are immediately required? Evaluate what impact spending today has on future income.

Risk tolerance and time horizon will influence what amount of annual distribution is sustainable.

Look for articles on strategies and options on calculating a safe withdrawal rate and methodologies of creating a paycheck from your portfolio.

The real measure of success

After more than two decades helping families navigate life's biggest financial transitions, I've come to believe that sudden wealth isn't really about money. It's about stewardship.

Money can be transferred in a single day. The judgment required to preserve it often takes time to develop.

Whether your wealth arrives through an inheritance, the sale of a business, a settlement or an unexpected windfall, the greatest responsibility isn't deciding what to buy. It's properly preparing before starting to deploy your newfound resources.

Related Content

• Suddenly Inherited Money? The Critical Steps You Need to Take First
• Treating Your Inheritance as 'Extra Money' Is a Sure Way to Blow It: Instead, Use This Simple Technique for Financial Windfalls
• What Not to Do After Inheriting Wealth: 4 Mistakes That Could Cost You Everything
• Your First 5 Potential Moves When Inherited Wealth Makes You Rich Overnight
• Why Would I Hire You? A Financial Adviser Answers a Friend's Pointed Question

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

When you budget for an AI tool, you budget for the bill the vendor sends. That bill is the visible part of the cost. It is also the smaller part.

The expenses that decide whether AI pays off for your firm never appear on the vendor's invoice at all, and most firms do not budget for them until they arrive.

This is the part of AI economics that catches finance leaders off guard. The token cost is the tip. The real cost sits below the surface, and it is made of your people's time and your firm's regulatory exposure.

The cost of review

Every piece of AI output that reaches a client must be checked by a human first. This is not optional for a fiduciary. You cannot send an AI-drafted client communication, an AI-generated summary or an AI-assisted recommendation to the people who trust your firm with their money without a qualified person reviewing it.

The technology does not change the standard of care. It changes who does the first draft.

That review is a labor cost, and it scales with how much AI you use. The more your advisers generate, the more there is to check. A firm that measures only the token bill sees AI getting cheaper per task while the review burden quietly grows.

If you do not budget the review time, you have not budgeted the tool. You have budgeted half of it.

The cost of training

A tool your staff cannot use well is a tool you are overpaying for. I see this all the time with firms that roll out Microsoft Copilot without any training around how to use the tool and get the most out of it. These firms quickly find the costs without the benefits.

Getting real value out of AI requires teaching your people how to prompt it and how to judge what comes back, including when to distrust it. That training takes time, it takes a person to deliver it, and it repeats every time the tool changes or a new hire arrives.

This cost is easy to skip and expensive to skip. Untrained staff produce worse results from the same tool, which makes the AI tool look like a poor investment when the real problem is the absence of training. The token bill is more expensive when your people use the tool badly, reducing your return on the investment.

The cost of governance

This is the line that protects the firm, and it is the one most likely to be missing from the budget.

Using AI responsibly in a regulated business requires an acceptable-use policy that classifies which tools are approved and which data may be processed. It requires vendor due diligence documentation for every tool that touches client data, mapped against your regulatory obligations.

It requires updated supervisory procedures showing how AI-assisted work is reviewed before it reaches a client. It also requires a training record an examiner can inspect.

None of that builds itself. Each piece takes time from compliance and operations staff, and it must be maintained as the tools and the rules change. The off-channel communications enforcement wave taught the industry an expensive lesson about applying existing rules to new technology after the fact.

AI governance is the same lesson waiting to be learned again. The firm that funds the tool but not the governance around it is buying the upside and leaving the downside unbudgeted.

Why ownership decides the outcome

These costs fall across three parts of your firm. The token bill belongs to technology. The review burden belongs to the leadership team. The governance work belongs to compliance. When one of those groups owns the AI budget alone, the costs that live in the other two go unfunded.

Research on AI return makes this concrete. According to the Mavvrik report AI Cost Statistics 2026: Forecasting, ROI, and Budget Risk, firms where technology teams own AI spend by themselves capture less value than firms where finance and compliance share the decision. The reason is exactly this fragmentation.

A technology-only budget sees the invoice and misses the iceberg. A shared budget sees the whole cost, funds it correctly and gets a real answer about whether the tool is worth it.

How to budget the whole cost

Start by writing down every cost a single AI workflow creates, not just the one the vendor charges for. Put the token estimate at the top. Then add the hours of review the output will require, the training to get staff using it well and the compliance work to govern it.

That full number is the real cost of the tool. It is the only number that tells you whether the investment returns anything.

I want to point out that this cost will always be less than a human cost, but it should be clearly measured.

Then assign each cost to the group that incurs it and bring those groups into one budget conversation. The token line is a technology decision. The rest is not.

The firm that budgets the whole iceberg will know what its AI use costs and whether it pays dividends on the investment.

The firm that budgets only the tip will be surprised twice, once by the hidden costs and again by the return that never materialized because the tool was never properly supported.

Related Content

• If You Want Your Employees to Embrace AI, You Need to Let Them Have a Say in How It's Used
• I Met With 100-Plus Advisers to Develop This Road Map for Adopting AI
• Adapting to AI's Evolving Landscape: A Survival Guide for Businesses
• Using Google AI Tools Can Give Your Advisory Firm the Edge — If You Do These 5 Things First
• Why Financial Advisers Will Benefit as Google Shakes Up Financial Research

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

When most people hire a financial advisor, they think they are receiving comprehensive financial advice. Unfortunately, that assumption is not always correct.

Many financial advisors focus primarily on investments. Others specialize in insurance, taxes, retirement planning or estate planning. While expertise in any one area can be valuable, consumers often discover that financial decisions rarely occur in isolation.

A decision about investments affects taxes. A decision about taxes affects retirement planning. A decision about retirement planning affects estate planning. Every financial decision is connected to several others.

That reality helps explain why comprehensive financial planning has long been considered the highest standard of financial advice.

Gary Schatsky, founder of Independent Financial Counselors in New York City and former chairman of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA), has spent more than four decades advocating for comprehensive, fee-only financial planning.

According to Schatsky, the fundamental challenge is that consumers often receive advice focused on a single area of their finances while the real opportunities and risks may exist elsewhere.

"You can't have someone who's closing one eye and focusing on one issue when investment allocation is no more important than tax planning, which is no more important than debt planning," he says. "They're all completely integrated."

That simple observation highlights one of the most important realities in personal finance: Financial success rarely depends on one decision. Instead, it depends on how all the pieces fit together.

What is comprehensive financial planning?

In my book AdvisorSmart for the Individual Investor, I describe comprehensive financial planning as a process that examines a client's entire financial life rather than focusing on a single product, account or investment decision.

A comprehensive approach considers goals, investments, taxes, retirement plans, insurance needs, estate planning, employee benefits, debt management, cash flow and other financial factors.

CFP Board, which sets and enforces the requirements for the CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER® certification, identifies several major planning disciplines, including:

• Financial statement analysis
• Insurance and risk management
• Employee benefits planning
• Investment planning
• Income tax planning
• Retirement planning
• Estate planning

A comprehensive financial planner evaluates how these areas interact and affect one another rather than treating each as a separate assignment.

Schatsky believes this holistic perspective is what separates professional financial planning from narrower forms of financial advice. "The goal is to know 360 degrees of someone's world," he says.

In his view, advisors should understand far more than a client's investment portfolio. They should understand family circumstances, tax situations, debt obligations, retirement goals, estate planning concerns, charitable objectives and other factors that influence financial outcomes.

Any advice they provide is cheapened if they don't know "100% of a client's financial world" and haven't considered it fully, he warns.

Why comprehensive advice produces better outcomes

Imagine two investors with identical investment portfolios:

• The first investor has no debt, lives below their means, maintains appropriate insurance coverage and has a well-designed estate plan
• The second investor carries high-interest credit card debt, lacks adequate insurance, has no estate plan and has significant tax inefficiencies

Although their investment accounts look identical, their financial situations are dramatically different.

A comprehensive financial planner would recognize those differences immediately. For the second investor, debt management advice may be more valuable than selecting a different mutual fund or making a minor portfolio adjustment. As Schatsky says, "I'd be happy to take money earning 3% and pay off a credit card [charging] 10%."

Similarly, effective tax planning can sometimes generate greater financial benefits than investment selection alone. Strategic Roth conversions, charitable giving strategies, tax-loss harvesting opportunities and proper asset-location decisions can create substantial value for investors over time.

The common thread is that these opportunities often fall outside traditional investment management.

The importance of asking better questions

Comprehensive financial planning begins with information gathering.

In my experience, a competent financial planner may ask dozens — or even hundreds — of questions before making major recommendations. The purpose is not to create paperwork. The purpose is to understand the client's complete financial picture.

Schatsky compares the process to solving a complex puzzle: "You need to have all of the skills. I need to see your tax return. I need to understand your debt. I need to know your family's situation. I need to understand all the factors."

Consumers should be cautious when advisors ask very few questions before making recommendations.

A financial plan built on incomplete information is likely to produce incomplete results.

If an advisor spends most of the meeting discussing investment products without thoroughly exploring goals, taxes, debt, insurance, retirement planning and estate issues, investors should consider whether the advice is truly comprehensive.

Why fee-only matters

Comprehensive planning becomes even more powerful when combined with a fee-only compensation model.

Fee-only financial planners are compensated directly by clients rather than through commissions generated from the sale of financial products.

The significance is straightforward.

When advisors are not paid to sell products, they are often in a better position to evaluate alternatives objectively.

For example, a fee-only advisor may recommend paying down debt instead of investing additional assets. They may recommend delaying the purchase of a financial product. They may even recommend retaining an existing investment rather than replacing it.

The focus shifts from product implementation to problem solving.

Schatsky believes this objectivity is essential: "The public needs impartial advisors."

The combination of comprehensive planning and fee-only compensation creates an environment where advisors can focus on identifying the best solution rather than the most profitable solution.

What consumers should look for

Investors searching for a financial advisor should ask potential candidates several important questions:

• Will you review my entire financial situation?
• Will you examine my tax returns?
• Will you evaluate my debt structure?
• Will you review my insurance coverage?
• Will you discuss estate planning issues?
• How are you compensated?
• Are there any financial products for which you receive commissions or incentives?

The answers can reveal whether an advisor is providing comprehensive financial planning or a more limited service.

According to Schatsky, consumers should seek financial advisors who embrace the responsibility of understanding every relevant aspect of their financial lives.

"If you're not getting skilled advice and comprehensive advice and impartial advice simultaneously," he says, "you're not getting what you need."

The future of financial planning

As technology continues to automate many investment functions, the value of comprehensive financial planning may become even more apparent.

Portfolio management is increasingly commoditized. Asset allocation models can be automated. Rebalancing can be automated.

What cannot easily be automated is the thoughtful integration of taxes, retirement planning, estate planning, insurance decisions, debt management, family dynamics and life goals into a coherent financial strategy.

That is where comprehensive financial planning continues to demonstrate its value.

More than 40 years after the modern fee-only movement began, the central idea remains remarkably simple: Investors deserve advice that considers their entire financial life.

As Schatsky puts it: "The public needs comprehensive advice."

For consumers seeking objective guidance and better financial outcomes, that principle remains as relevant today as ever.

Related Content

• Revenue Sharing Is Great for Financial Pros — For You, Not So Much. How Can You Avoid This Sneaky Sales Incentive?
• 'Trust Me. I Am a Fiduciary': But That Does Not Always Mean What You Think It Means
• The Truth About 'Top Producers': What You Should Know Before You Choose a Financial Professional
• I Asked Investors to Share the Frustrations They Have With Financial Professionals, and These Are Their Top 10
• Will a Financial Professional Always Act in Your Best Interests? 1 Question Will Tell You — and It's Not 'Are You a Fiduciary?'

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Editor's note: This is the third article in a series in which Peter Newman, CFA®, of Peak Wealth Planning, shows you how to make the most of Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs). The first and second articles are Why High-Net-Worth Families Need a Financial Quarterback to Protect Their Wealth and Concentrated Company Stock in Your ESOP? Waiting to Diversify Could Tank Your Retirement.

Sally retired at 62 with $890,000 in her Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) and another $420,000 in her 401(k). The numbers looked solid. She'd done the math a hundred times. It was enough to cover expenses, maybe some travel, definitely that kitchen remodel.

Then reality hit. Health insurance before Medicare? $1,800 a month. Property taxes she'd overlooked? Another $6,500 annually. And because she'd claimed Social Security at 62, her monthly benefit was permanently reduced by roughly $750 every month for life.

The ESOP money was there. The 401(k) was there. But the plan wasn't. That gap turned what should have been a comfortable retirement into constant calculations of what she could and couldn't afford.

Here's what I've noticed: The difference between people who retire confidently and people who retire anxiously isn't about how much they've saved. It's about what they did — or didn't do — in the decade before retirement.

Your 50s are a critical window where you either build the foundation for sustainable retirement income or realize too late that your assumptions don't match reality.

Age 50-54: The foundation you can't skip

At 50, you're probably earning peak income, kids might be finishing college, and retirement feels distant.

But this is actually the most important time to create your first real retirement income forecast. Not a napkin calculation or a vague sense that things will work out. An actual projection accounting for your ESOP balance, your 401(k), maybe your spouse's retirement accounts, and what those numbers translate to in monthly income.

Why now? You might discover you're on track to retire at 61. Or you might find out that you need to work until 68. Both answers are valuable, but one of them requires a significant adjustment to your timeline. It's better to know that at 50 than 59.

This is also when you need to look at your debt and what financial obligations are competing for your money. I've seen too many people prioritize funding kids' college education while assuming their own retirement will take care of itself. Sometimes that works out. Often it doesn't.

The questions you should be asking:

• What's my realistic retirement budget, including health care costs?
• Am I on pace to replace my current income, or do I need to adjust expectations?
• What debts should I eliminate before retirement?
• Am I prioritizing retirement savings, or are other goals consuming resources I'll need later?

Getting clear answers at 50 gives you five years before diversification eligibility at 55 to course-correct if needed.

Ages 55-59: Strategic decisions that compound

At 55, you hit your first ESOP diversification eligibility. If you've been with your company for at least 10 years, you can now sell back up to 25% of your accumulated shares.

Say you've accumulated $800,000 in company stock. At 55, you could diversify $200,000, rolling it into an IRA where you can invest in something other than your employer's stock. You can take the cash directly, but there are significant tax consequences and potential penalties that make that option less attractive for most people.

This is also when major life events can change everything. A grandchild is born and you want to help with their education. You buy a second home. Someone gets a difficult medical diagnosis. These things are common, and they should trigger an update to your financial plan.

Between 55 and 60, you'll continue accumulating shares if you're still working, and you may have options to diversify small amounts annually. Whether that moves the needle enough to be worthwhile depends on your specific situation.

Ages 60-65: The pre-retirement pressure test

At 60, you can diversify up to 50% of your total ESOP account. This is your chance to shift half of your concentrated company stock into a more balanced portfolio before retirement.

Here's where planning becomes critical. Retiring before 65? You need a rock-solid plan for healthcare costs until Medicare kicks in. Those costs can easily run $18,000 to $24,000 annually for a couple.

Planning to retire before the full Social Security retirement age of 67? Understand what that costs. Claiming at 62 reduces your benefit by roughly 30% for life. Waiting until 70 increases it by about 24% compared to 67. That difference can mean tens of thousands of dollars annually when you might need it most.

This is also when your liquidity strategy becomes crucial. You need your expenses for the first one to three years of retirement covered by stable sources, such as money market funds, savings accounts or low-risk bond funds. Not your ESOP. Not aggressive stock funds that could crater 40% right when you retire.

Post-retirement: The plan continues

Retirement is when the ongoing management gets more complex. You've got multiple income sources that need coordination: ESOP distributions that might be delayed up to 24 months, Social Security, possibly a spouse's pension or 401(k), maybe an annuity.

And then there are taxes. What federal bracket will you be in? Will a large ESOP distribution push you into Medicare surcharges? Are you approaching 73, when required minimum distributions kick in and potentially force you into higher tax brackets than you'd planned for?

There's no one-size-fits-all answer. Every situation requires mapping out each income source, projecting taxes not just this year but for the next decade, and making strategic decisions about which accounts to spend from when.

The timeline nobody follows (but everyone should)

I get it. Planning across a decade feels overwhelming, especially when you're busy working, managing family obligations and living your life. But the cost of not planning systematically is usually much higher than the effort of doing it.

The people who retire confidently didn't necessarily save more than everyone else. They just understood the timeline and made strategic decisions at each phase instead of letting things happen by default.

If you're anywhere in your 50s with significant ESOP wealth, the question isn't whether you should be planning, it's whether you're going to start now or wish you had five years from now.

For readers looking to better understand how these strategies apply to their own situation, Peter Newman created My ESOP Planner — a resource focused on helping employee-owners plan for diversification, retirement income and legacy decisions. Learn more at www.myesopplanner.com.

Related Content

• Have $1M+ Saved? Consider a Financial Planning One-Stop Shop
• Estate Planning for Millionaires
• Three Pros (and Four Cons) of Hiring Multiple Financial Advisers: The View From a Financial Adviser
• Taxes in Retirement: What ESOP Participants Need to Know
• How Much Retirement Income Could Your ESOP Generate?

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

For decades, the traditional balanced portfolio has relied on stocks for growth and bonds for stability. The classic stock-and-bond allocation became the foundation of retirement investing because it offered investors a practical way to pursue long-term returns while managing risk.

But investing has evolved and today, we have access to solutions that didn't exist when the traditional portfolio was developed.

One product receiving increased attention is the registered index-linked annuity (RILA), prompting an important question: Should investors rethink whether traditional bond allocations are the only way to help manage portfolio risk?

The key is downside protection

Unlike bonds, which are influenced by interest rates and credit markets, a RILA may provide returns linked to the performance of a market index, such as the S&P 500, while providing a defined level of downside protection over a specified outcome period.

Many contracts today offer downside protection against the first 10% to 30% (or even 100% in some cases) of market losses over a six-year term while allowing investors to participate in the market's gains, subject to participation rates, upside caps or other contract provisions.

Protection features are subject to contract terms and limitations, and investors can still experience losses.

Portfolio construction should evolve as investment solutions evolve. For years, investors had two primary choices for long-term assets: Stocks for growth potential and bonds for stability.

Additional tools

Today, investors have additional tools that may deserve consideration depending on their objectives.

That shift has led many advisers to think less about replacing one investment with another and more about expanding the conversation. Whether a RILA, bond allocation or other strategy is appropriate depends on an investor's objectives, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, time horizon and tax circumstances.

Rather than viewing a portfolio as consisting of only two buckets (growth potential and stability), some advisers now view buffered investment strategies as a potential third category, positioned between traditional equities and fixed income.

Worth evaluating

For investors seeking growth potential with a predetermined level of downside protection, that middle ground could offer an alternative worth evaluating.

The goal isn't to declare that one investment is universally better than another. It's to ask whether the traditional portfolio deserves a fresh look.

Investors today have more choices than previous generations, and sometimes the best solution is one that didn't exist when conventional wisdom was established.

RILAs are not appropriate for everyone.

• Investors generally forgo dividends
• Upside returns may be limited by participation rates or caps
• Downside protection applies only according to the contract's terms only if the contract is held through the applicable outcome period

Most contracts also include surrender charges during the early years, and withdrawals from nonqualified contracts are generally taxed as ordinary income to the extent of earnings.

In addition, distributions taken before age 59½ may be subject to a 10% federal tax penalty unless an exception applies.

Bonds continue to play an important role for many investors by providing income, liquidity and diversification. The point is not that bonds have become obsolete. Rather, it is that today's investors have more choices for managing risk than they did a generation ago.

Perhaps the conversation is no longer simply about stocks vs bonds. Maybe it's time to consider whether modern portfolio construction includes a third bucket —one designed to bridge the gap between growth potential and downside protection. For many investors, that conversation may be long overdue.

Related Content

• Have a Negative Perception of Annuities? Consider RILAs and FIAs
• For Your Fixed-Income Pot, Consider an Annuity That Behaves Much Like a Bank CD
• I (Used to) Hate Annuities: Then I Looked at the Math
• The Truth About Annuities: The Question Isn't 'Are They Good or Bad?' It's 'Are They Appropriate for You?'
• Too Scared to Dive Into a Fixed-Rate Annuity? Interest Rates Make It Worth Dipping Your Toe In

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Americans who are over the age of 55, mainly baby boomers, own more than half of the country's wealth. Over the next two decades, it will be passed down to the generations that follow, marking the greatest wealth transfer in our country's history.

While many of us look at inheritance as something purely for the wealthy, 66% of Americans either expect to or have already received an inheritance from their parents, according to a survey from Choice Mutual.

Receiving any kind of inheritance can be overwhelming, and being unprepared can lead to losing much of that money to poor financial decisions or taxes. If you think you may be a part of the Great Wealth Transfer, either as a provider or a beneficiary, here's how to avoid those pitfalls.

1. Start conversations now

One of the biggest issues with the trillions of dollars expected to be passed down during the Great Wealth Transfer isn't the money itself, but beneficiaries being unprepared to manage the assets they receive.

Although it may be uncomfortable, discussing the plan for these ahead of time helps family members know exactly how much they will receive and what taxes they might expect.

If beneficiaries don't have a chance to discuss the inheritance before their loved one passes away, they may end up making important decisions while they're grieving.

Bringing the topic up well beforehand will give them time to plan before their emotions take over, helping reduce the likelihood of poor decisions or impulsive spending.

Some of the most successful inheritances I have seen are among families who prioritize these conversations.

2. Avoid spending sprees

If you suddenly receive a windfall, it can be tempting to spend money on the things you've always dreamed of. You may want to buy a bigger house, a more expensive car or finally take that extravagant vacation. But going on a shopping spree can lead to disaster.

Your dream items will come with additional costs, such as taxes, insurance and maintenance, and those will stick around long after the initial purchase.

You should look at your inheritance as a long-term investment, not an excuse for a one-time splurge. If you have a good plan for the assets, they should help provide financial security for years.

Using the money to pay down any debts you have or starting an emergency fund is much more valuable than spending it on an asset that will eventually lose its value.

3. Consider tax implications

While the tax implications that come with an inheritance will depend on what you inherit and where you live, receiving an inheritance can trigger estate, capital gains, inheritance or income taxes.

For example, while many people may believe they will owe federal income taxes on any inherited money they receive, that may not be the case. Cash that is passed down from a person who has passed away is not considered taxable income for the beneficiary.

If you are gifted a property as an inheritance, receiving it is not taxed in most cases. However, depending on how you plan to use it, you need to consider a few things:

• Ongoing property taxes, insurance and maintenance costs
• Capital gains tax if the property value increases significantly before it is sold
• How you will use the property (personal, investment, rental) determines which tax deductions you can take

Most people don't have a full understanding of which processes will be triggered when estates are handed down. It's important to work with a financial professional before signing anything.

4. Build a strong team

Being part of the Great Wealth Transfer may be life-changing, but it could also be overwhelming. You may be faced with financial decisions you've never had to navigate before.

Having a strong team of professionals, such as a trusted financial adviser, tax professional or estate attorney, can help everyone involved avoid costly mistakes and create strategies that align with their goals.

A large inheritance is a life-changing event, and surrounding yourself with the right people can be the difference between enjoying it and watching it disappear.

Related Content

• Manage an Inheritance Like a Pro in Just Seven Steps
• Preparing for an Inheritance: Don't Let Your Blessing Become a Curse
• What Not to Do After Inheriting Wealth: 4 Mistakes That Could Cost You Everything
• Four Things to Know About Managing a Loved One's Finances
• I'm a Financial Planner: Here's How to Make the Most of Your Charitable Giving on a Budget

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Raising financially literate children requires intentionality. By making financial literacy a regular part of family life, parents can empower their kids to make informed, responsible financial decisions that will benefit them throughout their lives.

And that attitude helps your kids — and yourself — throughout all phases of raising children.

First, starting a family — maybe in your 20s or 30s — means a shift in both your lifestyle and your finances, but it also means that you are responsible for teaching your children good financial hygiene and money habits.

Later, your 40s often bring a unique blend of increased responsibilities and high earning potential, and you might find yourself balancing the financial and emotional needs of growing children with your own financial planning goals.

Finally, as your children approach their teen and young adulthood years, it is important that you set them up for success in college and beyond by building on earlier lessons.

Here are specific ideas for each stage.

Start talking to them about money when they're young

Start early and normalize talking about money. Begin as early as when they are 5 years old. Introduce age-appropriate financial activities that help them understand the value of money and how to manage it.

Making "money memories" with your kids is one way to educate them about financial responsibility while having fun: Giving them a piggy bank to learn about saving, practicing budgeting on family outings and celebrating savings wins are a few ways to teach kids about money, and they can also create positive memories.

Today's kids may never carry as much physical cash as adults, but they still need to understand the value of every dollar. Whether money lives in a wallet or on a phone, the habits of saving, spending intentionally and planning never change.

To help children recognize that continuity, openly discuss financial decisions and share your household budgeting process in simple terms.

Later, this foundation will help as children reach their teen years. You can encourage them to track their spending habits and get a part-time job or step into a small entrepreneurial venture.

Just like any skill, practicing good financial habits over time makes children more adept at managing money as they grow older.

Go digital, but don't ignore physical cash

I send my preteen daughter's allowance through Apple Pay because that is most likely how she'll interact with money as she gets older. It is important for her to learn how to make digital payments and manage her account in a world that continues to move toward "tap" or "double click" to pay.

This also teaches her independence and empowers her to make her own money decisions — and potentially money mistakes. I would rather have her make a $20 purchase that she regrets at age 12, than a $20,000 mistake when she's 22.

While embracing digital tools, I also intentionally use physical cash to teach my daughter about other financial concepts. We talk about where cash comes from and how to count it, and we take physical money to the bank to deposit into her savings account.

I want her to understand that the numbers on the screen in her Apple Wallet represent real dollars, and I want her to be comfortable managing her money both ways.

Teach them about trade-offs

Teens — like all of us — need to understand that every financial decision involves a trade-off. Spending money on one thing means that money won't be available for something else.

For example, buying the latest gaming console might mean saving less for a car, college or future experiences. This concept helps them prioritize and understand the long-term implications of their choices.

Help teens learn to resist the bombardment of messages promoting instant gratification and luxury, often amplified through social media. Help them differentiate between needs and wants, understand the true cost of things (including the impact of debt) and resist the pressure to keep up with trends.

Encourage them to use critical thinking about advertising and social media influencers and emphasize that a healthy money mindset often comes from smart choices and delayed gratification, not just outward displays of wealth.

If they're working, consider helping them open a Roth IRA to teach them about investing early. You should also discuss responsible credit use before they get their first credit card.

Don't stop when they get to college

The goal isn't to raise a child who can balance a checkbook — it's to raise a young adult who feels confident making financial decisions. That confidence comes from hundreds of small conversations and real-life experiences over many years, not one big lesson.

College provides a perfect context for in-depth discussions, both when saving and spending. It's never too early, or too late, to start saving for college.

If you anticipate that your child will contribute to the costs of their higher education, that's something to discuss earlier rather than later. That way, as they grow up, they'll have a full understanding of the plan.

Raising financially savvy children is more important than ever in today's fast-paced, digital world. Teaching your kids about the value of money and how to manage it responsibly can have a lasting impact on their future success.

Related Content

• Credit Cards for Kids and Teens — One Mom's Take
• 4 Practical Ways to Prepare Your Children for Their Inheritance
• 3 Ages, 3 Money Lessons: A Parent's Guide to Raising Financially Savvy Kids
• The 7 Worst Assets to Leave Your Kids or Grandkids
• If You Want to Give Money to a Child in Your Family, Some Options Are Better Than Others

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Roth conversions have become one of the hottest topics in retirement planning. Browse financial headlines long enough, and you'll likely encounter conflicting advice.

Some experts argue that everyone should convert their traditional IRA to a Roth. Others insist it's a costly mistake. The truth is far more nuanced.

As a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER® and CEO of Peak Retirement Planning, I can tell you that for most Americans, a Roth conversion probably isn't necessary. However, retirees with pensions often live by a different set of tax rules (I wrote a book for those with pensions, The 2% Club, that you can request for free here.)

Their guaranteed income can create tax challenges that don't apply to the average retiree, making Roth conversions worth a much closer look.

Before deciding whether a Roth conversion belongs in your retirement strategy, it's important to understand the factors that actually determine whether the math makes sense. You can learn more about this in my YouTube video:

The only question that really matters

Many investors focus on whether they can afford to pay the taxes on a Roth conversion today. While that's certainly part of the equation, it isn't the deciding factor. The more important question is this: Will your total tax rate be lower today than it will be later?

That "total tax rate" extends beyond your federal income tax bracket. A Roth conversion can also influence:

• State income taxes
• Medicare IRMAA surcharges
• Social Security taxation
• Capital gains taxes
• Estate planning outcomes

When viewed together, your true tax cost could look very different than your federal bracket alone suggests.

Why most people don't need a Roth conversion

For many retirees, taxable income will naturally decline when they stop working. Someone who retires with modest retirement savings, no pension and Social Security as their primary income source usually remains in relatively low tax brackets throughout retirement.

In those situations, paying taxes today through a Roth conversion could result in paying more tax than necessary.

Roth conversions are frequently overpromoted, as they can be powerful, but they aren't universally beneficial.

Pension holders face a different tax reality

Rather than seeing their income in retirement decline, retirees with pensions often have multiple sources of guaranteed retirement income arriving simultaneously:

• Pension payments
• Social Security benefits
• Required minimum distributions (RMDs) from traditional retirement accounts

Each source adds taxable income, and together they can keep retirees in higher tax brackets for decades.

For households that have accumulated substantial balances in tax-deferred accounts, such as 401(k)s, IRAs, TSPs or 403(b)s, RMDs can make the situation even more challenging as they grow over time.

That's why many pension recipients find themselves paying as much, if not more, in taxes during retirement than they did while working.

Today's tax environment creates planning opportunities

Another consideration is today's tax landscape: Current tax laws provide relatively favorable tax rates and expanded standard deductions compared with historical norms.

While no one can predict future legislation, many economists expect government revenue needs to increase over time because of rising national debt and the long-term funding challenges facing programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

If future tax rates eventually rise, converting portions of traditional retirement accounts while rates remain relatively low could produce meaningful lifetime tax savings. The objective isn't simply to pay taxes sooner, but to pay them when they're expected to be lower than they otherwise would be.

Don't look only at your tax bracket

One of the biggest mistakes retirees make is evaluating Roth conversions using only the federal tax tables. Your retirement tax picture is much more interconnected.

Increasing taxable income through a Roth conversion could:

• Cause more of your Social Security benefits to become taxable
• Push you into a higher Medicare IRMAA bracket, increasing Medicare Part B and Part D premiums
• Raise your capital gains tax rate
• Increase state income taxes

This is why comprehensive tax planning frequently produces better results than simply converting up to the top of a particular tax bracket.

The widow's penalty can create future tax problems

Married couples regularly overlook one significant future risk: When one spouse dies, the surviving spouse generally transitions from married filing jointly to single tax status. At that time:

• Tax brackets and IRMAA thresholds shrink
• The standard deduction lowers
• One Social Security benefit typically disappears
• The surviving spouse often continues receiving pension income and RMDs

The result can be substantially higher taxes for the surviving spouse. Completing Roth conversions while both spouses are alive allows couples to take advantage of the wider married tax brackets before this transition occurs.

Your children's tax situations matter, too

If leaving money to your children is one of your goals, their future tax bracket deserves consideration as well.

Under current law, most non-spouse beneficiaries must empty inherited retirement accounts within 10 years. A child inheriting a large traditional IRA might be required to recognize hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxable income during that period, potentially pushing them into significantly higher tax brackets.

On the other hand, if your children are likely to remain in relatively low tax brackets, leaving them traditional retirement assets instead of paying higher taxes through Roth conversions today could prove more efficient.

Estate planning isn't one-size-fits-all, and understanding your heirs' financial circumstances is an important part of the analysis.

Tax diversification provides flexibility

Many retirees have accumulated the vast majority of their wealth inside tax-deferred retirement accounts, and that creates a challenge. Every dollar withdrawn becomes taxable income, leaving retirees with limited flexibility when tax laws or personal circumstances change.

Building assets across multiple account types — including traditional retirement accounts, Roth accounts and taxable brokerage accounts — creates what many planners call tax diversification.

Having multiple "tax buckets" allows retirees to decide where retirement income comes from each year, making it easier to adapt to changing tax laws, Medicare thresholds or unexpected expenses.

Where you live can affect the timing

State taxes can also influence whether a Roth conversion makes sense. Someone planning to relocate from a high-income-tax state to one with no state income tax could benefit from delaying Roth conversions until after the move.

Conversely, someone expecting to move into a higher-tax state might decide to accelerate conversions before relocating.

State taxes generally receive less attention in planning than federal taxes, but they can meaningfully affect lifetime tax costs.

A common Roth conversion myth

One objection frequently raised against Roth conversions is that paying taxes today means losing years of investment growth. That argument overlooks an important concept: Taxes on a traditional IRA already represent a future liability.

Paying that liability earlier doesn't necessarily reduce long-term wealth if tax rates remain unchanged — it simply satisfies the government's share sooner.

Where Roth conversions can create additional value is by reducing future RMDs, potentially lowering Medicare premiums, limiting Social Security taxation, providing greater withdrawal flexibility and protecting against higher future tax rates.

The comparison isn't simply about investment growth — it's about maximizing what you keep after taxes over the course of retirement.

The bottom line

Roth conversions aren't appropriate for everyone. In fact, many retirees with modest savings and no pensions might be better off leaving their traditional retirement accounts untouched.

Pension holders, however, ordinarily face a different reality. Guaranteed income, RMDs and long retirement horizons can create tax burdens that make proactive planning far more valuable.

Rather than asking whether Roth conversions are "good" or "bad," ask a better question: Will paying taxes today likely cost less than paying them later?

For retirees with pensions and substantial retirement savings, the answer is often worth exploring through a comprehensive, long-term tax strategy that considers not only income taxes but also Medicare premiums, Social Security taxation, estate planning and future tax flexibility.

Because when it comes to retirement, it's not just about how much you've saved — it's about how much you'll ultimately keep.

Related Content

• Do You Know Why a Roth Conversion Isn't Right for Everybody? Test Your Knowledge With This Quiz
• 13 Things to Know About How Your Pension Affects Your Taxes in Retirement
• Many Retirees With a Pension and $1 Million-Plus Do These 7 Things (and Regret It Later)
• 10 Retirement Fixes You Can Implement Today to Strengthen Your Financial Plan
• When Is a Roth Conversion a Bad Idea? 6 Situations Retirees Should Consider Carefully

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Annette Kruzynski, a 79-year-old retiree from West Hempstead, N.Y., used to think her 401(k) survived the dot-com bust, the Great Recession and the COVID pandemic because she moved all her money to cash. She proudly told anyone that being in CDs, bonds and money market accounts saved her from the massive sell-offs in the stock market.

But in hindsight, she knows she was wrong. "I wish I didn't keep everything safe," says the retiree and grandmother of five. "I think if I had invested, I would have had much more money saved."

Kruzynski can't change the past, but she and other retirees can help future generations avoid similar mistakes, particularly their millennial children, the oldest of whom are turning 45 this year.

It's a prime age to take your finances seriously and, more importantly, hear some sage advice. At this point, you're typically in the peak earning years (or about to enter them) and still have time to build a nest egg. You're also likely juggling multiple expenses, making it difficult to save.

"In your 40s is where everything starts to become a priority, and those priorities for spending are competing with each other," says Pam Krueger, founder and CEO of Wealthramp, a free service that matches consumers with fee-only fiduciary financial advisers. "This is where money decisions start to have bigger consequences."

Today’s 45-year-olds may think they have it all figured out, but the retirees who have come before them know better. Having learned the hard way, these older adults want to spare the younger generation the pain, knowing that preserving family wealth starts with avoiding costly mistakes. Whether it's investing, saving, or spending, here are the crucial, hard-earned lessons retirees and financial professionals say 45-year-olds need to know.

Investing: Siloed accounts and too much risk

Even if 45-year-olds have figured it out by now and are contributing to their 401(k)s and IRAs, financial pros say some common mistakes still linger, including these:

Viewing your retirement accounts in silos. Treating your and your spouse's different retirement accounts as separate, standalone investments rather than a unified portfolio could result in additional fees or overexposure to a single market segment. "You might not have diversification, you might pay three times in fees or your returns may be beaten down because you didn't coordinate," says Krueger. "It's important to clean up, organize and have a clear view of the accounts consolidated in one place."

Taking on too much risk or being too conservative. This might be the age of the buy-and-hold Millennial, but there are plenty of 45-year-olds investing in crypto, meme stocks or other speculative investments. "People buying the next hot, shiny thing and taking unnecessary risk is the worst action I see, especially with retirement money," says Derrick Longo, a financial adviser at Savant Wealth Management in Huntersville, N.C. "A lot of people will hear something on social media or from a friend, and they let that influence their investment strategy. They might get a short bump, but in the long term, it doesn't keep up with market returns."

If you want to make speculative investments, Longo says, do it with money you can afford to lose. On the flip side, taking too little risk can also be detrimental to a 45-year-old's investment portfolio. With 20-plus years left in the workforce, a 45-year-old can afford to have more growth — and more risk — in their 401(k) than a 55- or 60-year-old.

Having been a little too conservative is one thing Sharon and Roger Gibbs wish they could change. The married retirees worked for the state of California for over 30 years and retired in their mid-50s. "Thinking back to age 45, we probably should have been more of a risk taker, but we’re pretty conservative. We regret not renting out a cabin vs selling it at one point," says Sharon, 73, who lives with Roger in Watersound, Fla. "But, for us, our jobs were our investment for our future. We were told by so many people, ‘If you can retire early, do it; you never know what tomorrow brings.’ "

Saving: Standing still on contributions and matches

In the age of the automatic 401(k) enrollment, many 45-year-olds don't have a choice when it comes to saving for retirement, granted that they work for a company that offers one. But that doesn't mean they don't make costly mistakes. One is not contributing enough to get the company's 401(k) match. That's free money they're leaving on the table.

Another mistake is leaving their contribution rate steady instead of automatically increasing it. Most plans offer the ability to automatically increase your savings rate by 1% each year. You can also have your plan increase contributions when you receive raises and bonuses.

Failing to save more aggressively is one of Kruzynski's primary regrets. In addition to being too conservative, she wishes she had contributed more to her 401(k). She worked for over 30 years, and while she has enough money to live comfortably in retirement, she could have had more cash to travel and to leave to her heirs. "Not adding more money to my 401(k) was a mistake," says Kruzynski.

Spending: Living on the edge with a 40-something budget

Many retirees remember all too well how managing their spending in their mid-40s was a constant exercise in discipline. Between paying down mortgages and funding children's educations, a multitude of expenses pull at the household budget all at once. When trying to manage it all, it was easy to make mistakes. A big one that throws everything else off course is winging it, says Michael Conrath, JPMorgan's chief retirement strategist. They have a vague idea of their monthly expenses and savings goals, but nothing concrete.

"On the fundamental level, they need to ask themselves, how much do I spend monthly, what are my known expenses and what do they cost me?" said Conrath. "It's important to have that foundation."

Lots of 40-somethings also live beyond their means, worrying about saving later. "They tend to believe they will keep earning the same amount they are right now and when you make that assumption, you might go for the bigger house or the bigger and better car," says Krueger. "You're living on the edge of your budget instead of putting that money to work."

The view from the finish line

Making sense of money in your 40s is a balancing act with the financial realities of spending and saving pulling you in different directions. While the oldest Millennials may feel they have plenty of time to fine-tune their investing, saving, and spending strategies, retirement will arrive before they know it. That's why it's so important for them to listen to the hard-earned lessons of the retirees who came before them. After all, sharing their lessons on unified investing, disciplined spending and aggressive saving is the best way to protect everyone's wealth.

Note: This item first appeared in Kiplinger Retirement Report, our popular monthly periodical that covers key concerns of affluent older Americans who are retired or preparing for retirement. Subscribe for retirement advice that's right on the money.

Related Content

• Eight Biggest Retirement Financial Planning Myths: How Many Do You Believe?
• Baby Boomers vs Gen X: Who Spends More?
• Counting on the Great Wealth Transfer to Fund Retirement? Why It Might Not Pan Out the Way You Hope

In April, the IRS and the Department of the Treasury released Revenue Procedure 2026-12. Here's what it means in plain English: The federal government handed state governors the official playbook, and the official map, for nominating the next generation of Opportunity Zones.

When the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) made Opportunity Zones permanent in July 2025, the industry had to wait nine months for the guidelines to be released.

Here are five things I think every investor with significant capital gains needs to understand.

1. We know exactly which communities are eligible

Revenue Procedure 2026-12 doesn't just describe the nomination process. It identifies, by name and by census tract, every community in America that qualifies for Opportunity Zone designation in 2027.

The number? 25,332 population census tracts across the United States, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. Every single one of them meets the definition of a low-income community under the updated rules of the OBBBA.

The IRS formally adopted the 2020-2024 American Community Survey five-year dataset as the controlling data source for determining eligibility — locking in the methodology and removing any ambiguity about which tracts qualify and which don't.

Not all 25,332 tracts will become Opportunity Zones. Governors can nominate up to only 25% of their state's eligible tracts. But investors and developers are no longer guessing which tracts are eligible to be nominated.

2. Rural America is a bigger part of the story than ever

Of those 25,332 eligible tracts, 8,334 are classified as fully rural. That's roughly one out of every three eligible communities.

This matters for two reasons. First, the OBBBA created powerful new incentives specifically for rural Opportunity Zone investments. Investors in Qualified Rural Opportunity Funds receive a 30% basis step-up after five years, triple the standard 10%, and rural properties benefit from a reduced substantial improvement threshold of just 50% instead of 100%.

These aren't minor tweaks — they fundamentally change the math on deals that wouldn't have penciled out under the original program.

Second, the law requires that states give rural communities meaningful representation in their nominations. With a third of all eligible tracts classified as rural, governors will have both the incentive and the inventory to direct capital into parts of the country that have historically been overlooked by institutional investors.

For those of us who believe Opportunity Zones should be about real economic development in communities that genuinely need it, this is encouraging news.

3. The clock is ticking

Here's the timeline every investor should have on their calendar.

The nomination window opened on July 1, 2026. State governors — along with the mayor of Washington, D.C., and territorial executives — have less than 45 days to submit their nominated census tracts to the Treasury Department.

That puts the initial deadline at September 28, 2026, with a provision for a single 30-day extension that could push final submissions to October 28.

One important detail from the new guidance: States can submit and revise their nominations multiple times during the window, and nominations filed early in the window aren't processed until the window closes. In other words, this isn't a race to gain first-mover advantage — it's a thoughtful, deliberative process designed to arrive at the best possible outcome.

If you're a developer or community leader trying to make the case for a particular tract, you have a genuine window to advocate right up until the deadline.

After the nomination window closes, Treasury will review and certify the selections. The IRS has indicated it expects to publish the final designated Opportunity Zones before January 1, 2027, the date the new OZ 2.0 map officially takes effect.

Treasury has also announced that it will roll out online tools and resources to help state officials with the nomination process, which should make this round smoother than the sometimes chaotic 2018 experience.

But here's what I want you to take away: If you're an investor or a fund manager, you don't have the luxury of waiting until the final map drops in December.

The smart money is positioning now, identifying likely zones, building relationships with developers and local officials and structuring deals to be ready to deploy capital the moment the new designations go live.

4. Fewer zones, fixed boundaries and more competition for the best deals

One thing that sometimes gets lost in the excitement is this: OZ 2.0 will almost certainly have fewer designated Opportunity Zones than OZ 1.0.

Under the original program, there were 8,764 designated zones. Industry estimates suggest the new round will produce roughly 6,300 to 6,500, a reduction of about 25%.

That's because the eligibility rules are tighter:

• The median family income threshold dropped from 80% to 70%
• The contiguous tract loophole (which allowed some higher-income areas to qualify under OZ 1.0) has been eliminated
• Tracts that qualify based on high poverty rates are now disqualified if their median family income exceeds 125% of the area median

Here's something else the new guidance confirms that should matter to anyone doing long-horizon underwriting: The OZ 2.0 tract boundaries are drawn from the 2020 decennial census map and are set in stone for the entire decade the designation is active, which is January 1, 2027, through December 31, 2036.

No redrawing of lines. No splitting of tracts. No adjustments of any kind. Whatever map gets certified in late 2026 is the map for the next 10 years. That's the kind of certainty that serious investors and fund sponsors can build a strategy around.

Fewer zones do not mean fewer opportunities. It means the zones that do get designated are more likely to be genuinely distressed communities where investment capital can make a real difference. But it also means that the best deals in the best locations are going to attract more competition. Early movers will have a meaningful advantage.

5. Puerto Rico investors: Your timeline is different

If you have Opportunity Zone money in Puerto Rico, this one's for you, and it may come as a surprise.

Most investors know that the original OZ 1.0 designations across the 50 states run through December 31, 2028. What many don't realize is that Puerto Rico has always operated on its own schedule.

Back in 2018, the Bipartisan Budget Act gave the island a unique deal: Every eligible tract was automatically designated as an Opportunity Zone, and that designation was backdated to the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) on December 22, 2017. That was a full year before most states received their designations.

Both parts of that unique deal are now history.

A 10-year clock that started in December 2017 doesn't end in December 2028. It ends in December 2027. The new guidance makes this point clearly, and that gives Puerto Rico investors one less year than they may have been counting on.

In addition, Puerto Rico will play by the same rules as everyone else going forward: No more automatic island-wide coverage. The governor will nominate up to 25% of eligible tracts, just like every other state.

That's a dramatic reduction in scope for a territory where nearly all census tracts were previously designated.

If you have exposure to Puerto Rico in your OZ portfolio, now is the time to review and make sure your timeline assumptions still hold up.

What all of this means for you

If you have unrealized capital gains — whether from real estate, a business sale, stock or any other appreciated asset — and you've been thinking about Opportunity Zone investing, the new guidelines should sharpen your focus.

The OZ 2.0 framework is no longer theoretical. The eligible tracts are published. The timeline is set. The boundaries are locked. And the enhanced benefits, especially for rural investments, are some of the most generous tax incentives the federal government has ever offered.

This is the starting gun. The investors who do their due diligence now, not in January 2027, will be the ones best positioned to capture the full power of what OZ 2.0 has to offer.

Related Content

• Opportunity Zone 2.0 Designations: How Your Governor Will Pick the 2027-2036 Map
• 2026's Tax Trifecta: The Rural OZ Bonus and Your Month-by-Month Execution Calendar
• DST Inventory Just Hit a Record $3.9 Billion: What 1031 Exchange Investors Should Do Next
• How to Use 1031 Exchanges to Scale Up Your Real Estate Empire
• DST Exit Strategies: An Expert Guide to What Happens When the Trust Sells

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Some of the saddest meetings I have aren't with couples. They're the ones where a client comes to see me for the first time after losing their spouse.

After nearly 30 years as a financial adviser, I've noticed a pattern. In most marriages, one spouse becomes the family's de facto chief financial officer. They know where the accounts are, when the required minimum distributions begin and why certain beneficiaries were chosen. The other spouse understands the big picture, but not always the details.

When the spouse who handled the finances passes away, the survivor isn't just grieving. They're suddenly responsible for a financial life they may never have expected to manage, often while well-meaning family members and financial institutions are pushing them to act fast.

In my experience, the families who fare best aren't the ones who move the fastest. They're the ones who slow down and think it through.

Resist the urge to do everything immediately

Aside from getting certified death certificates and handling immediate household needs, very few financial decisions have to be made in the first few weeks.

I've watched surviving spouses notify every financial institution within days of a death, only to find out that a pension payment, dividend check or insurance reimbursement is still coming payable to the deceased spouse.

Once an account is restricted, negotiating that payment gets far more complicated than it needs to be.

Gather information first. Meet with your financial adviser, CPA and estate planning attorney before making decisions that could be difficult or impossible to reverse.

Your beneficiary designations just changed

Retirement accounts, annuities and life insurance policies pass according to their beneficiary forms, not your will or trust. That makes them one of the first things worth reviewing.

I often see clients who named their living trust as the beneficiary years ago. Depending on your situation, naming individual beneficiaries instead can be simpler for your heirs to administer.

There's no universal right answer here, which is exactly why it deserves a real conversation with your adviser and attorney rather than a quick assumption.

Don't let the widow's tax catch you off guard

Here's a planning window most people miss: For the year your spouse dies, you can still file as married filing jointly. The following year, you'll typically file as single, where the tax brackets are considerably less favorable. Advisers call this the "widow's tax" or the "widow's penalty."

That one-year gap can be an opportunity to convert some, or all, of a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA while you still qualify for the wider joint-filer brackets. The catch is timing: The conversion generally has to be done by December 31 of the year your spouse passed away. If your spouse dies later in the year, that window shrinks fast.

Don't make this decision in isolation. The 2025 tax law changes, including the new $6,000 deduction for older people and the updated SALT deduction, can change the math on a Roth conversion. Loop in your CPA before you convert a dollar.

Don't rush into a spousal rollover

I see this more than almost any other misstep: A surviving spouse moves an inherited IRA into their own IRA right away because it feels like the obvious next step. Sometimes it is. Often, it isn't.

There's no deadline requiring a spousal rollover. If you're younger than 59½ and need access to retirement money, distributions from your own IRA are generally hit with a 10% early withdrawal penalty.

Distributions from an inherited IRA owned by a surviving spouse generally avoid that penalty. Once you complete the rollover, that flexibility is gone. Wait until you actually know which option fits your situation.

Give your estate plan a second look

Your estate plan was written for a different chapter of your life. Have your attorney review your living trust, power of attorney, HIPAA authorization and healthcare directive to confirm the people you named are still the right people.

If your trust is older, it may require setting up a bypass, or "B," trust when the first spouse dies. That provision made sense when the federal estate tax exemption was much lower.

Now that the exemption has been raised to $15 million per individual in 2026, many families no longer need that structure, and keeping everything in the A trust may be simpler if your estate falls under that threshold.

This is a decision to make with your attorney, not on your own.

Have the family conversation

One of the best things you can leave your family isn't money. It's clarity.

I encourage clients to hold a family meeting after losing a spouse. You don't have to share account balances. Just let your family know where your documents are, who your advisers are and how your estate plan works.

This is also a good time to start passing along personal items that carry meaning. If your late spouse loved fishing, the family member who shares that passion might treasure the gear now more than they would years from now.

My goal for every client is simple: When the surviving spouse eventually passes, I don't want their kids searching for account numbers and passwords. I want them focused on the life that was lived, not a scavenger hunt for the paperwork behind it.

Losing a spouse changes your finances as much as it changes your life. The families who come through it in the best shape aren't the ones who acted fastest. They're the ones who took a breath, asked the right questions and made each decision on its own timeline.

Related Content

• From Wills to Wishes: An Expert Guide to Your Estate Planning Playbook
• I'm a Financial Planning Pro: Do Your Family a Final Favor and Write Them a Love Letter
• From Pets to Paintings: The Little Things That Can Cause Big Estate Trouble
• Now That You've Built Your Estate Planning Playbook, It's Time to Put It to Work
• Per Stirpes vs Per Capita: The Beneficiary Rules Most Families Have Never Heard Of

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Most of my clients hate paying taxes. That part is universal. But what I've noticed over years of helping high-net-worth families with tax planning is that the instinct to avoid taxes today often leads to paying significantly more of them tomorrow.

The pattern shows up consistently: A client prefers to draw first from Roth accounts or taxable brokerage accounts, which are taxed at favorable capital gains rates, to avoid touching their IRA or 401(k) for as long as possible. It feels like a win. They've deferred taxes.

But when you model it out over 20 or 30 years of retirement, that approach often increases the cumulative tax burden, because they haven't spread withdrawals across tax brackets in a way that keeps their taxable income in check year after year.

That's what happens when you optimize for April instead of the next two decades.

Why deadlines are the enemy of good tax planning

When tax planning happens only in the fourth quarter, or in the final days of December, it may limit available strategies.

First, there's a logistical problem: Custodians can't guarantee that transactions such as qualified charitable distributions (QCDs), donor-advised fund (DAF) contributions or Roth conversions will settle before year-end if you wait until the last minute. A missed deadline isn't a tax strategy, it's a penalty.

Second, and more importantly, you lose flexibility. Many tax-saving moves depend on timing relative to market conditions, income fluctuations and life circumstances. Gifting appreciated shares to charity, for instance, is far more impactful when a stock has just jumped on an earnings report than when you're scrambling in December.

The difference between gifting 10 shares at $80 vs $88 per share, a 10% move that translates directly into a larger charitable deduction and greater tax savings, is an opportunity you can only capture if you're watching for it throughout the year.

Four strategies that require time to be effective

Some of the most effective tax moves cannot be executed well in a single tax season. Four stand out, and each one requires years, not months, to deliver.

1. Roth conversions in the low-income window.

For clients who retire before claiming Social Security, there's often a window, of about five to 10 years, when taxable income drops considerably.

Converting IRA or 401(k) funds to a Roth account during this window, at the 12% or 22% bracket rather than the 32% or higher rate that may apply once Social Security and required minimum distributions (RMDs) kick in, may produce meaningful lifetime tax savings, depending on individual income levels, bracket projections and future tax law changes.

This is cash flow modeling at its most useful: Mapping out conversion amounts year by year rather than deciding in isolation.

2. Coordinated charitable giving.

Bunching charitable deductions into a high-income year, such as one marked by a significant portfolio rebalance or a large Roth conversion, can be far more effective than spreading gifts evenly.

When income spikes irregularly, charitable giving becomes a natural offset. Planning this in advance, rather than reacting after the income event has already occurred, is what separates intentional strategy from coincidence.

3. Inherited IRA management under the SECURE Act.

For clients who inherit an IRA, the old "stretch" provision that allowed distributions over a lifetime is largely gone. Most beneficiaries now have a 10-year window to deplete the account. The planning question is when, within that window, to take distributions.

Consider a client who inherits an IRA two years before retirement and is still earning a full income. Depending on their income trajectory and tax bracket, delaying those withdrawals until after they stop working, while still within the 10-year depletion period, could shift distributions into meaningfully lower tax years.

4. Portfolio transitions for clients with embedded gains.

When a client comes in holding a portfolio of highly appreciated securities, triggering all of those gains in year one is rarely the right answer. A better approach recognizes those gains gradually over two, three or more tax years, spreading the burden while moving toward a better-diversified portfolio.

This requires a long-range view of the tax cost, not a reflex to get everything repositioned quickly.

Where investment decisions and tax strategy meet

Paying capital gains taxes is not inherently bad. It means your investments have grown. The risk of staying in a concentrated position that may no longer outperform can be far greater than the tax cost of diversifying.

We see clients hold individual company stock well past the point where it makes portfolio sense, purely to avoid a capital gains bill. That's a case where the tax tail is wagging the investment dog.

The better goal is minimizing taxes without compromising portfolio quality and diversification. Strategies such as tax-loss harvesting, asset location and direct indexing are genuine tools, but they work best as optimizations on top of a sound plan, not as substitutes for one.

Three steps to explore before your next tax season

If you've been taking a reactive approach, here are three places to start looking for opportunities:

1. Pull out your 2025 tax return and look for surprises.

Were there large distributions you didn't anticipate? Did you end up in a higher bracket than expected? Are there tax-advantaged accounts you could be contributing more to?

2. Identify any irregular income on the horizon.

Equity compensation, a business sale, a liquidity event, a large one-time expense: Each of these is a planning opportunity, and the earlier you can model the tax implications, the more options you have.

Once the income has already hit your return, many of the best strategies are off the table.

3. Get organized before you need to be.

One of the biggest sources of tax-season friction is simply not knowing where things are: Prior returns, IRS PINs, cost basis records, charitable contribution receipts.

Building a simple reference document for your annual tax prep reduces stress and makes it far easier to execute time-sensitive strategies without scrambling.

Taxes are unavoidable. But the total taxes paid over a lifetime of retirement are not fixed. They're shaped by decisions made years in advance, at the right income levels, in the right accounts, in the right sequence. That's a long game worth playing.

Related Content

• 4 Smart Ways to Use Your Tax Return for Financial Planning
• The September 15 Tax Conversation You Should Be Having Right Now
• After Decades of Investing, Your Biggest Winner May Now Be Your Biggest Risk
• A 2026 Tax Playbook for High Earners: Stealth Taxes and Strategic Wins
• A Confident Retirement Starts With These Four Strategies

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

By now, the fall tuition bill has landed, and for a lot of families the numbers don't close the way they used to. That isn't your imagination.

The federal borrowing caps that took effect on July 1 set a ceiling on Parent PLUS for the first time at $20,000 a year and $65,000 over the life of a student.

They also ended Grad PLUS for new borrowers. The loan that quietly filled whatever grants and federal aid left behind now runs out sooner.

Private lending is already a $140 billion market, about 8% of all student debt, according to industry data from Enterval. Analysts expect private loan volume to climb sharply this year as families move to cover the difference.

So here you are, maybe taking out a private loan for the first time, with a payment deadline days away. The textbook advice was to shop these loans back in May or June. That window has closed, but the situation isn't an emergency yet. Private loans have no fixed federal deadline and can still disburse into the fall term.

What you can't afford is to let the clock stampede you into the first offer that clears the bill. A little thought now will save you years of paying for a rushed choice.

First, make sure you have hit the federal ceiling

Before you sign anything private, confirm you have used every available federal dollar, because federal loans offer protections, such as income-driven repayment, forgiveness programs and deferment options, that private lenders rarely match.

Understanding these benefits helps families weigh the true cost and safety of each option.

Review each step deliberately. Make sure the student has accepted their full federal loan amount first. Then look at what Parent PLUS still allows under the new caps, because even a capped PLUS loan keeps federal features that a private loan might not offer.

A private loan should only fill the gap that remains. Borrow that figure, not a dollar more. A federal-versus-private loan comparison (like the one on CollegeLens, the website that I founded) can help you confirm you're filling a real gap rather than replacing cheaper, safer money.

Get a fixed rate unless you have a specific reason not to

A variable rate will almost always look cheaper on the day you apply. That is the point of it, and it is also the trap. A rate advertised at 3.99% variable can climb to 8% or 9% if benchmark rates rise, and this is a loan you may be repaying for a decade or more.

A fixed rate locks in your cost for the life of the loan. For a bill you're financing over many years, the certainty is worth more than a low teaser number. Unless you plan to pay the loan off fast and can absorb a jump, fixed is the safer call.

Understand what a cosigner really signs up for

Most students need a cosigner to qualify, and most cosigners don't fully register what they're agreeing to. If you cosign for your child, you're not vouching for them. You're equally on the hook. The debt shows up on your credit report; a missed payment is a missed payment, and it can sit on your record for years.

You're also not unusual in needing one. Cosigners are the norm in this market, not the exception. Industry data from Enterval shows cosigner rates have remained above 85% every year since 2009.

In the most recently reported quarter, more than 94% of newly originated private loans carried a cosigner, including almost 97% of undergraduate loans. If a lender is willing to lend to your student at all, it is usually because someone with established credit is standing behind the loan.

This is where the fine print earns its keep. Look for a cosigner release — the provision that lets you come off the loan once the student has made a stretch of on-time payments, often around 12 months, and can qualify on their own.

Some lenders offer it, and others don't; the terms vary widely. If two offers are close on rate, the one with a clean, achievable cosigner release is the better loan.

The trade you are actually making

It is helpful to understand what you give up when moving from federal to private loans, especially since private loans typically lack income-driven repayment options. Payments do not flex with income drops, and deferment or forbearance are limited and lender-specific.

Knowing these limitations can make you feel more cautious and prepared to weigh the risks involved.

None of that makes a private loan a bad choice. For a family with strong credit, it can be a perfectly reasonable way to close a real gap, and the rate can even beat a federal loan in some cases.

The point is to go in knowing the trade rather than discovering it later. If you have read my earlier columns, you will recognize the theme: The mistake is rarely the loan itself. It is borrowing on autopilot because you were busy.

Here's a short checklist for before you sign:

• Confirm the student has accepted all federal loans first, then measure the true remaining gap.
• Borrow only that gap. Resist rounding up for a cushion you will pay interest on for years.
• Choose a fixed rate unless you have a concrete plan to pay it off quickly.
• Compare at least two or three lenders on rate, fees and cosigner release, not just the first approval.
• Read the deferment and forbearance terms so you know your options if income drops.

The bigger picture

The federal safety net for college borrowing shrank this summer, and the private market is stepping into the gap it left. That isn't automatically bad news, but it does shift more of the responsibility onto you to shop well.

The deadline on your desk is real. It is also the exact moment a lender's job gets easier, and yours gets harder.

So slow down by one notch, even now. Fill the gap you actually have, lock in a rate you can live with, protect whoever is cosigning, and know the protections you are trading away.

Do that and a private loan becomes a deliberate piece of a plan instead of the thing you grabbed because the bill was due on Friday.

Related Content

• The Right Way and the Wrong Way to Use a 529 Plan That Doesn't Cover the Full Cost of College
• How to Budget for College Expenses Beyond Tuition
• How Grandparents Can Help with Education Expenses
• The FAFSA Quietly Got Friendlier and Stricter This Year: Will Your Family Win or Lose?
• 529 Plans Beat Trump Accounts for College Savings, But It Makes Sense to Have Both: Here's Why

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

"If you're hoping to retire someday, invest and start early."

Many of us have probably heard this, and it's true. However, investment accounts are only part of a comprehensive financial plan. Many people mistakenly believe contributing to a 401(k), IRA or brokerage account means they have a plan in place.

However, those accounts are just tools. The actual plan is a road map for how those tools should be used to help achieve financial goals.

In addition to making retirement savings contributions, a lot of people review their portfolio statements periodically, largely focusing on balances, returns and performance.

These statements are great for providing a snapshot of where your investments stand, but they don't explain how they'll be used to help you achieve your goals.

For example, two individuals can have identical portfolios with very different strategies. Someone who's planning to retire in the next few years will likely have different risk considerations and income needs compared with someone who is still decades away from retirement.

Rather than focusing on balances and returns, it's the financial plan that helps determine whether those investments align with your needs and circumstances.

Don't forget tax planning

Tax planning is another area in which portfolio statements fall short. They can tell you what type of accounts you're invested in, but they don't explain how withdrawals will be taxed or whether your money is in the appropriate account based on your situation.

Since investment accounts are taxed differently, where money is saved and how it's taken out can significantly impact your tax burden.

With a well-rounded financial plan, pre-retirees have the ability to understand how assets are intended to be distributed across retirement accounts and how withdrawals can be managed to reduce tax liabilities.

Adapting to changes

Unlike a portfolio statement, financial plans are designed to adapt to changes in your life rather than changes in the market.

Major life events such as a new job, marriage, the birth of a child or approaching retirement influence financial priorities, oftentimes requiring updates to an existing strategy.

A person's goals and spending habits can also change throughout retirement. The early years of retirement, also known as the go-go years, might mean traveling or taking on new experiences.

As the slow-go and no-go years approach, priorities tend to shift, especially when it comes to healthcare. However, financial planning doesn't stop when retirement hits.

Although a portfolio statement might list beneficiaries, it doesn't account for greater estate planning needs. Some people might want to leave assets to children or grandchildren, while others might decide to donate to charity or set specific guidelines for how their wealth should be distributed.

A financial plan helps make sure those wishes are incorporated into your overall strategy.

Paying attention to investment returns is important, but they're only one piece of the pie. A portfolio statement can give you a snapshot of current beneficiaries, various retirement accounts, and current investment performance.

It's the plan that helps determine whether those investments support your financial goals.

Related Content

• Does Your Retirement Portfolio Resemble a Junk Drawer? Here's How to Clean It Up, From a Wealth Manager
• Divide and Conquer: Your Annual Financial Plan Made Easy, Courtesy of a Financial Adviser
• 4 Great Tools to DIY Your Own Financial Plan
• 5 Do's and Don'ts for a Successful First Meeting With Your Financial Adviser
• I'm a Financial Adviser: This Is the Retirement Tax Assumption That Could Cost You

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

For generations, philanthropy has measured itself by generosity: How much money went out the door. Maybe it's time to measure something else: How long the impact lasts.

America's foundations have made a difference. They've funded hospitals, kept food banks stocked and propped up communities through hard years.

But too often, "success" still means dollars distributed rather than lives genuinely changed. A grant can ease a crisis this month. It rarely creates the conditions that let a family or a neighborhood stand on its own two feet next year.

Sometimes, without meaning to, it does the opposite: It funds the same need again and again instead of solving it.

The need for philanthropic investment

Every industry hits a point where the old playbook stops working. Philanthropy is there now. The problems facing communities have changed shape over the past few decades; the tools built to fight them mostly haven't. Funding yesterday's solution for today's problem rarely produces tomorrow's opportunity.

The world has moved on. Entrepreneurship is everywhere. Venture capital turns raw ideas into real companies at a pace that would have seemed absurd 50 years ago. Yet most institutional giving still runs on a model built for an earlier era, one designed to meet needs rather than build capacity. That deserves a second look.

Today's problems call for something more ambitious than charity alone: Philanthropic investment. Foundations acting less like check-writers and more like long-term partners, backing entrepreneurs, community leaders and organizations capable of creating opportunity that outlives the grant.

The goal shouldn't be to make people better at receiving help. It should be to help them stop needing it.

Americans gave an estimated $593 billion to charity in 2024, up 6.3% from the year before, or about 3.3% after inflation, according to Giving.org.

Private foundations alone distributed nearly $110 billion. And because most private foundations are subject to annual distribution requirements tied to roughly 5% of certain assets, that number only grows as endowments do.

The real question isn't whether philanthropy has the resources to make a dent. It clearly does. The question is whether those resources are being spent to fix things, or just to keep fixing the same thing.

A new playbook for private foundations

My years at the JPMorgan Chase Foundation taught me something simple: Capitalism creates opportunity only when capital actually moves. A neighborhood doesn't build lasting prosperity while its most promising entrepreneurs stay chronically underfunded.

That means foundations need to step outside their comfort zones, trading some of the risk aversion of traditional grantmaking for the instincts of an angel investor.

Zero-interest loans, recoverable capital, and patient, mission-driven investment are three methods. Money that comes back and gets reinvested, again and again, doing more good the second and third time around than a one-time grant ever could.

Picture a foundation less like a donor and more like a convener pulling together business leaders, entrepreneurs, schools, nonprofits and local officials around one goal: Durable local prosperity, not just relief from the latest hardship.

We don't have to guess at what this looks like in practice. A few foundations have already written the playbook. The Kauffman Foundation has spent decades investing in entrepreneurship and expanding access to economic opportunity.

Miami tells a similar story: The Knight Foundation helped turn it into one of the fastest-growing startup hubs in the country, not through blind check-writing but through smart, sustained bets on entrepreneurs, civic institutions and the organizations around them.

In both cases, the money was never the point. It was the ecosystem it built: Businesses, investors, schools, nonprofits and local leaders all pulling in the same direction.

Philanthropy's next chapter

The lesson here is worth sitting with: Philanthropy does its best work as a catalyst, not a benefactor. Bring the right partners to the table, absorb some of the early risk nobody else wants to touch, and back ideas with real staying power. Suddenly a foundation's reach extends well past its own checkbook.

What you get isn't just healthier nonprofits. You get local economies that keep generating opportunity long after the original investment is a distant memory.

Venture investors know most bets won't pay off, but the ones that do can create jobs, spin up new supply chains and lift an entire community in the process.

Philanthropy can borrow that same long game, just with a different scoreboard: Not equity value, but economic mobility, business formation, household income and community resilience.

No single foundation can pull this off solo. The real opportunity lies in public-private partnerships, where philanthropic capital pairs with business expertise, government resources and entrepreneurial energy. Together, they can build something no one player could fund alone.

Philanthropy's next chapter shouldn't only be about doing charity better. It should be about needing less of it. Every dollar that funds a small business, seeds an entrepreneur or builds real capacity in a community is a dollar that starts working on its own, creating jobs, generating tax revenue and funding the next idea.

That's not a smaller vision for philanthropy. It's a bigger one.

The foundations that figure this out first won't just write the biggest checks of their era. They'll build the playbook every foundation after them has to reckon with. The ones that don't will keep measuring success in dollars out the door, long after everyone else has moved on to measuring what those dollars actually built.

Related Content

• The Future of Philanthropy Is Female: How Women Will Lead a New Era in Charitable Giving
• Five Ways to Adapt Your Charitable Giving Strategy in a Changing World: An Expert Guide
• Start-ups Trying to (Profitably) Solve the World's Hardest Problems
• Venture Capital Is Evolving: Here's the New Playbook for Startups and Investors
• How to Thrive as an Entrepreneur Despite the Stress

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

If you had school-aged children or grandchildren in your care during the pandemic, COVID-19 was that nightmare none of us fully woke up from, leaving this haunting question: "What did these past several years — a tsunami of doubt and contradictions — do to our children?"

While, historically, it has been virtually impossible to sue a school district for educational negligence ­— for example, graduating kids from high school who are functionally illiterate — COVID opened the floodgates, leading to multimillion-dollar class action settlements across the country to pay for remedial tutoring in basic subjects.

But money alone can't answer those questions that most of us had, and might still have, such as:

• Was it really necessary to shut down the schools, depriving our kids of not only education, but the development of important social and life skills?
• Was the virus really a fatal risk to young children?

The release of Dr. Anthony Fauci's pandemic diaries could not have come at a better time for many of these issues to be reexamined. In 2020, when the pandemic began, Fauci was director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease.

As Southern California pediatrician Dr. Stanley Calderwood asks in his book, COVID-19, Children and the Lasting Impact: A Parent's Guide to the Global Pandemic, published in July, "Did the pandemic response truly protect children, and how can we do better next time?"

Mass of confusing messages

"There was a mass of confusing messages we all heard about the COVID-19 virus and efforts to find treatments and a vaccine," Calderwood noted during our Zoom interview. "But little attention was paid to educating the public in the basic biology of what we were facing — how a virus, like COVID, can infect someone merely if you stand next to them."

His book takes us through a mini course in Infectious Diseases 101. He has a unique ability to break down the science behind what makes us sick and how our bodies are equipped to fight a never-ending war against unseen enemies — and how the science of vaccination has saved so many.

Vaccination helped win the Revolutionary War

And speaking of war, did you know that it was science — yes, science — that played a significant role in our Revolutionary War? "It wasn't only the military brilliance of George Washington that helped to achieve independence," the author pointed out, "but something that took great courage off the battlefield to assure victory on the battlefield.

"A distrust of vaccination developed during the COVID crisis, but most people are completely unaware that in the winter of 1775, George Washington faced two enemies — the British army and smallpox, which had a mortality rate of 30%.

"An early form of vaccination, known as 'variolation,' while controversial, was proven to be effective in preventing the deadly respiratory aspects of the disease. Washington ordered this be administered to recruits who never had smallpox and quarantined those who were infected.

"During the spring offensive, his troops were healthy and encountered little resistance from the British, many of whom were too sick to fight, giving the Continental Army its first significant victory."

Was it necessary to shutter the schools — and the country?

Who can forget the panicked shutdown of human activity during COVID, "as a way, it was thought, of stopping the disease and fatalities. This was flawed reasoning," the author notes. "Several countries did not go into lockdown — Japan, Taiwan, Sweden, for example — and were not worse off for it, as we see in retrospect."

Calderwood's pediatric practice remained open throughout COVID. He and his colleagues gathered a great amount of data on the frequency of infection and symptoms in children, and he draws on more than 30 years of clinical experience in his examination of the virus and the public health response to it.

"The results were striking. Half of the children who tested positive were asymptomatic. They reported no symptoms and had normal vital signs. Almost all the remaining children had only mild or moderate illness, typically recovering within seven to 10 days.

Researchers and physicians across the globe have substantiated these findings. The majority of children with COVID-19 are asymptomatic or have mild disease.

Why do children not become as ill as adults?

Calderwood spends a great deal of time in his book explaining how an infection spreads and tells us why children did not become so ill: "COVID-19 gains entry into cells by binding to the ACE-2 receptor cells on their surface. In children, there are relatively few ACE-2 receptors, significantly limiting the virus' ability to establish serious infection.

"Early in the pandemic, many pediatric infectious specialists understood this and were very cautious about voicing opinions that contradicted the prevailing narrative, afraid to tell it like it was, that COVID-19 would not be a serious infection for children."

Education and the family

Calderwood is most eloquent when he looks at what the lockdown did to children at critical stages in their social development and academic education.

"There is a window of opportunity where the brain is best able to develop language and math skills. Merely by reopening the schools, things do not pick up where they left off. While a short period of closure to slow the virus may have been warranted, we continue to witness the results of our failure to ask, 'What does shuttering schools do to the students? What does it do to families?'"

Calderwood concluded our interview with this cautionary observation: "COVID-19 illustrated what happens when politics and ideology slam the door to science shut. Society will be tested again."

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield, Calif., and welcomes comments and questions from readers, which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993, or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1@gmail.com. And be sure to visit dennisbeaver.com.

Related Content

• How to Spot a Bad Landlord Before You Hand Over Your Hard-Earned Money
• How the Billable Hour Can Break Even a Strong Moral Compass: This Marriage Is at Risk of Becoming Collateral Damage to Firm Profits
• The Billable Hour Is on Life Support: How AI Is Killing the Clock
• Are Your Secrets Safe With a Law Firm's Receptionist? All About Attorney-Client Privilege (Though Kenny Is Clearly in Big Trouble)
• Loyalty Points and a Widow's Interaction with Customer Service: What Happens When a Company Forgets the Human Behind the Account

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

A signed will, a funded trust and a list of named beneficiaries can create a powerful sense of security for individuals mapping out their estate: The paperwork is done, so the plan must be ironclad.

In reality, even the most carefully designed estate plans can quietly fall apart when left unattended.

Anyone actively engaged in or preparing to start the estate planning process should be fully aware of where they may be exposed to vulnerabilities, which life events should prompt an immediate review and reevaluation and what to bring with them when meeting with an estate planning attorney.

Here are five of the biggest myths in estate planning, each paired with the best practice to follow instead.

Myth No. 1: The will and trust always have the final say

It seems logical that a will or trust controls where everything goes. In practice, beneficiary designations on retirement accounts, life insurance policies and similar assets generally take precedence over both.

Consider a revocable trust that thoughtfully establishes a separate share for each child in a family. If the largest retirement account names just one child as beneficiary, that single form quietly bypasses the entire trust structure. The funds go directly to the named child.

Strategy tip: Treat beneficiary designations as a core component of a coordinated and comprehensive estate plan and confirm that every designation is made with intent that is reflected within the will and trust.

Myth No. 2: Once beneficiaries are named, the job is done

Standard beneficiary forms carry default rules that routinely surprise families. For example, if three adult children are each named as one-third beneficiaries and one of them dies first, that child's share typically flows to the surviving siblings, rather than the deceased child's own children.

In such a scenario, the grandchildren are unintentionally disinherited by a form nobody thought to revisit.

When assets do reach minors through beneficiary designations, the results are rarely good: The child receives full control at 18. Custodial Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (UGMA) or Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (UTMA) accounts are irrevocable, and compounding growth over time can gradually turn modest gifts into a substantial sum no teenager is properly prepared to manage.

In our own practices, these accounts have produced some of the most difficult conversations we have ever had — a parent watching a 17- or 18-year-old gain control of far more money than anyone ever intended, with no legal way to slow it down.

By the time a family realizes the account has ballooned, nothing can legally stop the transfer.

Likewise, divorce introduces its own trap. Some states automatically sever a former spouse's beneficiary designation the day a divorce is finalized. Anyone who intends to keep an ex-spouse as beneficiary must re-execute the designation after the divorce is final, or the law may quietly override the plan.

Strategy tip: Review every beneficiary designation after any major life event and at least every five years. Make sure to review beneficiary designations on accounts with less common beneficiary designation options such as payable on death (POD) or transfer on death (TOD).

Myth No. 3: More documents mean more protection

Complexity is not the same as security. While an estate plan may become more elaborate with every well-intentioned addition, it can also become more fragile. Key warning signs include:

An uncoordinated patchwork of paperwork. Wrangling several documents not designed to work together — such as a living trust from one attorney and powers of attorney from another — can add up to produce disaster.

Outdated assumptions. The federal estate tax exemption now sits at $15 million for individuals; roughly two decades ago, it was $1 million. Sophisticated structures built under the old rules can be obsolete today.

Assets ignored by documents. A closely held business, a buy-sell agreement or a family investment entity can derail everything.

Forced togetherness. A family cabin left jointly to three children living in three different states, further complicated by a provision forbidding its sale, is a recipe for resentment. So are co-fiduciaries, which generate an outsized share of estate litigation.

Strategy tip: Favor coordination over accumulation, revisit older structures as the law changes and name one person at a time.

Myth No. 4: The attorney will flag any problems

As former practicing estate planning attorneys ourselves, we say this with genuine affection for the profession: Attorneys are, by the design of their practice, reactive.

They respond to what clients bring them, and they rarely reach out unprompted to ask whether a plan still reflects a client's life.

So, the responsibility for noticing that a named guardian is no longer needed, or that a personal rift has made a chosen trustee a poor fit, tends to fall on the client.

Strategy tip: Complete three steps before any attorney meeting:

• Do a cursory self-review. Check who is named and in what roles, the ages at which distributions occur and whether significant assets are mentioned in the documents at all.
• Articulate wishes in plain language. An effective plan maps who receives what, in what proportions and under what conditions, no legal vocabulary required.
• Bring a personal financial statement. Provide a clear accounting of what is owned, how it is titled and who else holds an interest.

The stakes of that last step are easy to underestimate. We once worked through a client's entire plan, only to have her mention, almost in passing, that she had been diagnosed with stage IV cancer.

Attorneys can work with only what they are given, and one undisclosed detail can quietly undo an otherwise flawless plan.

It also pays to ask the attorney's opinion directly. Asking, "Would this work in my situation?" invites a far more engaging answer than a directive ever will.

Myth No. 5: A good plan is built to last a lifetime

An estate plan is not an immovable monument; it is a living document. Trying to solve for the next 30 years is a surefire recipe for decision paralysis.

The better question is simpler: If something major happened in my life within the next five to 10 years, how should my estate plan follow suit?

There is no standard estate plan. The power of a good estate plan lies in how precisely it reflects a particular family, its assets and the wishes of the person drafting it.

Strategy tip: Plan for the foreseeable future and resist any plug-and-play template.

The strongest plans are not the longest or the most sophisticated, but rather, the ones reviewed regularly, coordinated carefully and shaped by owners who stay engaged.

An intentionally designed plan does not simply sit in a drawer looking impressive; it makes a meaningful difference for the family it was designed to serve.

Ultimately, the most effective estate plan isn't the one with the most documents, but the one that stays coordinated across wills, trusts and beneficiary designations and is revisited after every major life event.

By staying actively engaged, individuals can ensure their plan continues to protect the family it was built to serve rather than falling victim to the default rules and outdated assumptions that catch so many families off guard.

Shelby Anderson, J.D., CEPA®, is a Senior Wealth Planner at Clark Capital Management Group. In this role, Shelby works closely with clients' legal and tax advisers to provide client-facing expertise across a wide range of wealth planning strategies.

Patrick Schultz, J.D., CEPA®, is a Senior Wealth Planner at Clark Capital Management Group. In this role, Patrick works closely with clients' legal and tax advisers to provide client-facing expertise across a wide range of wealth planning strategies.

Related Content

• Wills Gone Wild: How to Avoid Estate Planning Disasters
• Your Estate Plan Isn't 'Done' Until You've Completed These Five Steps, From an Estate Planning Attorney
• Protect Your Family's Future: Avoid These 12 Common Estate Planning Mistakes
• 5 Estate Planning Things You Need to Do Now, From a Financial Planner
• Estate Planning Checklist: 13 Smart Moves

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

For many homeowners, today's housing market feels like a stalemate. Elevated mortgage rates and limited inventory have left many people choosing to stay put rather than make a move.

A recent report from Citizens, where I am the head of Mortgage and Consumer Lending, found that only 13% of American homeowners say that buying a new home feels realistic in the current economic environment.

But not everyone has the luxury of waiting. Job relocations, family changes and caregiving responsibilities continue regardless of market conditions. For these "must-move" buyers, the question isn't whether to act, but how to move forward in a difficult market.

Many begin the process with a strategic, financially focused approach. Affordability remains a top concern. However, market conditions frequently prompt buyers to pivot.

Many buyers enter the process expecting their current home to be the biggest hurdle. Increasingly, we're seeing the opposite. Homes might sell quickly, while limited inventory and competition make finding the next property significantly more difficult.

Managing the gap

For homeowners who need to sell one home and buy another, the challenge is often less about completing a transaction and more about managing the gap between two transactions that rarely align perfectly.

Navigating this environment requires flexibility. A clear understanding of the financing and liquidity tools available can help bridge those gaps, but many buyers aren't sure where to start.

The same report from Citizens reveals that 63% of homeowners are likely to need financing for a home purchase or improvement within the next five years, yet 39% say they don't understand how financing options work.

In addition, 27% are either unfamiliar with home equity or have not yet explored how to use it.

Lots to discover

This knowledge gap can complicate an already complex process. Beyond finding the right home, buyers must evaluate loan options, compare costs and manage timing — all while dealing with uncertainty around rates and inventory.

For those who need to move quickly, liquidity and flexibility are critical. Some buyers are exploring ways to tap into their existing home equity, including home equity lines of credit (HELOCs) and home equity loans.

About 40% of HELOC applications at Citizens reach final approval in 10 days or less, helping borrowers act decisively without prolonged uncertainty.

These options allow homeowners to borrow against the value they've built in their current property, which can be useful when the competitive market makes the purchasing timeline difficult to pin down.

For example, a buyer relocating for work might have a defined timeline to sell the current home and secure housing in a new region. Too often, those timelines don't align.

A home might sell quickly, but a lack of suitable options can delay the purchase of the next property, creating the need for interim housing or temporary financing solutions.

In these situations, accessing home equity can help bridge liquidity gaps and reduce pressure to make rushed decisions.

Buyers can also strengthen their position by obtaining a fully underwritten commitment letter from a lender, which verifies income, credit and debt-to-income ratio before they begin making offers.

Explore your options

That said, home-equity products and a strong position in the market aren't the only paths toward a successful transaction, and they don't come risk-free. Sale contingencies are an option, but most sellers prefer to avoid them.

Alternatively, buyers who want to hold on selling their home before buying can consider a bridge loan, which is designed to provide short-term financing that "bridges" the gap between buying a new home and selling the current one, giving buyers the funds to make an offer before their existing home closes.

That opens the possibility of carrying two housing payments at once and causing great financial strain. The flexibility of a HELOC's draw period allows borrowers to pace principal and interest repayments, which can be useful for smoothing out cash flow in early repayment years.

Understanding these risks is key to making decisions that will best position the buyer financially, far beyond the transactional moment of moving.

Easing the strain

Even when equipped with solid information, buying a home under pressure can be difficult. Practical guidance and realistic expectations can help buyers make more confident decisions.

In today's challenging market, buyers should build a trusted team of advisers — including real estate professionals and lenders — early in the process. They can also anticipate setbacks and consider temporary housing if necessary to avoid compromising on their goals.

When buyers fully understand their options, they are better positioned to make decisions that support their long-term financial health.

While some experts suggest the housing market is at a standstill, the must-movers prove that the market hasn't shut down completely. People are still buying homes, just with a stronger need for reliable guidance when timing isn't ideal. They want to understand every possible financial risk before listing.

In this landscape, buyers who take the time to understand their financing options and plan for liquidity are better positioned to navigate the market thoughtfully, even when waiting isn't an option.

Related Content

• How Does the 10-Year Treasury Yield Affect Mortgage Rates?
• 5 Signs Home Buyers Have More Negotiating Power Right Now
• Think You Can Afford That House? Run These Numbers First
• Applying for a Mortgage Loan? Here's What to Expect
• Buying a Home With Your 401(k)? Consider the Risk to Your Retirement

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

You've done everything the system has asked of you.

You were automatically enrolled in your 401(k) on your first day and never opted out. Your contribution rate climbs a little each year — automatically, whether you notice or not — and your money sits in a target-date fund that quietly rebalances while you live life.

On paper, you're a retirement success story — the exact "participant outcome" every employer hopes for and the entire financial services industry is built to produce.

Then the brakes on your car go, the emergency room copay hits, or the rent notice arrives with a number you simply can't cover this month. And you do the very thing you swore you'd never do: You log in and pull money out of the account you know you shouldn't touch.

If that stings a little, it's probably because it's a story about a lot of us.

In 2025, a record 6% of retirement plan participants took a hardship withdrawal from their 401(k), according to Vanguard's latest How America Saves report — the largest share the firm has ever recorded, and up from 5% the year before.

That happened in the very same year account balances climbed 13% and plan participation reached an all-time high of 86%. Read that again.

By those measures, the system looks healthier than ever. So why are more people than ever reaching into their retirement savings early? And how can we help mitigate this?

Hardship withdrawals aren't a discipline problem

The "easy" conclusion is that people simply aren't saving well, or that they lack discipline. I'd argue the opposite. The median hardship withdrawal last year was about $1,900. The two most common reasons were to stop a foreclosure or eviction and to cover a medical bill.

People aren't necessarily draining their retirement accounts for a vacation, a new pool in the backyard or an online shopping spree. They're reaching for the last cushion they have, because every other one is already gone.

That's the real story hiding inside the headlines: The early withdrawal isn't the problem. It's a symptom. The fragility was there long before the withdrawal; this is just where it finally became visible.

The rest of the data agrees. Worker confidence in retiring comfortably fell six points in a single year to 61%, the lowest since 2017, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Fewer than three in five workers say they could handle an emergency expense, while 65% say debt is a problem in their household.

These aren't the numbers of a country that forgot how to save. They're the numbers of a country where paychecks stopped stretching as far as the plan assumed they would.

To be fair, part of the increase is mechanical. It's simply easier to take a hardship withdrawal than it used to be thanks to a 2018 rule change that removed a required step, resulting in less paperwork and fewer hoops to jump through.

Going back to the 6% taking withdrawals, this could mean friction is disappearing, not necessarily that distress is appearing. But that caveat doesn't rescue the overall story. In contrast, it sharpens it.

When someone is facing eviction, unexpected medical bills or a $1,900 shortfall and this is what they reach for first, you're not looking at carelessness. You're looking at a need.

A better way to cope with financial emergencies

If you find yourself eyeing that account in a hard month, instead of asking, "What's wrong with me?", ask some of these questions instead.

Am I measuring the right thing? A growing retirement account balance feels like security, but it's a promise about a life you'll live decades from now. It tells you nothing about your next 30 days.

The fragility lives in the gap between this paycheck and the next surprise, and that gap never shows up on your quarterly retirement account statements.

The number that may better predict whether you'll have to raid it is a different one: How long you could cover the basics if the paychecks stopped tomorrow, using money you can easily reach without touching retirement at all.

Is there anything between me and the next emergency that isn't my retirement account? For a lot of people, honestly, there isn't. But that's not a character flaw — it's the most changeable thing on this list.

A small, separate emergency fund, built however it gets built — a little set aside over time — is often all that stands between an unexpected bill and a withdrawal.

And what would actually make me feel secure, as opposed to just making the balance bigger? Those aren't always the same goal, and noticing the difference is where real security starts.

Rather than focusing too rigidly on standard savings advice, find the number that helps you sleep at night.

To be clear, none of this means the years of saving were pointless. It means retirement readiness and financial security are two different things, and we've spent a long time discussing the first as if it guarantees the second.

If you're doing everything right and still feel like you're one surprise away from it all coming apart, you're not imagining it, and you're not alone — you're paying attention. The account is never the whole picture. The life around it is.

Related Content

• 8 Costly 401(k) Mistakes That Could Tank Your Retirement
• The 401(k) Loan Dilemma: Is It Ever a Good Idea?
• 6 Steps to Quickly Build Your Emergency Fund
• How Much Savings Do You Actually Need to Feel Financially Secure? Start With These 3 Benchmarks
• Take It From a Tax Expert: The True Measure of Your Retirement Readiness Isn't the Size of Your Nest Egg

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

My parents were born during the Great Depression and understood money down to the penny.

I still have their passbook savings accounts — small booklets filled with handwritten deposits and withdrawals that documented the flow of money through their lives. Every entry is a reminder of a time when financial stewardship was a necessity.

Today's teenagers and young adults live in a very different world. As many prepare to leave for college and manage money on their own, parents are asking important questions: Should they provide a monthly allowance? Encourage a part-time job? Help their children open a credit card?

Many families understandably provide financial support during college — whether for tuition, housing or living expenses. In fact, according to Edelman Financial Engines' What Money Means study, 43% of parents with adult children say they currently provide financial support, including 14% who say they provide a significant amount.

Financial assistance has remained remarkably consistent over the past several years, suggesting this has become a normal part of launching young adults into adulthood.

1. Start with awareness: Help them see how money moves

Most teens and young adults experience money only at the moment of spending. They tap a card, and the story ends there. But financial maturity begins with understanding how money actually flows into, out of and through our lives.

One good way to illustrate the value of money is to encourage them to track their spending — ideally for a month. The point is not to judge their choices — it's to help them see patterns.

If they are earning a paycheck, walk them through it. Show them the difference between gross and net pay, how taxes work and why payroll deductions matter. For students who take on a campus job, reviewing a paycheck can be an eye-opening lesson.

Understanding why take-home pay is less than expected — and learning to budget around it — builds practical financial skills.

Another way to teach financial responsibility is to let young adults pay for certain things themselves. Start small with discretionary purchases — the things they really want — and gradually move to necessities.

Whether support comes through a monthly allowance or helps cover larger expenses, establishing clear expectations helps young adults learn to budget while still benefitting from a parent's guidance. This is not about withdrawing support — it is about giving them the dignity of ownership.

2. Teach credit before they need it

College is often the first time young adults are exposed to credit card offers. Before they apply, help them understand the difference between building credit and accumulating debt. Explain how interest works, why paying the balance in full each month matters and how credit utilization affects a credit score.

It's also important to discuss common credit card mistakes, such as making only the minimum payment, carrying a balance month to month, maxing out available credit, missing payments or treating a credit card as an emergency fund.

These habits can lead to costly interest charges, damage credit scores and make it harder to reach future financial goals.

In fact, nearly 60% of Gen Z credit cardholders say they typically make only the minimum payment on at least one credit card, according to a recent LendingTree report.

The survey also found that many cardholders mistakenly believe carrying a balance helps their credit score and rely on credit cards as a substitute for emergency savings.

Relying on minimum payments can become an expensive habit because interest continues to accrue on the remaining balance, making debt more difficult and costly to pay off over time.

When used responsibly, a credit card can be a valuable financial tool. When used carelessly, it can become an expensive lesson.

3. Help them start saving and investing early

If your teen or young adult has income through a job, helping them open a Roth IRA may be one of the most valuable gifts you can give. Even modest contributions to an individual retirement account can be powerful because time — not investment brilliance — is the most valuable asset a young investor possesses.

The goal is not to teach them how to pick winning stocks. Instead, teach them the importance of regularly saving, broad diversification and patience. Show them how a low-cost index fund allows them to become owners of hundreds or even thousands of companies around the world.

More importantly, help them understand the extraordinary power of compounding over decades. A teenager who invests a few thousand dollars today may find that those early contributions may become some of the most valuable dollars they will ever save.

4. Model the behavior you want them to learn

Young adults learn far more from what they observe than from what they are told. One of the most effective ways to teach healthy money habits is to be open about your own experiences with money, including the lessons you've learned along the way.

Whether it's sharing how you paid off debt, recovered from an overspending habit or learned the importance of saving for emergencies, these real-life examples can make financial concepts feel more relatable and achievable.

According to the What Money Means study, 86% of Americans say their parents or upbringing influenced their relationship with money, including 35% who say the influence was major.

Financial responsibility is not learned in a single conversation. When we help young adults understand money, we give them confidence, independence and a foundation for lifelong financial well-being.

Related Content

• How to Budget for College Expenses Beyond Tuition
• 3 Ages, 3 Money Lessons: A Parent's Guide to Raising Financially Savvy Kids
• Schools Can Teach Kids About Money, But Guess Who They Learn From the Most?
• These Small Money Habits Stick (and Now Is the Perfect Time to Adopt Them)
• My 2 Key Rules for Investing Work Even When the Markets Are in a Tizzy

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

Could owning a pet affect the way you view life during retirement?

Turns out Fido or Whiskers may have a bigger influence on your post-work happiness than you thought.

Full disclosure: I'm a retirement researcher by profession, and I'm also an animal lover. My wife is a veterinarian, and we're proud pet parents to three dogs, two guinea pigs and a tortoise.

In other words, I don't need to do any research beyond my own home to know the profound impact a pet can make at any stage of life.

Still, I was delighted that Prudential included a few questions about pet ownership in the Global Retirement Pulse Survey it did last summer. And it's really not much of a stretch — the cost of owning a pet should absolutely be a factor in building a comprehensive retirement income plan.

Some things we learned aren't particularly surprising: Pet ownership declines notably by age, people who owned pets before are likely to want a pet during retirement, and most people don't fully consider all the costs of owning a pet after they're done working.

Cats vs dogs

Now for the fun part, and I realize I may have buried the bone — I mean, buried the lede. I wanted to see whether pet ownership — specifically cats and dogs — is related to changes in life outlook. So, we asked whether someone's outlook on life has gotten better with age.

Drum roll, please: Go give your dog a treat! People who own dogs report having better life outlooks than those with cats. And people who have cats actually reported life outlooks that were worse than people without pets (I mentioned this to a few cats I know, and perhaps not surprisingly, they just don't care).

I was curious if other factors like wealth could be driving this, so I ran some additional calculations, and it turns out I wasn't barking up the wrong tree. See the results below.

So, I can't offer any guarantees from our research. But if you think owning a dog in retirement will bring a lasting smile to your face, who am I to disagree?

For over 20 years Prudential has been studying broader economic trends impacting Americans in its Pulse survey. The latest, the Global Retirement Pulse Survey, expands the geographic footprint and includes responses from the U.S., Brazil, Mexico, and Japan (for this analysis I just focus on just the U.S. respondents). The survey was conducted online by Brunswick Group between August 8-22, 2025 and there were 1,000 U.S. respondents. Note, the survey only included "mass affluent" adults, who are defined as age 30+ with at least $100,000 in investable assets.

Related Content

• How to Cut the Cost of Pet Care
• Is Pet Insurance Worth It?
• Why Your Pet Should Be In Your Estate Plan
• How to Find Your Pet Insurance Sweet Spot: A Financial Planner's Perspective
• From Pets to Paintings: The Little Things That Can Cause Big Estate Trouble

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

In my experience, when a couple sits down to plan their Social Security timing, one thing surprises them almost every time: They don't agree.

One spouse has read that waiting until 70 gets you the biggest possible check, so that's the plan. The other wants the income now.

Neither of them has run the number that should be driving the conversation: Not the maximum benefit, but the spousal benefit and what happens to it if they wait.

That's the piece of Social Security planning I see skipped more than any other. It can be worth hundreds of dollars a month, for the rest of a spouse's life, and most people never calculate it until it's too late to matter.

The decision you can't undo

Social Security is one of the only truly irreversible decisions in retirement planning. Once you file, that's generally it. There's a narrow exception: You can withdraw your application within 12 months of filing, but only once, and you must repay every dollar you've received. Past that window, you're locked into whatever you chose, for life.

That permanence is exactly why this decision deserves more than a rule of thumb. "Wait until 70" is good general advice for a single person maximizing their own lifetime benefit. It's incomplete advice for a married couple, because it ignores a benefit that only becomes available once someone files.

The number most couples never calculate

If you're married, your spouse may be eligible for a spousal benefit worth up to 50% of your benefit at your full retirement age, even if they have little or no work history of their own, or if their own benefit is smaller than 50% of yours.

But here's the part that trips people up: Your spouse can't collect that spousal benefit until you file for your own.

Consider a hypothetical couple, Mark and Diane, both in their mid-60s, with a full retirement age of 67. Mark's full retirement age benefit is $3,200 a month, but he's planning to wait until 70 to collect $3,968. Diane spent most of her career raising their kids and working part-time, so her own benefit at full retirement age is only $700 a month.

Most couples in this position focus entirely on Mark's number. But Diane is also eligible for a spousal benefit of up to $1,600 a month, more than double what she'd get on her own record. The catch is that she can't touch it until Mark files.

While Mark waits, Diane can draw her smaller $700 benefit or wait alongside him. Either way, that's three extra years of a meaningfully smaller household income in exchange for a bigger Social Security check down the road.

Whether that trade-off is worth it depends entirely on the couple's full financial picture, which is exactly why this number needs to be calculated, not assumed.

Running the break-even math

The other number worth knowing is the break-even age: The point at which the extra money from delaying benefits catches up to and passes what you'd have collected by filing earlier.

For someone weighing full retirement age against age 70, that break-even point typically lands in the early-to-mid 80s, depending on the exact benefit amounts involved.

If you expect to live well past that age, delaying tends to pay off in total lifetime benefits. If your health or family history points the other way, filing earlier may make more financial sense, even before you factor in what it means for your spouse's income today.

The part everyone forgets: The survivor's check

Here's the piece that rarely comes up until it's too late to plan around: When one spouse dies, the survivor doesn't keep both checks. The smaller one stops, and the survivor keeps the larger one for the rest of their life.

That means whoever has the higher benefit, and their filing age, determines the income floor their spouse will live on if they're the one left behind.

That's a real argument for delaying the higher earner's benefit, especially when there's an age gap or a health difference between spouses. But it's not automatically the right call for every couple, and it needs to be weighed against the income the household is giving up in the meantime, not treated as a rule that overrides everything else.

3 steps to take this week

You don't need an adviser to start this process. You need 10 minutes and both spouses' numbers.

Pull both statements. Log into your accounts at SSA.gov and record each spouse's benefit at 62, at full retirement age and at 70.

Calculate the spousal benefit two ways. Compare each spouse's own benefit against 50% of the higher earner's full retirement age benefit, and use whichever number is larger.

Run your own break-even math. The 80s range in this article is a general guide, not your number. Free tools, such as Open Social Security, let you plug in your actual birth dates and benefit amounts to see your household's real break-even age and total lifetime income under different filing combinations.

See the math applied to a real filing decision. If it helps to watch this reasoning play out step by step, this video walks through a similar case, including the spousal benefit tension and the break-even trade-off.

Make the decision with the numbers in front of you

Social Security timing isn't a decision either spouse should make alone, and it's not one that should be settled by general advice in an article you've read, including this one. It's a decision that depends on your spousal benefit, your break-even age, your health and what happens to the survivor.

Do the math for your household, not someone else's. And have the conversation with real numbers on the table before you file, because after that, there's no going back.

Related Content

• Claiming Social Security: 7 Tools and Rules for DIY Investors
• When Spouses Clash on Retirement Age: Longevity Risk vs Early Retirement
• How Couples Can Manage Different Retirement Timelines
• The Mulligan Rule of Retirement — Seven Mistakes You Can Fix
• Social Security Do-Overs Quiz: Can You Undo a Claiming Mistake?

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

December has become the default season for financial planning. It's when many investors review taxes, increase retirement contributions, make charitable gifts and rush to complete other planning before the calendar turns.

But it can also be one of the least effective times to make important financial decisions. Schedules are crowded as deadlines are closing in, while advisers, accountants and attorneys may have limited capacity to support.

Instead of rushing through year-end checklists, summer can give you the space and time to think more strategically. By this time of year, you can see how income, spending and investments are tracking, with several months left to make changes while they can still have an impact.

In my experience as a CFP®, that head start often leads to better decisions because families have time to consider trade-offs and adjust gradually.

1. Rebalance your portfolio and review asset location

Even if you haven't made any trades, market performance over time can change your portfolio's risk profile. Strong returns in equities, a particular sector or one concentrated holding can gradually increase risk, leaving the portfolio more aggressive than it was at the beginning of the year.

An end-of-summer review can identify where allocations have drifted and whether new contributions should be directed toward underweight areas. The goal is to ensure that the portfolio still reflects your goals, time horizon and tolerance for risk.

The review can also include asset location, or which investments are held in taxable, tax-deferred and Roth accounts. As markets move and contributions are added, assets may no longer be held tax-efficiently.

Income-producing investments may be better suited to a retirement account, while investments that receive favorable long-term capital gains treatment may fit better in a taxable account.

Liquidity needs, charitable plans, required minimum distributions and estate considerations also matter. Reviewing where assets are held can improve after-tax efficiency without changing the overall strategy.

2. Check your retirement contribution pace

Many employees choose their retirement plan contribution rate at the beginning of the year and rarely revisit it. By summer, however, a raise, bonus or promotion may have changed both cash flow and the contribution needed from each remaining paycheck to reach a retirement savings goal.

Reviewing your retirement strategy in late summer allows time to make smaller adjustments over several months. Waiting until November may require a much larger increase over only a few pay periods.

This is an overlooked aspect of financial planning that has come up often in my client conversations: People assume they are on pace because their contribution percentage has not changed, but soon discover that compensation or payroll changes have left them short.

A summer financial review can also consider a mix of traditional and Roth contributions. Retirees should confirm how much remains to be withdrawn from required minimum distributions and whether qualified charitable distributions fit into their giving plans.

3. Run a tax projection

By the end of the summer, your financial picture is typically much clearer and more comprehensive than it was at the start of the year. Wages, bonuses, business income, investment gains and equity compensation are easier to estimate, making summer an ideal time to determine whether tax withholding or estimated payments need to be adjusted.

A summer tax projection may also reveal valuable planning opportunities, including Roth conversion, gifts of appreciated securities, the timing of stock-option exercises or the use of investment losses to offset realized gains.

Some of these strategies may be better executed later in the year, once the full tax picture is clearer. But reviewing them now allows you to identify your options before year-end deadlines begin to dictate your decisions.

The goal isn't simply to lower this year's tax bill — it's to ensure every tax decision supports your broader long-term objectives without creating avoidable cash-flow constraints.

4. Put cash and debt to work more deliberately

Over time, cash can accumulate without a clear purpose. Conversely, some households may have too little set aside, forcing them to rely on credit or investment sales to cover predictable expenses.

An end-of-summer review can separate money needed for taxes, travel, home improvements or other near-term spending from assets intended for longer-term goals. It is also worth checking whether savings are earning a competitive return.

Borrowers with adjustable-rate loans, home-equity lines or other variable-rate obligations should understand how interest costs are affecting cash flow. Anyone planning a major purchase should consider how new debt would interact with retirement savings and other priorities.

Cash and debt can be managed intentionally rather than carried forward without review.

5. Prepare for employee benefit decisions

Open enrollment often leaves employees with little time to make important choices. Reviewing benefits during the summer creates more time to consider whether health, life and disability coverage still match the household's needs, particularly after a marriage, divorce, new child, home purchase or change in income.

Employees eligible for a health savings account can reassess their contribution pace and consider how the account fits into their broader plan.

Executives may also need to review stock options, restricted stock, deferred compensation or company-stock concentration before election deadlines arrive.

These choices affect taxes, cash flow and investment risk, and deserve more than a rushed year-end review.

6. Review estate documents before there is an emergency

Estate planning is easy to postpone when nothing feels urgent. Summer is a good time to ensure that wills, trusts, powers of attorney, health care directives and beneficiary designations still reflect the family's circumstances and long-term intentions.

Major life events — such as births, deaths, marriages, divorces, moves and significant changes in wealth — may also require updates to your broader financial plan.

For families considering significant gifts, planning should begin well before December, given valuations, legal documents and trust administration often require coordination among several advisers.

In conversations with clients, estate planning reviews often uncover practical issues that have little to do with estate taxes. An outdated beneficiary designation, an unfunded trust or a missing power of attorney can all create complications long before federal estate-tax exposure becomes relevant.

The goal is straightforward: Ensure the right people have the authority to act in an emergency and that your assets will be distributed as intended. Don't wait for an arbitrary year-end deadline to review your plan.

Act earlier to save stress later

Year-end planning will always matter. After all, certain tax, retirement and gifting decisions are tied to the calendar. But I believe that December should not be the first time you review and adjust your financial plan.

By summer, enough information is available to provide a clearer picture of your finances while still leaving enough time to make intentional adjustments without being rushed. Acting earlier can give investors the breathing room they need to make meaningful adjustments.

For many households, the most important question is simple: Has anything changed in the markets, my finances or my life that should change what I do next? Asking that question now — rather than in December — can lead to better decisions and less stress in the year-end.

Related Content

• Most Investors Aren't as Diversified as They Think: Are You?
• Eight Steps to Help Get You Through the Open Enrollment Jungle at Work
• Estate Planning Checklist: 13 Smart Moves
• School's Out — and Summer Is the Perfect Time to Reassess Your 529 Plan
• I'm a Financial Planner: Trump Accounts Are a No-Brainer if You're Eligible (How to Apply)

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

We've all done it. You're waiting in line. You see a snack and think, "It's just a few bucks." Or you tap to subscribe because it's only $4.99 a month.

Those tiny decisions feel weightless in the moment. That's the psychology of "just one small purchase" at work.

It shows up everywhere in modern consumer life. From coffee runs and in‑app upgrades to delivery fees and streaming trials. Understanding why small buys feel harmless helps explain why budgets leak even when we think we're being careful.

As a financial professional, I'm here to help you learn how to rise above this mentality.

The psychological drivers behind minimal purchases

Small purchases (or frictionless digital payments) don't slip past our radar by accident. A few well‑studied biases give them cover and make them easier to justify.

The denomination effect. The tendency to treat smaller units of money as easier to spend. Research in the Journal of Consumer Research finds people are more willing to part with smaller bills than a single large bill of the same value, which makes bite‑size buys extra tempting.

Mental accounting. This is a concept popularized by behavioral economist Richard Thaler. We mentally sort money into different buckets (like rent, groceries, fun money, etc.), then treat each bucket as if it's separate.

Our minds treat minor purchases differently from major ones, making people underestimate the impact of small buys.

Marketing cues and the environment. Placement at checkout, limited‑time offers, one‑click payments — these design choices shrink the "pain of paying" and turn a "maybe" into a "yes."

Social comparison also plays a role. We don't shop in a vacuum — we scan what peers are doing and use it as a yardstick.

For instance, blank apparel is often priced affordably, so adding an extra T-shirt or hoodie to your order may seem like a small decision. It's the kind of purchase that's easy to justify because each item doesn't feel expensive.

Combined with limited-time offers or free shipping thresholds, those small additions can quickly become part of the "just one more" mindset.

The slippery slope: How small purchases add up

The tricky part isn't a single latte or one delivery fee. It's the slow drip.

Picture this scenario for Sheryl:

• She grabs a $4.50 coffee three times a week on her commute
• She has two streaming services at $12 and $15 a month, plus $9 for cloud storage
• She makes a couple of $3 in-app purchases each month
• Her meal-delivery fees average $6 three times a month
• She gets a snack at the register once or twice a week for $1.50

None of these actions feel like decisions. They're habits.

Add it up over a year:

• Coffee: $4.50 x three times a week x 52 = $702
• Streaming: $27 a month = $324
• Cloud storage: $9 a month = $108
• In‑app extras: $6 a month = $72
• Delivery fees: $6 x three a month x 12 = $216
• Small snacks: $1.50 x two a week x 52 = $156

Total: About $1,578 a year

That's real money. And it doesn't include the costs of the food that came with delivery — just the fees.

Gregor Emmian, deputy chief digital growth officer at Rise, says today's digital payment experience makes it easier than ever to overlook small purchases.

"People rarely worry about a single small purchase," he says. "The challenge is that these purchases become routine. And over time, they can add up to much more than expected. "

For a bigger backdrop, U.S. households spend thousands each year eating outside the home, a category packed with small, frequent swipes. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that average household spending on "food away from home" was over $3,600 in 2022.

How to combat the 'just one small purchase' mentality

You don't need heroic willpower to fight this mindset. A few small shifts can make a big difference. Why? Because they meet the problem where it lives: In the moment.

Track the tiny stuff, briefly and honestly. For two weeks, log every sub‑$10 purchase in one place. Patterns pop up fast. If you like budgeting with buckets, give minor purchases their own category so you can see the full picture.

Cap the category, not the item. Set a weekly "small flex" budget, say $25 or $40, to cover coffees, snacks, tips, microtransactions and more. When the bucket's empty, you're done for the week.

Use a wait‑and‑watch rule. A simple waiting period is one of the most powerful tools. When you give yourself 24 hours before a non-essential purchase, most of the urgency disappears. Pair that with clear financial goals, and every small decision starts serving a bigger purpose.

Tie every "yes" to a goal. Name the trade‑off: "If I buy this, I'm choosing it over an extra $25 toward my emergency fund." The clarity is usually enough.

Reintroduce gentle friction. Turn off one‑click checkout on discretionary sites or require Face ID for purchases. A six‑second pause is often all you need.

Make small swaps that feel easy. Take a travel mug two days a week. Batch your errands to avoid "I'm out anyway" impulse buys and order pickup once a week instead of delivery.

If you find mindfulness helpful, try this quick sequence when a small purchase tempts you:

• Notice the urge
• Name the feeling (Bored? Stressed?)
• Number it (1 to 10)
• Navigate (choose to wait, pass or buy with intention)

A final note

If you want to test this for yourself, total your past 30 days of sub‑$10 transactions. No judgment, just data. Then pick one change that would cut that number by 20% next month without making life feel smaller.

Related Content

• Are Digital Payments Making You Spend Too Much, Too Fast? These Simple 'Speed Bumps' Will Help You Slow Your Roll
• 8 Things You Need to Stop Wasting Money on in 2026
• How to Choose the Right Payment App
• 7 of the Best Budgeting Apps for 2026
• 6 Steps to Quickly Build Your Emergency Fund

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.

If you have millions saved in your 401(k) and IRA, that feels like a win, and it is. But there's one way a large balance quietly works against you: The more money sitting in tax-deferred accounts, the more likely the IRS is to tax the maximum allowable portion of your Social Security check.

That happens by default, unless you plan around it.

Most people who reach this point spent decades doing everything right: Saving consistently, maxing out their 401(k), following the advice they were given. That advice was built for accumulation, not for the withdrawal phase.

This is often called the Social Security tax torpedo. It shows up the same way in almost every retirement plan I, as the founder of MOKAN Wealth Management, review for the first time. It's not a mistake. It's what happens when there's no planning for the tax impact of retirement withdrawals.

How the IRS decides what gets taxed

The IRS uses a number called provisional income to decide how much of your Social Security check gets taxed: Your regular income, plus any tax-free interest, plus half of your Social Security benefit.

Once that number crosses certain levels, your Social Security starts getting taxed, and those levels have never been adjusted for inflation.

Married couples filing jointly start owing tax at $32,000 of provisional income. Above $44,000, up to 85% is taxable. Single filers cross at $25,000 and $34,000.

Frozen since the 1980s and 1990s, these thresholds mean a couple with a modest combined income can land at the maximum simply because the numbers are so outdated.

In retirement, income piles on top of itself:

• Your IRA withdrawal gets taxed
• Your Social Security gets taxed on top of that
• Medicare premiums climb along with both

If almost all your savings sit in a traditional IRA or 401(k), every dollar you pull out to pay the bills is fully taxable, and adding half your Social Security on top pushes most retirees past every threshold in year one, often by a wide margin.

Nobody made a bad decision. They just never built a different kind of account to draw from.

The one exception is a Roth IRA. Money pulled from a Roth doesn't count toward provisional income, doesn't show up on your tax return and doesn't raise Medicare premiums. It's the one source of retirement income the IRS leaves alone.

The three buckets every retirement needs

Think of your savings in three buckets:

• Money you've already paid tax on (a brokerage account, where you owe tax only on the growth)
• Money you haven't paid tax on yet (a traditional IRA or 401(k), where every dollar withdrawn is taxed as ordinary income and where most people hold nearly all their savings)
• Money you'll never pay tax on again (a Roth IRA, which grows and comes out tax-free and is invisible to the IRS)

When almost everything sits in the second bucket, every dollar you withdraw pushes more of your Social Security into the taxable zone.

Tax diversification means having enough in each bucket to choose which dollars to spend each year based on what creates the smallest tax bill.

Roth conversions: Moving money to the third bucket

The most reliable way to build the tax-free bucket is through a Roth conversion: Moving money from your traditional IRA into a Roth IRA and paying income tax on the converted amount that year.

After that, the money and all its future growth come out completely tax-free and never count toward provisional income again.

The window to do this well is shorter than most people think. It typically opens in the years just before or after retirement, before Social Security starts and before required minimum distributions (RMDs) force taxable income onto your tax return. Income is usually at its lowest point during that stretch, which means lower rates on any conversion done then.

Three approaches work well in practice:

• Filling your tax bracket by converting just enough each year to use up room in your current bracket
• Converting larger amounts over a shorter window when a balance is too large for small annual conversions to move the needle in time
• Converting more aggressively when the market is down, since the same number of shares costs less in tax

The biggest mistake is waiting. RMDs force taxable income onto your return at age 73 or 75 whether you need it or not — on a balance that's kept growing with the tax bill still attached.

A before-and-after example

John and Karen, both 60, have $1.8 million combined in traditional IRAs, $200,000 in a brokerage account and almost nothing in a Roth. They plan to retire at 63 and need about $150,000 a year to live on. Their combined Social Security benefit is roughly $70,000 at full retirement age, or about $53,000 if they claim benefits early at 63.

On the default path, they retire and claim at 63, then pull the remaining $97,000 they need straight from the IRA. Provisional income comes out to roughly $123,000, well past the $44,000 ceiling: The 85% maximum, or roughly $45,000 of taxable Social Security, stacked on top of the $97,000 IRA withdrawal.

On the coordinated path, starting at 60 while they're still working, they convert a portion of the IRA to Roth each year, paying the tax from income and the brokerage account so the full converted amount keeps growing tax-free.

They keep converting through their mid-60s and wait until 67 to claim Social Security, when the benefit reaches its full $70,000. By then, the Roth is large enough to cover roughly $40,000 of annual spending tax-free, with the remaining $40,000 from the IRA.

Provisional income lands around $75,000 instead of $123,000: Still above the ceiling, but with substantially less Social Security taxed and a large share of spending arriving with no tax bill.

Same retirement date, same lifestyle spending, a meaningfully different tax outcome for the rest of their retirement. The only difference was starting at 60 instead of waiting until the options had narrowed.

What to do now

Most people don't choose to pay the maximum tax on their Social Security. It happens because they didn't plan for it, which also means it's predictable enough to fix.

Run your own provisional income number. Figure out how much room is left in your current bracket. Then start moving money into the Roth bucket, even a few years before retirement. The window narrows every year you wait.

The Social Security Administration's benefit estimator and IRS Publication 915 are good starting points for running your own numbers.

Related Content

• Don't Let Low Tax Rates Lull You Into the Torpedo Zone
• Will Your Death Double Your Spouse's Tax Bill? 4 Ways Couples Should Prepare for the Widow's Penalty
• How to Retire at 62 and Build a Financial Bridge to a Maxed-Out Social Security Check at 70
• 9 Tax Surprises Retirees Don't See Coming Until It's Too Late
• I'm an Investment Adviser: This Is the Tax Diversification Strategy You Need for Your Retirement Income

This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC or with FINRA.