Archive for July, 2008 Page 2 of 3



Reverse Mortgage Abuse on the Rise

NewRetirement Editorial Note:  NewRetirement shares some of the concerns voiced by the authors of this article.  In particular, we are carefully watching the impact of a rapidly increasing number of brokers entering the reverse mortgage market.  We encourage consumers to receive counseling prior to agreeing to apply for a reverse mortgage.  We suggest they work with trusted brokers and lenders.  If possible, we suggest that consumers discuss their thoughts about a reverse mortgage with a certified financial planner, who can then position the reverse mortgage as one element of a complete retirement plan.  NewRetirement does its best to verify broker licensing, HUD status and current membership in associations supporting ethical business practices for all the reverse mortgage brokers and lenders we rely on for information and services.


Kiplinger - July 23, 2008


After her husband died in November 2003, Ernestine Boach met with a financial adviser, who told her that her $60,000 life-insurance policy was inadequate. He assured Boach, who had just retired as a clerk for a local school district, that he could boost the value of the estate that she would leave to her daughter. And, he said, it wouldn’t cost her a cent. “He said he had a wonderful deal for me,” recalls Boach, of Chula Vista, Cal. “He said all I have to do is buy a reverse mortgage.”


What she really bought though was a lot of trouble, according to a lawsuit she later filed in California Superior Court. The adviser, who was an insurance agent, called in an employee of Financial Freedom Senior Funding Corp., a large reverse mortgage lender based in Irvine, Cal., who arranged a $171,000 loan.


With part of the reverse mortgage, Boach bought a $250,000 life-insurance policy. The agent also sold her an immediate annuity for more than $44,000 and told her that the $4,000 annual payout would pay the insurance premium, the suit alleges. In addition, Boach bought an $80,000 deferred annuity, which, she says she was told, would eventually pay back the reverse mortgage. Her heirs would get the house free and clear as well as the life-insurance proceeds.


After signing on, Boach began to worry. A real estate agent crunched the numbers. Within five years, she would owe $240,000 on the reverse mortgage, for principal and interest. By then, Boach says, the $80,000 annuity would have grown to only $97,000. Plus, the suit says, once the immediate annuity ended in ten years, she’d have to pay the life-insurance premiums out of pocket.


Boach wanted out. To pay back the reverse mortgage, she took out a home-equity loan, which will cost her $1,000 a month, she says. Boach, now 67, says her blood pressure has shot up after four years of fretting. “It will affect me for the rest of my life financially and health-wise,” she says.


Read more of this article…


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

Historic Financial Collapse Underway?

Seeking Alpha – July 20, 2008


I tend to be in hotel rooms when bubbles burst.


On January 6, 2000, I was on the 30th-something floor of the Marriott hotel across the street from the convention center in San Francisco. I was jet lagged and up working even though it was still dark outside, around 5:30 a.m. local time. Just then, Lucent Technologies announced earnings before the market opened. After beating expectations for 15 quarters in a row, Lucent missed its earnings forecast by 18¢. Much worse, it reported a $1 billion drop in revenue. You can’t miss on revenues by $1 billion unless something is horribly wrong.


And something was horribly wrong. It wasn’t clear until months later, but that was the morning the bull market in tech, telecom, and the Internet died. I vividly remember that morning. Believe it or not, I didn’t have to look up the date or the details on the earnings miss. That morning is seared on my brain. It was the end.


I don’t believe it was a coincidence I was in San Francisco that day. We financial scribblers follow the market. We cover what’s hot. I visited tech capitals San Francisco, Boston, or Seattle nearly every month during the big bubble of 1998-2001. It was an incredible, exciting time. I’m glad I got to see it up close and personal.


This month, I got the same feeling I did back on January 6, 2000. It’s over. And I was watching it all collapse, at the epicenter.


Recently, I was at the Four Seasons Hotel, looking down over the Las Vegas strip. Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) have finally cracked. While the stocks haven’t gone to zero yet, it’s clear the market woke up to the obvious fact equity holders of these companies are holding worthless pieces of paper. From my hotel room, I could see many of the reasons why…


Las Vegas may end up being the single-largest source of mortgage defaults. Upscale home prices here have fallen nearly 40%. The $2 billion Cosmopolitan hotel development is in default. The $6 billion Las Vegas Plaza is being delayed. Even Donald Trump has put his second tower on hold. It’s a bloody mess.


Meanwhile, City Center, a $9.2 billion condominium/hotel development on the strip, is still going up.


Pre-construction sales began in February of last year – just before the financial markets shut out condo developers completely. I can see six huge cranes and the enormous steel infrastructure, half wrapped in glass. I cannot embellish on how big City Center is.


Each of its six main buildings seems bigger than any existing building in Las Vegas. This is the largest privately financed development in the history of the United States. It sits in the middle of a desert, in a city whose economy is dominated by gambling. Those two facts alone would give most reasonable investors pause.


The entire complex is five-star. One-bedroom condos here sold for $700,000. And the complex includes literally thousands of them. What will they be worth in foreclosure? I’d bet less than $200,000. And who will absorb those losses? I can’t help but think in another two years we will look at those buildings and wonder, “What were they thinking?”


Read more of this article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

Uncomfortable Answers to Questions on the Economy

The New York Times – July 19, 2008


You have heard that Fannie and Freddie, their gentle names notwithstanding, may cripple the financial system without a large infusion of taxpayer money. You have gleaned that jobs are disappearing, housing prices are plummeting, and paychecks are effectively shrinking as food and energy prices soar. You have noted the disturbing talk of crisis hovering over Wall Street.


Something has clearly gone wrong with the economy. But how bad are things, really? And how bad might they get before better days return? Even to many economists who recently thought the gloom was overblown, the situation looks grim. The economy is in the midst of a very rough patch. The worst is probably still ahead.


Job losses will probably accelerate through this year and into 2009, and the job market will probably stay weak even longer. Home prices will probably keep falling, shrinking household wealth and eroding spending power.


“The open question is whether we’re in for a bad couple of years, or a bad decade,” said Kenneth S. Rogoff, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, now a professor at Harvard.



Is this a recession?


Officially, no. The economy is not in recession until a panel at a private institution called the National Bureau of Economic Research says so. Unofficially, many economists think a recession started six or seven months ago, even as the economy has continued to expand — albeit at a tepid pace.


Many assume that if the economy expands at all, then it isn’t a recession, but that’s not true. The bureau defines a recession as “a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months.” If enough people lose their jobs, factories stop making things, stores stop selling things, and less money lands in people’s pockets, it is probably a recession.


Read more of this article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Raiding the Retirement Stash

Washington Post – July 20, 2008


Would you still put money in a tax-advantaged retirement fund if you couldn’t touch it until you retired?



And when I say you couldn’t touch it, I mean you couldn’t take out loans or withdraw funds under any circumstances.


If Congress were rewriting the rules for 401(k) s and similar retirement plans, that’s what the Washington-based Pension Rights Center would recommend. Why this hard stance from a consumer-oriented group that works hard to protect and promote retirement savings?


A new study found that an increasing number of employees are raiding their retirement funds by taking out loans against their 401(k) accounts. Strangled by debt and rising consumer prices, workers are turning to these plans as the only stash of cash they have.


“The result is that families leverage their future retirement security to ease their present financial insecurity,” wrote Christian E. Weller and Jeffrey B. Wenger, authors of “Robbing Tomorrow to Pay for Today: Economically Squeezed Families are Turning to Their 401(k)s to Make Ends Meet.” The report was issued by the Center for American Progress.


Last week, the Senate Special Committee on Aging held a hearing to examine this trend and hear solutions on how to reverse it. The CAP report was released at the hearing.


The report says that over a 15-year period, loans against retirement savings accounts increased fivefold in inflation-adjusted terms, to $31 billion in 2004, up from $6 billion in 1989 — an increase of more than 400 percent. Between 1998 and 2004, an average of 12 percent of families with 401(k) plans borrowed from them.


Read more of this article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

We’re going to pay for all of this with our taxes

This is a contribution from Bud Hebeler who runs Analyzenow.com

How would you like to have retirement resources that will provide about the same income in retirement as when working and be inflation protected? Answer: Go to work for the government. Oregon has one of the richest pension plans. After 30 years of employment, pensions equal or exceed their working compensation per 1999 rules. (Statesman Journal, April 20, 2003) Add Social Security which may provide another 40%.

The baby boomers with government pensions will exceed the number of baby boomers getting pensions in private industry if current trends continue. Consumer Reports Money Adviser (May, 2008) cites Boston College research showing that while 36% of the private sector employees had defined benefit plans in 1992, only 19% have such plans now. That translates to about 22 million private sector employees (19% of 116 million) who get pensions. Virtually all of the 23 million government employees get pensions. This does not count those in the military who also get pensions, and I believe does not count postal service employees or those in similar government sponsored corporations like the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation that’s supposed to save pensions for the rest of us.

Most federal pensions have inflation protected cost-of-living-adjustments, COLAs. Many state pensions also have this rich benefit. Practically no private sector pensions have COLAs. At 65, a pension with a COLA has a funding obligation about 50% more than a fixed pension assuming future inflation is only 3%. So if you’d go to buy an inflation adjusted immediate annuity with regular monthly payments like a pension, a COLA annuity will cost about 50% more than a fixed payment annuity. Said another way, a $1,000 a month COLA pension will pay $1,810 after 20 years of 3% inflation while a $1,000 fixed pension will still pay $1,000.

So we are paying into a pension plan that’s not our own even if we personally will not get a pension. That’s because we are paying for the federal, state and local government retirement plans with our taxes. As government increases in size, we’ll pay more—and even more with the COLA adjustments. Although politicians run for office on the basis of reducing government spending, it practically never means reducing the government payroll. Every addition for oversight or a function adds people. And it’s almost impossible to reduce the staff size in a government job. I can remember when congressmen had only 4 people on their staff while ten times that much is not uncommon today.

That’s not all. The percentage of retired people is increasing relative to the number of working people, perhaps 10% to 20% more in the next couple of decades. That means that an ever smaller working force is going to have to support an ever increasing number of aged people. This is not just for the government pensions. It also covers everyone’s Social Security (also inflation adjusted) and Medicare. Medicare is not only increasing from inflation—it’s increasing because of the increasing number of aged and faster-than-inflation growth of medical expenses of almost every kind.

It also means that over 17% to 20% of the work force will be in the government excluding the military and other quasi government workers and the unstoppable growth of government. That’s a powerful voting block. Government employees will always vote to keep their jobs.

Federal employees have subsidized health insurance in retirement as do many state and local government retirees. Very few private sector employees have this benefit. This is huge. A retired couple from the private sector pays about $700 a month for Medicare and Medigap policies, and that doesn’t cover drugs, uninsured costs and care of eye sight, hearing or dental work.

Government employees have 403(b) savings accounts with provisions similar to the 401(k)s in the private sector. But, in the case of the private sector, these savings plans are rapidly replacing pensions, not in the government sector. The public sector is better subscribed because many of those in the private sector opt out, even when the employer offers matching funds.

The average government employee now makes about 50% more than the average person in the private sector. USA Today (2/1/08) reports that “State and local government workers now earn an average of $39.50 per hour in total compensation …Private workers earn an average of $26.09 an hour. . . From 2000 to 2007, public employees enjoyed a 16% increase in compensation after adjusting for inflation compared to 11% for private workers.” In large part, many government workers can thank their very powerful unions and public shy politicians afraid to confront a large part of their voters.

So there you have it. We’ve grown a government that not only pays its employees better than the private sector, we give them better benefits. We’ll pay for those employees not only while they are working, but at an ever increasing rate while most of the rest of us in private sector retirement see our incomes cut by inflation.

General Motors, move aside. There’s another entity that is going to pay more dearly than you for all the retirement promises it has made. Ah, but it’s a sovereign power that has the ability to tax. Sorry about that GM. You have to manage better to catch up. The government doesn’t.

Bud

A Generation Gap in Retirement Planning

US News & World Report – July 16, 2008


Almost everyone aims to attain financial security in retirement. But each succeeding generation expects to be more self-reliant than the preceding one, according to a new online survey by Charles Schwab, Age Wave, and Harris Interactive. Americans are depending more on personal savings and investments and less on the government or their employer.


Current retirees depend on the traditional three-legged stool: Social Security, pensions, and personal savings and investments. Each leg supports their retirement to a substantial degree. But generations X and Y expect to rely largely on their own investments, the survey shows.


Survey participants were asked: “Approximately what percentage of your retirement funds will come from the following sources?” Here is how various age groups responded:





























Age group Social
Security
Employer
pension
Personal
savings/
investments
Silent generation (ages 63-83) 41% 27% 32%
Baby boomers (44-62) 35 23 42
Generation X (32-43) 27 20 53
Generation Y (21-31) 19 20 61

The generations also differ on the path to financial security. Members of the frugal “silent generation” stress living within your means, while generations X and Y emphasize investing wisely.


Read more of this article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Study: Most middle-class retirees will outlive retirement savings

Washington Business Journal - July 14, 2008


Almost three out of five new middle-class retirees will outlive their financial assets if they keep up their pre-retirement ways of living, according to an Ernst & Young LLP study on behalf of Americans for Secure Retirement.


The study found that D.C. residents, along with those from Rhode Island, Utah and New York, are the least likely to outlive retirement savings.


But on average, middle-income Americans entering retirement now will have to reduce their standard of living by an average of 24 percent to ensure they don’t outlive their financial assets.


“Many Americans envision a retirement where their lifestyle continues much as before,” said Tom Neubig of Ernst & Young. “Our work shows that this is not a realistic expectation and that, with the current state of savings and potentially very long life expectancies, many retirees will have to cut back far more on expenditures than they had ever expected.”


People seven years out from retirement will have to reduce their standard of living an average of 37 percent, the study says.


Retirees with a guaranteed source of retirement income beyond Social Security are more likely to salvage their assets.


“As a guaranteed source of retirement income, life annuities relieve the risks and burdens of managing a nest egg and can maximize savings’ value over the course of an individual’s retirement years,” said Joe Reali, chairman of the D.C.-based Americans for Secure Retirement coalition.


The study found that Montana, Wyoming and South Dakota citizens have the highest likelihood of outliving retirement savings.


Read more of this article…


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

The Fannie and Freddie Fallout

New York Times – July 13, 2008


IT’S dispiriting indeed to watch the United States financial system, supposedly the envy of the world, being taken to its knees. But that’s the show we’re watching, brought to you by somnambulant regulators, greedy bank executives and incompetent corporate directors.


This wasn’t the way the “ownership society” was supposed to work. Investors weren’t supposed to watch their financial stocks plummet more than 70 percent in less than a year. And taxpayers weren’t supposed to be left holding defaulted mortgages and abandoned homes while executives who presided over balance sheet implosions walked away with millions.


Over the course of this 18-month financial crisis, we have lurched from land mine to land mine. Last week’s was all about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government-sponsored enterprises set up to provide affordable housing across the nation. By issuing debt, these shareholder-owned companies guarantee or own more than $5 trillion in home mortgages. Got that? $5 trillion.


Because the federal government established the companies, investors view them as backed, at least implicitly, by taxpayers. And that implied guarantee is what drove Fannie and Freddie’s business models.


The advantages the companies gained from this unique arrangement were huge. They had to keep less cash on hand than traditional lenders, for example. They also made more money on their mortgages than lenders because they paid less to borrow money in the bond market. These profits enriched Fannie and Freddie shareholders over the years and bestowed significant wealth on the companies’ executives.


Now it looks as if the bill for that largess is coming due. Of course, it will be borne by the usual bagholders: United States taxpayers. You and me.


Read more of this article…


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Can you still afford to retire? Better re-check your timetable

USA Today – July 10, 2008

 

The economic downturn has thrown an extra problem at older Baby Boomers who had planned to retire over the next few years: They now have less money at their disposal than they had projected.

Retirement portfolios are shrinking. Home equity is plunging. And Social Security faces an uncertain future. This trifecta of grim news means that all but the wealthiest Baby Boomers may have to review — and possibly rethink — whether their retirement target dates are still realistic.


The bottom line is this: Unless you’re flush with cash, if you don’t need to retire, don’t. The stock market is tanking, eating away at your hard-earned nest egg. If you tap into your portfolio now, you’ll deplete it further.


You’ll also have to brace for the risk of poor market performance in the first few years after you retire. Meager returns during the first five years of retirement can significantly raise the chance that you’ll outlive your money, especially if you’re withdrawing more than the portfolio is earning each year, according to an analysis by T. Rowe Price, an investment firm.


Read more of this article…


401K Rollovers:  Answers to common 401K Rollover questions at NewRetirement.com


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Avoid Cashing Out Your 401(k)

The Wall Street Journal – July 10, 2008


When prices are rising and bills are pressing, any available cash may seem like the perfect solution to a short-term crunch. And that means people switching jobs these days may be more tempted than ever to cash out their 401(k)s.


That is a mistake, financial advisers say. Even if your account balance seems too small now to represent significant retirement savings, the power of compounding over time is a saver’s best friend. And if you compare compounding growth to the downsides of taking the cash — the penalties and taxes assessed on early distributions — your best bet is to roll the money into an IRA or 401(k), if offered by your new employer, advisers say.


“It’s hard to save,” said Linda Lubitz, president of the Lubitz Financial Group in Miami, “so don’t blow it by destroying the foundation of a good savings plan.”


Still, about 40% of workers in their 20s and 30s said they had cashed out their 401(k)s or 403(b)s when they switched jobs, according to an online survey of about 1,200 people conducted in January for Fidelity Investments by CMI, a research firm.


In the land of retirement savings, every little bit helps. Even if your 401(k) balance is small, it will grow: $800 earning 8% for 45 years grows to almost $26,000. And rolling the money over into another retirement account means you avoid the 10% penalty for early withdrawal (assessed if you are younger than 59½), plus ordinary income tax levied on the money.


“You’re paying a heavy tax load. You’re losing the tax-deferred compounding on those monies over time. What seems like a nice chunk of change right now will cost you much more over a 20- or 30-year period,” said Andrew McIlhenny, executive vice president of Firstrust Financial Resources in Philadelphia.


Also, workers who opt to take the cash don’t always realize their employers will only pay out 80% of the account balance. The IRS requires the employer to withhold 20% for taxes.


“If the check is made payable to you, they are going to withhold a mandatory 20%,” Mr. McIlhenny said. If that is more than you will ultimately owe in penalty and income tax on the distribution, you will have to wait until tax time to get your refund.


An IRA can offer more investment options than a 401(k), depending on the employer’s plan. How to decide where to send the money?


Read more of this article…


401K Rollovers:  Answers to common 401K Rollover questions at NewRetirement.com


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Tips for using a financial advisor for retirement planning.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.


 


 


http://www.newretirement.com/Services/Rollover.aspx



NewRetirement Blogs Home