As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: advice


Passive income is the Holy Grail of financial independence. Although modern Western society and capitalism relies on the Puritan work ethic, the idea that labor is a value to society and hard work is the path to a spiritual and successful life, most people would prefer not to trade their time and effort for an opportunity to survive financially.

There are good reasons. The work ethic is designed to benefit employers, not employees. Even though the labor movement worked hard to ensure humane conditions for employees, in the business world, the idea of spending countless hours at the office is rewarded in some working environments. Employees are made to feel guilty about desiring work/life balance, as excellence in an organization is a goal that requires a measure of imbalance. Unwavering dedication to the job above all other priorities is rewarded.

MoneyThis approach might make sense if a job is also a passion, but for the vast majority of people, passions exist outside the office. Families, hobbies, and personal missions all have higher importance on the scale of values, but they often don’t have the ability to provide the financial incentive necessary to make life easier for families, hobbies, and personal missions. When eight or more hours of the day are lacking passion, the results are the tired memes of the ordinary workplace:

  • Is it Friday yet?
  • I can’t wait to get out of here.
  • She’s retiring this year; she’s lucky.
  • My coworkers are so annoying.
  • The boss expects too much and then raises the bar when I exceed expectations.
  • I can’t get anywhere in this job.

The list goes on.

It’s no wonder at all people view the idea of passive income as salvation. Rather than trading in effort and time for a paycheck, your assets generate income while you sit back and relax, spend time with your family, and pursue your less lucrative passions.

Passive income exists, at least from a tax standpoint. Income from a rental property or from a partnership where you aren’t actively involved is considered passive income. The IRS treats this type of passive income differently than other income, even if that income comes in the form of dividends from an investment portfolio, what some might also call “passive income.” The truth is that all income requires active involvement, but perhaps it’s a matter of degree.

The IRS considers income from real estate investments passive income, but managing real estate can be a full-time job. Don’t expect to sit back and your investments to thrive, even if you have a management company handling the day-to-day work. In fact, unless you’re able to amass a significant volume of real estate, or if you do most of the work yourself, it’s unlikely the time and effort you spend will be as profitable as you expect.

Expect the same disappointment if you’re looking to dividend income as your path to wealth. If you calculate that you would like to replace $50,000 of your toil-based income, you would need to have $1 million invested in investments paying a 5 percent dividend. (I’m ignoring the difference in income tax just to keep the example simple.) $1 million is a large bank balance, but it is achievable. You can’t, however, just put $1 million in an investment paying a 5 percent dividend and forget about it.

Any investment requires active involvement, starting from the beginning. You need to choose the right investments to start, and you need to monitor your investments over time. Sure, you’re not toiling in the field or wiping sweat off your brow at a construction site, but you are spending time researching your investments. You also need to pay attention to ensure your investments continue to perform. Companies decide to cancel their dividends without so much of a warning, so you should follow the company’s financials to be aware of any signs of trouble before the executives decide to reinvest profits, if any, rather than continue the distribution to shareholders.

When it comes to letting your money earn your income, nothing beats bonds. Suze Orman and financial planners offer advice to the general public, extolling the virtues of investing in a portfolio made almost entirely of stocks, but if you look at Suze’s own portfolio, which is designed not to increase value over time in exchange for risk but to generate income year after year, she invests primarily in bonds. (Her investment was in bonds as of a few years ago according to her own admission in a news story. I don’t know whether this is still the case, but it’s likely.)

Taking a step back, while Suze — and many other investors, but she is a good example — invests her portfolio for passive income, she’s not sitting back and relaxing with her life. While she may have money managers who handle her investments for her, she still trades her time and effort for an income.

Are you seeking the Holy Grail of passive income?

Photo: Raido Kaldma
Wealthy Turtle

{ 10 comments }

When someone who has accumulated debt across a number of credit cards embarks on the journey to rid himself or herself of this debt, and when that person is generating enough monthly income to cover all expenses and the minimum payments due on all cards with additional funds left over, there are two main philosophies describing the best way to achieve this goal. Although all approaches are good, there is no question where I stand on this issue.

I suggest following the path that affords the opportunity to get rid of debt as quickly and as cheaply as possible. This method has many names, but I’ve called it the Debt Avalanche in the past. The opposing viewpoint is the Debt Snowball, popularized by author and guru Dave Ramsey. This method suggests paying off debt in such a way that it might take more time and be more expensive but offers “quick wins” which help some people gain encouragement and momentum at the earliest stages of the process. And there are, of course, many points of view that present a compromise between these two extremes.

The snowball approach to debt reduction

By ordering your credit card debts from lowest balance to highest balance and paying the minimums to all except the first on the list each month, you will pay off your first debt sooner than by following any other method. If you need encouragement to continue your journey as you pay off debt, you can celebrate after your first credit card has a zero balance.

Not everyone requires this type of extra motivation for paying off debt. Additionally, even those who need extra motivation may not suffer by choosing a cheaper and quicker method of paying off debt. The “quick win” of paying off the first debt could come just as quickly by using the Debt Avalanche. But even if the first payoff doesn’t come as quickly, you can redefine your first milestone to allow yourself helpful celebrations as explained in the next section.

J.D. Roth from Get Rich Slowly has seen success with the Debt Snowball approach, as have many others. It is the most widely marketed philosophy.

For an illustration of the monthly process of sending minimum payments to all credit cards except the one on top, regardless of how the debts are ordered, see this visualization from No Credit Needed.

snowball3

One major problem I have with the above snowball approach is that your largest balance may be significantly more expensive than your smallest balance. Today it is not difficult to find a default interest rate on a credit card north of 30%. There is no way in good conscience I could recommend holding off on eliminating a debt this expensive in favor of paying off a small balance with a 7.9% interest rate. The same goes for payday loans, whose fees can border on usurious if interpreted as interest rates.

The avalanche approach to debt reduction

There is no question that anyone who follows this alternate approach to its conclusion will have emerged from debt sooner and by paying the least amount of interest possible. Some people argue that it is not as likely for someone to follow the Debt Avalanche through, but there are no data to support this. By ordering your credit card debts from the most expensive (highest interest rate) to the least expensive and paying the minimum each month to all cards except the first on the list, you reduce your interest payments quicker.

Since this is a mathematical approach, critics say it doesn’t take into account the emotions that come into play when dealing with money. It is true that emotions — your feelings about money — play an important role in financial decisions, and although this is a mathematical approach, how you feel about money still is represented in this method.

  • If you follow the Debt Avalanche method, you can feel good knowing that you’ve made a sound decision and will spend less money than others who take a different approach.
  • You can motivate yourself throughout by creating your own milestones for achievement, including paying off your first credit card, paying off $1,000 (or some other meaningful amount), or consistently reducing debt for six months (or some other meaningful time frame).
  • Your emotions may be the cause of your debt in the first place. While they obviously cannot be eliminated, learning to focus on the best mathematical approach for certain financial decisions can improve your overall relationship with money.
snowball4

Here I outlined the details of the Debt Avalanche. Trent from The Simple Dollar also likes the Debt Avalanche approach and Five Cent Nickel explains how Dave Ramsey is bad at math.

Other approaches to debt reduction

The hybrid approach. Somewhere between a snowball and an avalanche lives this hybrid. The concept here is simple. Order the credit cards from highest interest rate to lowest, like the Debt Avalanche, but move the card with the lowest balance to the top. This will provide a “quick win” if necessary but could still save significant money and time when compared to the Debt Snowball approach.

Pay the most annoying debts off first. This approach plays directly into the human psyche. The urge to eliminate a persistent itch is strong enough to motivate anyone to scratch, just ask any kid with chicken pox. Stephanie from Poorer Than You is a fan of this approach. This works well when you include debts other than credit cards. If you have a personal loan from a family member, I usually suggest paying that debt off the quickest while paying minimums to your credit card to help retain good will within close relationships.

Baker from Man vs. Debt says the same thing slightly differently: Pay off the debt with the highest emotional impact first. The argument here is simple. For some people the debts with the highest emotional impact are simply the debts with the highest interest rate, while others have a different psychological composition requiring alternate focus. You can’t go wrong by this approach which if continued will help you feel better quicker.

So what is the “right” answer?

It is easy to say, “Do what works for you,” and allow the debtor to come to his or her own conclusions. This can be a dangerous approach as it invites people to skip the consideration of all the options. Many people I’ve talked to who have successfully eliminated debt by using the Debt Snowball method not only found themselves back in debt after some time but did not realize that they could have saved hundreds of dollars and been out of debt sooner just by ranking their credit cards in a different order. They simply followed a guru’s advice without any critical thinking. Not only did they not learn to approach money from a more stable viewpoint but they paid extra money in the form of credit card interest for this “feature.”

Would they have succeeded if they were simply presented the idea that they could save money on their debt reduction journey by following a more mathematical approach? It’s certainly possible.

There is no approach that does not have some sort of merit. Getting out of debt in any way possible is better than not getting out of debt at all. All that I ask is that the details, including the total cost and time differences, are fully explained before a method is prescribed for someone else.

Here’s a calculator that will help inform anyone in debt about the timing and bottom-line differences between the various approaches to eliminating debt. In some cases, the cost of one method over the others will be striking.

An informed decision is the best type of decision. With a full understanding of the differences and is familiar with their own psychological tendencies, someone with debt can make an intelligent choice that is right for the individual or family.

Photos: House of Sims, Joe Shlabotnik

{ 19 comments }

Occasionally, Consumerism Commentary readers send in questions about handling their finances. I am not a financial planner, so I have no certification claiming I’m qualified to give financial advice. I am not an investment adviser, so I certainly won’t be recommending stocks. I like the opportunity to address financial questions that other readers may be concerned about, and if I have an opinion or two on the matter, I’d be happy to share.

Readers may disagree with my opinion, or they may agree. Addressing these questions is also an opportunity to instigate discussions. As with any advice you may receive, it’s always good to check with a professional beforehand, particularly if the decision could have significant effects on your financial condition.

Here is a question I received from Steve:

I’m 24 years old and I haven’t started any retirement savings, but I know I need to start. My company offers a 401k benefit but does not offer any match. I was wondering, would this 401k’s tax benefits still be worth taking advantage of over other retirement investment vehicles? Would a Roth IRA be wiser? Or something else?

There are two primary tax benefits to investing in a 401(k) plan. You contributions and earnings grow tax-free until you retire, and your contributions can be deducted from your income for tax purposes if your income is low enough. I describe and explain the 401(k) contribution limits here.

Taxes are a distant second next to the best benefit of most 401(k) plans: matching contributions from your employer. Employers can structure the matching contributions in a variety of forms. One of the most common is for your employer to match 100% of your contribution up to a certain percent of your salary. For every dollar you take out of your paycheck to invest in your 401(k), your employer might also contribute a dollar of its own money. This is an immediate 100% return, much better than what you can expect from any of your investments. If your employer matches your contributions, find a way — any way — to contribute to your 401(k) at least enough to take advantage of the maximum matching benefit. Don’t turn down free money.

The choice to invest in a 401(k) gets more difficult when there is no matching contribution from your employer. At that point, your 401(k) becomes just another tax-advantaged investment account. Unless your 401(k) gives you access to low-cost investments, this account should no longer be a priority. Most 401(k) plans include fund choices that are not as inexpensive as choices you can find elsewhere, like at Vanguard or Fidelity. Low costs correlate to better investment results over long periods of time, and at age 24, this particular reader could be waiting many decades before accessing this money.

You can compare costs by reading the prospectuses for the investment choices in your 401(k) and comparing the expense ratios and other fees with similar funds managed by Vanguard.

Without an employer match, consider maximizing your IRA before contributing to your 401(k). A traditional IRA offers the same tax benefits as a 401(k), and a Roth IRA forgoes the tax deduction for your contributions today for a tax deduction in retirement. That’s a good choice if you expect that you’re in a lower tax bracket today than you will be in retirement. Considering the economy today, it’s probably a good bet that all taxes will be higher in thirty or forty years as the country struggles to pay its expenses, but you never know without a crystal ball.

While your investment choices in your 401(k) are limited, you can invest in almost anything in your IRA, depending on how you open the account. Your investments in IRAs are subject to an annual limit. If you have a strong enough cash flow to schedule your IRA investments throughout the year to the maximum and still have free cash flow, then you should consider investing what you can in a 401(k) without an employer’s matching contribution if your income isn’t above the maximum for taking advantage of the tax deduction. Otherwise, just invest using a taxable (regular, non-retirement) brokerage account. You can name the account “For Retirement” and leave it alone for forty years.

I wish I had been thinking like Steve when I was 24. I’m not sure I knew about the existence of 401(k) plans when I was that age. My employer didn’t offer a 403(b) plan — the non-profit version of the 401(k) — until the following year or two, and my cash flow was so tight, there was no matching contribution, and the investments were so expensive I just laughed. My only investment was in the form of a recently-converted UTMA or UGMA invested with what was probably savings bonds I received as gifts as a kid.

In reality, just making any choice for investing is better than making no choice. Whether you invest in a 401(k), IRA, or taxable account, just the act of putting money aside for retirement puts you ahead of half of all Americans in taking steps to ensure you have a stronger future.

Do you agree or disagree with the strategy outlined above? Share your thoughts on what you might do if your employer were not to offer a matching contribution on your 401(k).

{ 8 comments }

A few weeks ago, a Consumerism Commentary reader asked me on Facebook whether it would be a good idea to purchase shares of Facebook at $48 a piece. I do not give stock buying advice, but I mentioned that shares had recently been sold for $44.10 on the secondary market, so if someone were to accept an offer to buy shares at $48, they’d have to believe that the value had increased since the auction.

Interest in buying shares of Facebook has increased as rumors about the company’s going public continued, and when Facebook finally filed for its initial public offering (IPO) in February, shareholders (mostly company employees and investors willing to buy in the secondary market) celebrated. The company now plans to become a public company on May 18, though that date is somewhat flexible. Also flexible is the target range for the initial share price when the company goes public.

FacebookFacebook has set its open share price to be between $28 and $35. With the shares Facebook’s famed CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, plans to sell at the opening, he will personally cash in $1 billion, while the company raises at least $12 billion through new shares. The total valuation of the company could lie anywhere between $75 and $98 billion, according to CNN Money.

There is no doubt that Facebook is the biggest success story in technology in this century so far. Those who invested early, friends of Zuckerberg since the beginnings of the company and employees who received significant amounts of stock options, stand to be able to cash in their shares and retire pleasantly wealthy. Those buying shares on or after May 18 may be able to catch a star continuing to rise.

Google continued to perform well after its IPO, for example. Investors were concerned about overpaying for Google shares at about $100 around the time of that company’s initial public offering, but today’s price is over $600. Facebook’s shares will be sold at a price-to-earnings ratio of 99, higher than almost all companies in the S&P 500 index, making the investment seem to be at a high risk for its price to fall. Both Zynga and Groupon, after going public last year, are now trading below their initial share prices.

Are you planning to invest in Facebook’s common shares once you can buy them through the stock exchange? Has Facebook seen its heyday of growth or is there more to come from the company?

Update: Although average individual investors have traditionally had limited access to initial public offerings, Facebook, following a trend of other technology companies going public, will likely be opening its IPO up to E*Trade. If you have an E*Trade account in good standing, you can indicate how many shares of Facebook you would like and the maximum price you’d like to pay. E*Trade will distribute the shares it receives among its individual investors who bid high enough.

Photo: kudumomo
CNNMoney, BusinessWeek

{ 14 comments }

Thanks to the Consumerism Commentary Community

by Flexo

In just a short period of time, Consumerism Commentary will be entering its tenth year of existence. The site’s ninth anniversary is approaching, and I’ve been involved with the website longer than I’ve been involved with any other commitment in my life. Jobs and relationships have come and gone, but Consumerism Commentary remains. I started ... Continue reading this article…

13 comments Read the full article →

IRS Looking For Your Offshore Bank Accounts

by Flexo

The more money you have, the more likely you are to cheat on your taxes. The rich have more opportunities to try to hide assets and income from the Internal Revenue Service, particularly through offshore bank accounts. In the United States, banks are required to report income earned by their customers on savings and investments. ... Continue reading this article…

7 comments Read the full article →

Buffett: Buying Houses Better Than Buying Stocks

by Flexo

On CNBC a few weeks ago, Warren Buffett told the television-viewing audience, among other things, that he would purchase a couple hundred thousand single-family homes right now, if it were practical to do so. That seems like a ringing endorsement of buying residential real estate for its value as an investment. If the buyer also ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

The Cost of Raising a Child With Autism

by Flexo

A few years ago, I shared a statistic showing that it costs almost $200,000 to raise a child, from birth to age eighteen. If that weren’t enough of a financial burden, consider that one out of 88 children are now diagnosed with autism, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (source, pdf). Regardless ... Continue reading this article…

11 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 6112345···50···Last »