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

Search: estate

An elegant answer to the over-complicated tax system is to shift the basis of the system from income to spending. There have been a variety of proposals to make this happen. It’s the core of the so-called Fair Tax and Herman Cain incorporated its concept into his 9-9-9 tax plan. Other proposals have called for a value-added tax similar to the system in the United Kingdom.

FerrariWorking to earn a living contributes to society, as does investing in businesses. Taxes on income, whether wages or dividends, could discourage this type of economically-beneficial activity. Consumer spending also benefits the economy, though, and if this tax system discourages spending, it might have a negative effect on the economy initially.

Also, lower-income households and those who live paycheck-to-paycheck would bear a higher burden. When almost all of a family’s income is spent, this family would be taxed on a high percentage of their income. On the other hand, a corporate executive earning more than a million dollars does not need to spend all of his money. His tax burden is more affordable. Under today’s tax environment, someone with the means might put money into real estate, invest in businesses, and shelter assets in offshore accounts. Under the new system, a wealthy individual might stay away from buying houses if those transactions are taxed, while bringing more offshore assets back to the United States.

Rather than adding a national sales tax to determine consumption, one solution is to report all income, as is currently done, as well as all contributions to savings, just like what is done for IRA and 401(k) accounts. The difference between income and savings would be the basis on which the government levies the consumption tax. There could be a high standard deduction applied to the difference, so that lower-income families who are struggling to save do not need to pay an unaffordable tax bill, and so that the system remains progressive.

Reforming the tax system away from income tax is a tall order. Thanks to deductions for tax-advantaged savings, the income tax system has already begun to shift towards a focus on spending, but if you believe that the system could be vastly improved by focusing solely on consumption, the system has a long way to go before workers and savers aren’t punished by a tax collection system.

Would you prefer a tax system based solely on consumption?

Photo: exfordy
New York Times, Slate

{ 16 comments }

When politicians are campaigning, some try to reinforce the idea that they are similar to most Americans. Candidates for President of the United States try to avoid being labeled as elitist, because some sort of connection and kinship with their constituency is important for winning the favor of voters who aren’t already entrenched with a Democrat or Republican ideology.

Of course, the attempt to be viewed as an “average American” is nothing more than marketing and public relations. In order to find one’s way into the political arena at that level, you need to carry something that sets you aside from most Americans. And while money doesn’t guarantee a victory, it doesn’t hurt.

CNN has reported the net worth and income of the Republican presidential candidates as well as President Obama to see how they compare with each other. Like most Americans, they generally have wealth tied into their homes, but their investments, and in some cases, major liabilities and use of blind trusts, show that this crew lives in a world unfamiliar to most Americans.

Mitt RomneyMitt Romney’s net worth is between $85 million and $264 million. This is a wide range; with lenient reporting requirements, it’s difficult to be specific. He earns most from dividends and interest on his investments as well as from speaking engagements. Romney includes horses and gold among his investments. According to the Federal Election Commission, Mitt Romney has raised $32 million for his campaign as of September 2011 (the latest data).

Jon Huntsman’s net worth is between $16 million and $72 million. CNN points out that Huntsman’s father is one of the richest men in the world, as has donated more than $1 billion to universities and medical research. Huntsman has raised $4.5 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Newt Gingrich’s net worth is between $7 million and $31 million. Last year, Gingrich earned $2.4 million from his own company, Gingrich Productions, and most of his assets are tied to this company. He also has listed up to $1 million in liabilities in the form of a line of credit with Tiffany and Co. Gingrich has raised $2.9 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Barack Obama’s net worth is between $2.8 million and $11.8 million. Thanks to sales of his books, Obama can count himself among the richest politicians. He also earns a $400,000 salary as President. Obama has raised $88 million for his re-election campaign as of September 2011.

Ron Paul’s net worth is between $2.4 million and $5.4 million. This includes a five-year personal bank loan of up to $500,000. As a fan of gold, Paul has major investments in companies involved with gold and silver mining. Paul has raised almost $13 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Rick Santorum’s net worth is between $1 million and $3 million. Santorum’s wealth is in rental real estate properties. He also has mortgages comprising debt of up to $750,000 on properties with a value of up to $1.25 million. He earned $1.3 million from January to August 2010 as a contributor on Fox News and from the Ethics and Public Policy Center think tank. Santorum raised $1.3 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Rick Perry’s net worth is between $1 million and $2.5 million. The “poorest” of all presidential candidates, Perry receives a $133,000 salary as the governor of Texas. He has a diversified portfolio of stock investments. Perry raised $17 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Should the individual who represents the United States of America domestically and globally be a reflection of American society? Does wealth tie into that equation?

Photo: Maassive
CNN, Federal Election Commission

{ 14 comments }

Although the home mortgage interest deduction is one of the most oft-cited benefits of owning a home, most taxpayers don’t take advantage of it because it requires itemizing taxes. If itemized deductions including mortgage interest paid throughout the year exceed the standard deduction, a taxpayer can take advantage of the benefit.

The benefit isn’t as great as it sounds. If you pay interest, it certainly does help to get a tax benefit, but it rarely tips the balance of the long-term financial effects of renting vs. buying a house. Don’t let the real estate industry sway your opinion about owning a house through this faulty rationale. And certainly don’t decide to take out a mortgage if you were intending to buy with cash. Since this is a deduction, your taxes are reduced by only a percentage of the interest you pay, related to your tax bracket.

The home mortgage interest deduction is currently endangered. The Obama administration and Congress are looking for ways to cut spending, and this tax deduction is on the table for consideration. Some estimated put the cost of this deduction at $100 billion each year.

Despite the cost and its overstated effects, the tax deduction has helped convince renters to become homeowners — at least among people I have spoken with. In other words, for the cost of $100 billion, the economy has seen the benefit of a growing real estate market for many years. This law has made the National Association of Realtors, a lobbying group for the real estate industry, very happy, and they are working hard to prevent the government from eliminating the tax deduction.

There are many rules that determine whether you can claim the interest you pay on your mortgage for a tax deduction. The rules help ensure that the benefit goes to home owners rather than “investors” who earn a living from flipping houses, though due to market conditions the past few years, that activity has been less of an issue.

The interest you pay for construction, purchasing or improving your primary or secondary home, whether through a mortgage, home equity loan, or home equity line of credit, qualifies. There are limitations, though. You can deduct interest paid on up to only $1,000,000 of home acquisition debt. For home equity debt, which is any loan that was taken not to construct, purchase, or improve a house, you can deduct interest paid on up to only $500,000 of this debt or the fair market value of the home, whichever is less. For taxpayers who are married, filing separately, each of these limits is reduced by half.

Normally, the total of all of your itemized deductions are limited by income, but that income limitation was lifted in 2010. It could be lifted again if the benefit is not eliminated.

Question for homeowners: Do you take the home mortgage interest deduction? Question for everyone: Should this deduction be eliminated for the sake of reducing the national budget deficit?

Photo: Wonderlane

{ 60 comments }

Good Debt and Bad Debt

This article was written by in Debt Reduction. 16 comments.

Misuse of credit can destroy a family’s financial life. A household can crumble under the weight of debt, whether it has increased from a poor house-purchasing decision, a drastic change in the real estate market, a shopping addiction, an unexpected medical bill, or the lack of preparedness for an emergency. It’s no surprise people consider debt to be “bad.”

Is there any situation where debt can be “good?”

I have a problem with the good debt vs. bad debt argument. Good and bad are polar opposites, and most issues tend to sit somewhere on a spectrum between two extremes. In fact, issues don’t often sit; they can shift position. The requirement to declare anything, particularly “debt” as a concept, as either good or bad is oversimplification. There’s a tendency to want to make issues simple. Catchy soundbites reducing issues to the most basic terms attract people, and no one ever won a Presidential election while talking about nuances.

See-sawPeople who are looking to sell you something, like car salesmen, college recruiters, investment professionals, and real estate brokers, are more likely to be willing to point out how debt can be used effectively.

  • In real estate transactions, debt allows more families to afford a house, and in some cases, that could mean a healthier environment for raising children. Leverage also helps you reflect a higher rate of return if your home value increases and you decide to sell.
  • If you can borrow money at a low interest rate and use that cash to invest at a higher rate of return, you are using someone else’s money to benefit yourself financially. You can pocket the difference in interest rates or rates of return.
  • Getting a college education increases your lifetime earning potential, and going into debt for a bachelor’s degree could pay off.
  • If you work in a career where image is important, a higher-priced and otherwise-unaffordable car could help you succeed in your business.

Risk makes debt dangerous. There’s a risk that house prices go down. Since the housing bubble burst, that risk should be more apparent. Leverage may amplify your return, but it also makes losses more severe. You could lose your house. If your hot investment doesn’t pan out, you might not be able to pay back your borrowed money. If you find yourself in a career not earning much money, you could struggle to pay off your student loan debt. Using debt to focus your image doesn’t always pay off.

You can only determine whether a risk, like borrowing, is worthwhile after the fact. Hindsight provides perspective. If borrowing allowed you to triumph financially, it was “good” debt. If the debt was unmanageable or caused financial ruin, it was “bad” debt. Taking on debt to purchase an asset that increases in value would always be “good,” while using debt to finance an asset that decreases in value would always be “bad.” The problem is being able to accurately predict the future. The assets we hope will increase would be a house, an investment portfolio, lifetime earning potential, and career opportunities.

The determination of whether debt is “good” or “bad” also depends on the individual or household involved. What could be a good use of debt for one family might not be a good use for another.

There are often other options rather than increasing debt. While it may be expensive to attend an out-of-state private college, you could save money by enrolling in an in-state public college or by taking advantage of grants and scholarships. The Consumerism Commentary Podcast interview with Zac Bissonnette, author of Debt-Free U: How I Paid for an Outstanding College Education Without Loans, Scholarships, or Mooching off My Parents, can offer more insights on how to obtain a valuable college degree without going into debt.

If you are able to postpone desires until you’ve diligently saved for a purchase, you can avoid debt and its possible pitfalls. Not everyone has the opportunity to save, though. A college graduate without any money might need to buy work-appropriate clothing in order to get a job. The credit card comes out, and she buys a week’s worth of outfits to get her to the first paycheck. This may not be “good” debt, but if she didn’t earn and save enough money while achieving her degree, it could be a short-term necessity.

Then again, another way to look at this need for credit to prepare for the first week in a professional environment is an excuse for not following a solid financial plan over the course of her higher education and the start of her life as an adult.

In another example, a savvy investor could use borrowed money to invest in a business that succeeds. Financial analysts can often determine whether a risk is acceptable, and individual investors can use the same approach. For example, if you could borrow a sum of money at an introductory rate of 0% APR on a credit card for 12 months with no fee, as new customers of this Discover More Card offer can do right now, deposit that in a savings account with 1% interest, you can keep the proceeds as long as you pay the credit card bill on time each month and in full by the end of the introductory period. Back when interest rates were higher, this “credit card balance arbitrage” was a more worthwhile endeavor.

Today, however, most investments that would make borrowing money from a 0% APR credit card worthwhile are riskier than a savings account. Even when the safe interest you could earn was more favorable, there was always a risk of missing a credit card payment and owing penalties and interest to the issuer. If you completed the arbitrage scheme and succeeded in increasing your bank account balance, you’d consider that debt to be good. If not, the debt would be bad.

Do you believe that all debt is bad debt, or are there some situations where it’s worthwhile to pay interest and accept the risk of defaulting?

{ 16 comments }

Suze Orman’s New Prepaid Debit Card: The Approved Card

by Flexo
Suze Orman

As Ron Lieber reported in the New York Times, personal finance guru Suze Orman is launching her own debit card brand, the Approved Card, following in the footsteps of music mogul Russell Simmons and his Rush Cards. Suze Orman’s debit card will be a prepaid debit card, ensuring customers using the card can spend generally ... Continue reading this article…

56 comments Read the full article →

Behavior Gap Napkin Sketch Giveaway

by Flexo

I received an advance copy of Carl Richards’ book scheduled for wide release on January 3, The Behavior Gap: Simple Ways to Stop Doing Dumb Things with Money. Carl is a Certified Financial Planner who began writing articles — and sketching on napkins — at his own website, behaviorgap.com, and now does the same for ... Continue reading this article…

2 comments Read the full article →

More Homeowners Can Refinance

by Flexo

Thanks to some changes to the federal Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP), more homeowners can qualify for government-endorsed refinancing. Previously, the program only offered refinancing options for households where the mortgage value was up to 97 percent through 125 percent of the home’s market value. This did help families who have become underwater, having more left to ... Continue reading this article…

4 comments Read the full article →

CoreLogic Credit Report and Score: Always Watching You

by Flexo

CoreLogic, a company that already works with lenders to consolidate credit reports from the three reporting bureaus, is developing a new credit report and score. The company believes its information, culled from public sources and proprietary databases, could give lenders, employers, and any other company that wants to evaluate an individual’s risk, a more accurate ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 4112345···Last »