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

Search: estate


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 }

A new survey takes a look at the critical state of today’s recent college graduates. The survey questioned a nationally-representative sample of 444 recent college graduates between the ages of 22 and 29, about their employment situation and experiences. The questions also lightly touched upon these graduates’ financial condition. I’ve included a link to the full survey at the bottom of this article.

The necessity of choosing a major in college can put quite a bit of pressure on any student, particularly those who have either a wide variety of interests and talents as well as those who may not feel themselves pulled in any particular direction. There’s always the hope or the expectation that the bachelor’s degree will define a career path for the rest of one’s life, and that career path will follow a straight line or an exponential curve.

GraduationAn economist’s opinion is that students, who often go into debt to obtain their degrees, should simply look at the expected rate of return. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard or read that students should choose majors like engineering, physics, computer science, or applied mathematics to guarantee high salaries and easy job placement. Not everyone is interested or talented in these areas, and the pure financial approach says that those who aren’t shouldn’t bother spending money for a college education. The return on investment for an education is about more than just money, but that opinion doesn’t exactly make me popular in certain communities.

The financial reality is dire according to this survey. And as much as a college education has value beyond the expected return in the form of salary, no one can ignore the money-related part of the equation. Many decades ago, a college degree was a sign of differentiation, and gave holders the ability to market themselves well and qualify for the best jobs. At the same time, culture put such an emphasis on higher education that as it became available to more people — through grants and loans, not through lowered costs — it’s become less of a distinction. Colleges are basically unchecked in their tuition increases because they know that students will keep coming and the government will continue providing opportunities.

In good economic times, that can be ignored. With a low level of unemployment among graduates, former students can receive jobs, healthy incomes, and can pay down their student loan debt. In difficult times — when Baby Boomers aren’t retiring and there aren’t opportunities for younger workers, for example — the buy-now-pay-later model of education begins to fail. And it always fails for those with degrees in fields that take longer to recover their costs, like the arts and humanities.

Mark Cuban offered an apt analogy. College education is similar to the practice of flipping real estate. In the heyday of oversized, abnormal growth in the real estate market, any fool could make
money by buying a house relying heavily on debt, selling it to a bigger fool, and using the proceeds to repeat the process. There was a promise of success, and it worked well for a while — until the real estate market meltdown, followed by the Great Recession and credit crunch. A similar experience is happening today with the investment in a college education. Cuban argues that it used to be able to “flip” a college degree for a good starting salary and a solid opening to a life-long career, but the investment no longer performs so well.

With the run-up in real estate prices, it became very easy to access credit. Banks would give loans to as many customers as possible, with the knowledge the banks could repackage and sell those loans to reduce their apparent risk. The credit crunch required banks to tighten up their lending standards to the point where credit wasn’t available anywhere. Cuban believes this is where we are heading with student loans.

Years ago, policies were designed to ensure that everyone who wanted to become a homeowner could afford to do so. Taxpayers subsidized a great expansion in homeownership, and the real estate industry thrived. Education for all has been just as much a part of the American Dream, and taxpayers are subsidizing college educations for those who can’t afford it on their own. When it’s so easy to get an education for little money down, and everyone is taking advantage of free-flowing credit, we should have expected that making a return on that investment has become more difficult.

There is more student loan debt in aggregate in the United States than credit card debt, and Mark’s conclusion is that the economy won’t improve until this student loan bubble bursts. He promotes non-traditional universities — though not diploma mills, as he later warns — as the answer, because they can provide a better deal.

While colleges and universities are building new buildings for the English, social sciences and business schools, new high end, un-accredited, branded schools are popping up that will offer better educations for far, far less and create better job opportunities. As an employer I want the best prepared and qualified employees. I could care less if the source of their education was accredited by a bunch of old men and women who think they know what is best for the world. I want people who can do the job. I want the best and brightest. Not a piece of paper.

The competition from new forms of education is starting to appear… You would think traditional university educators would take notice. Beyond allowing some of their classes to be offered online, they haven’t. They won’t. Its the ultimate Innovators Dilemma. They don’t believe they should change and they won’t. Until its too late. Just as CEOs push for that one more penny per share in EPS, University Presidents care about nothing but getting their endowments and revenues up. If it means saddling an entire generation with obscene amounts of school debt, they could care less. This is how they get their long term contracts and raises.

It’s just a matter o[f] time until we see the same meltdown in traditional college education. Like the real estate industry, prices will rise until the market revolts. Then it will be too late. Students will stop taking out the loans traditional Universities expect them to. And when they do tuition will come down. And when prices come down universities will have to cut costs beyond what they are able to. They will have so many legacy costs, from tenured professors to construction projects to research they will be saddled with legacy costs and debt in much the same way the newspaper industry was. Which will all lead to a de-levering and a de-stabilization of the university system as we know it.

Just over half of recent college graduates have jobs. Many of those who do have jobs settled for a position for which their four-year degree was not necessary. 40 percent of recent graduates haven’t even begun paying off their student loan debt. Most recent graduates, while happy with their time in college, would have chosen a major after more consideration, taken different courses, or sought out more working or internship opportunities.

Photo: NazarethCollege
Blog Maverick, John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development

{ 13 comments }

Art Is Not a Good Investment

This article was written by in Investing. 10 comments.

A few months ago, art and money were connected in the news when Andreas Gursky’s “Rhein II,” a photograph depicting a still river and walkway, became the highest-valued photograph sold at auction. The buyer paid $4 million to walk away with the larger-than-life print. Art is in the news again today, with one of Edvard Munch’s renditions of “The Scream.” At a recent Sotheby’s auction, “The Scream” was sold for $119.9 million. This price set a record, making “The Scream” the most expensive work of art ever sold at auction.

For those who have the money to spare, art is a popular investment. Trading masterpieces of art among a small subsection of the population, less than 1 percent, is not without criticism, however. Many artists do not live to see their works become valuable, and do not benefit from the high prices sought for their work. I addressed both the criticisms and the benefits of giving art a significant societal value in the article about “Rhein II.”

The Scream - Edvard MunchWhile it may be good for society to value art highly, is it a good investment for any one individual who has millions of dollars to spare?

Well, first of all, there is art accessible at all levels of investment. With research, you might find works available for $50 that could certainly increase in value over time at a rate better than what financial advisers offer as typical long-term stock market returns. Art is not an investment solely for the 1 percent. And with the right buying choices, your smaller investment in living artists has a more direct effect on the artist community.

Investing in art isn’t going to be right for everyone. While some consider art to be one of the best investments outside of real estate, the economy has seen would-be real estate investors struggling when the market isn’t robust. The same is true with art. The market is subject to bubbles, the latest trends play a significant role in determining prices, and you may not be able to sell your art at the price time you need the proceeds. Artists whose work have proven to appreciate and are highly recognized as masters, like Dali and Picasso, have price appreciation almost guaranteed, but the barrier to entry for investments in proven artists is too high for investors without the desire to risk large sums of money.

Outside of artists whose works have proven worth, it’s risky to invest in art with the goal of making a killing between the purchase date and the sale date. Even the best research won’t guarantee performance. To mitigate the chance of loss, when choosing art, find something you like. As long as you enjoy looking at your art collection, you won’t mind as much holding onto it until it has the ability to fetch the price you desire — which may be never. At the auction where “The Scream” sold for $119.9 million, one fifth of the pieces on the auction block failed to sell because no investors were willing to pay the asking prices.

Another problem with investing in art is the due diligence required to avoid scammers and fraud-minded people in the industry. Even experts can be wrong about forgeries. Investments in art are not subject to the same kinds of regulation that allows investors to feel generally safe and confident when investing in stocks and mutual funds.

Unless you have the financial ability to invest in artists whose names you know from high school or your college’s Art History course, you might be better off staying away from investing in art if your purpose is finding the next Rembrandt.

Photo: br1dotcom

{ 10 comments }

The Next Credit Crunch

This article was written by in Economy. 1 comment.

There are signs that the economy might be in more trouble in the near future. One of the symptoms of the recession was the credit crunch. Banks and other lending institutions tightened up their previously loose standards for extending credit, and in order to prop up their own organizations financially, banks held on to the cheap money afforded to them by the government rather than extending loans to small businesses needing the cash flow to expand or operate, extending the recession.

A number of policies were designed to help small businesses when practically-free loans from the government weren’t enough to encourage banks to do anything but prop up their balance sheets. The FDIC instituted a policy where they would insure noninterest-bearing accounts without a limit. This is different than the insurance consumers receive on up to $250,000 on savings and checking accounts. The extended FDIC coverage allows businesses to keep their operating accounts — which are mostly used for paying employees with direct deposit — at smaller banks, seen as being at risk for failing moreso than large, “too-big-to-fail” banks.

Captain Credit CrunchThis FDIC benefit is scheduled to end before January 1, 2013. The expected reaction is for small businesses to take their operating funds out of community banks and return to larger banks, where size is assumed to correlate to strength. Small banks, which have recently begun extending more credit to local businesses, will no longer have the funds to continue this practice.

There is a chance that the FDIC program will continue, but that requires dependency on politicians being interested in changing the direction it gave the FDIC and being willing to continue the expense, whether from government (public) sources or from fees received from FDIC member institutions.

At the same time the potential shift from community banks to large, national banks hangs over the head of those who are concerned about the possibility of another credit crunch, big banks have already reined in their lending. In the first quarter of 2012, credit card and bank lending has dropped.

JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Citigroup cut their lending by a collective $24 billion in the first three months of the year. That was a change from last year when lending rose $34 billion at the nation’s four biggest banks in all of 2012.

Plan for the next credit crunch now

The individuals hurt the hardest during a credit crunch are people barely living paycheck to paycheck, relying on credit cards to meet their financial obligations, but by far the worst of the credit crunch is felt by small business owners who rely on bank credit, particularly during times of recession, to stay in business.

Families with the most exposure in a credit crunch can prepare by growing and nurturing an emergency fund. I’ve been promoting emergency funds during the best and worst economic times, and those who use the good times to shore up resources to survive the hard times make it through. It’s an economic policy as old as the Bible. Small business owners should take the same approach.

With a credit crunch, interest rates will continue to remain low, encouraging a money to flow as freely as possible. Those who qualify for borrowing with the stricter criteria in a credit crunch can take advantage of the opportunity to borrow money at low rates and invest in hard assets with a physical presence. Real estate and art come to mind.

Photo: mary_thompson
CNN, Fortune

{ 1 comment }

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 →

How Do You Preserve Your Money?

by Flexo
Money Bags

Preservation of capital is an important aspect of any financial plan, but in today’s economy, this is impossible without taking on some risk. At one time, you could confidently place any money you might need within one year in a high-yield savings account and be relatively confident that your money could buy at least as ... Continue reading this article…

19 comments Read the full article →

Three Banks and One Insurer Fail Fed’s Stress Test

by Flexo
Citi Checking Account Piggy Bank

After the recession, the Federal Reserve developed a stress test for banks and financial firms too big too fail. The stress test looks at the financial condition of these corporations and simulates a new recession. Under the simulation, based on a worst-case scenario, not an actual economic forecast, banks pass the test if the companies ... Continue reading this article…

7 comments Read the full article →

Buy Michael Jordan’s House for $29 Million

by Flexo
Basketball

If you’ve ever browsed through the television guide, you might have seen that there are a good number of television shows dedicated to the real estate industry. House Hunters International, Million Dollar Listing, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, and Real Estate Intervention are just a few of the cable or network television shows designed to allow ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 4212345···Last »