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

Search: stimulus


Improving your financial situation requires more than just trying harder. People who write financial websites offering advice often think or imply that the reason for financial misfortune is ignorance of the basics. Recently, there was one website that claimed that the only thing people need to know was spend less than you earn, as if taking this to heart is the single solution to getting your finances on the right track.

There is no switch that you can just turn on, for the most part. In some cases, particularly where someone experiences a major emotional setback — “hits rock bottom” — changing your direction in place works, but that could mean losing a house or destroying a family relationship. A devastating situation isn’t guaranteed for everyone and you may not want to wait until you reach such a low point.

MoneyIf you’ve been living in debt for the entirety of your adult life, you may have an epiphany of some sort and turn yourself around with just the knowledge that your net worth needs to increase at the end of each month in order to become financially independent, but for most people, changing behavior takes much more than desire.

There are certain things you can do to help yourself — and your brain — accept that you need to start improving your financial situations for the sake of your future self and family.

Replace old habits with new habits

Much behavior can be reduced to patterns and habits. Breaking a habit, like emotional spending, can be incredibly difficult because of the comfort that has developed through years of participating in the activity. Shoppers who derive pleasure from spending money may be in uncontrollable debt, and use shopping in difficult times to feel better. Of course, with more shopping and spending more money than is available, this person could experience emotionally difficult situations due to the lack of finances, yet still seek to cure those negative feelings by shopping.

Replace the reaction of shopping with something that makes you feel better without damaging your personal finances. Exercising releases chemicals in the brain that, for many people, enable happy feelings, so one of the best options for replacing a bad financial habit is exercise. Whenever you feel the urge to do something that you know is harmful to your finances, choose to run around the block or work out in a gym.

It might be difficult to make this change at first, but the goal is to make a new habit that can be triggered in place of your old habit. For some time, you may want to overlap both reactions, but after several weeks of consciously using your new habit, you should be able to successfully replace the old.

Resist temptation by making it difficult or inconvenient

Some financial advisers and gurus suggest freezing your credit card in ice or keeping your emergency fund at a bank that’s difficult to access. The more barriers you can place between yourself and your bad financial behaviors (in this case, using your credit card or dipping into your emergency fund), the more success you’ll have in avoiding these temptations.

Combining barriers with habits can be successful, too. Rather than purchasing items from Amazon on impulse, create a habit of waiting 24 hours between your desire and your action. This barrier of time gives you the opportunity to re-evaluate your decision. Twenty-four hours later, you may be in a different mood and decide that you don’t need the item you intended to purchase as bad as you thought you did.

Remove barriers to good financial behavior

While you’re adding barriers to prevent bad financial behavior, you may want to think about whether you already have barriers preventing you from making good financial decisions. Although the stock market has been on a rally lately, medium-term performance has not been great, and the investing industry has attracted a bad reputation through and following the recession and credit crunch. The fear of losing money may be preventing young people from investing in the stock market.

Many investment advisers say that you should evaluate your risk and only invest in a way that makes you comfortable with your possible losses, but an investor’s level of risk aversion could be tied to his or her feelings about the stock market. Risk profile measured this way would then fluctuate. One possible outcome from feeling good about the stock market and willing to take on risk during times of confidence about Wall Street while feeling nervous when the media is taking the financial industry to task is the unprofitable accidental strategy of buying high and selling low.

If you’re young and would like to save for retirement, with a goal of leaving your work behind one day with enough money to pay your expenses, you can’t ignore the stock market. A diversified portfolio may not make you rich over time, but there’s a good chance you’ll be able to retire.

Change your words

The words you choose to describe your financial behaviors will have an effect on your approach to your money. For example, take “investment” and “expense.” I mentioned this phenomenon in my editor’s note after Jennifer Calonia’s article about wedding planning and spending.

One way people often justify or rationalize expenses is by calling them “investments.” For example, one might say, “Spending a large amount of money for a wedding is an investment in your relationship.” Someone else might say, “Going to a private university is an investment in your future.” You should only invest in something when you receive an asset in return, and you are planning for the value of that asset to increase over time.

You may be able to argue that the asset you receive in return for a wedding is a partner who stays with you for the rest of your life. You may receive an emotional asset in return. But in order to be truthful with yourself, consider whether you’re using the term “investment” to justify paying more for a ceremony than you need to. As I’ve written previously, spending money for once-in-a-lifetime event is not a bad way to spend money if you can afford it, but calling it an investment is just a way for you to feel better about your resulting lack of money.

In return for your expense for your college-level education, you may receive assets: your ability to earn an increased income over time when compared with someone with just a high school diploma, possibly, cognitive skills that help you succeed in the world regardless of your job, career, or income, and, possibly, connections that you retain for the rest of your life, helping you with career moves and friendships. The values of these things may increase over time, making the term “investment” more legitimate. The trouble appears when you pay a higher price for education than necessary, calling it an investment.

If you ask anyone who has any experience with finance, a house is an asset and a mortgage is a liability. Yet, some financial gurus continue to insist that a house is a liability. This doesn’t make any sense from a purely financial perspective, but if you look at the connotations of the words instead of the meanings — or if you look at the broader sense of “liability” rather than its financial sense — these gurus might have an argument. A house that does not create cash flow for you (that is, a house that is not an investment with rental income) should be avoided as much as possible. Anything that costs you money is a liability in the sense that is drags your finances down. Although it’s not financially accurate, considering bad assets “liabilities” encourages you to eliminate as many of these as possible and to replace them with income-producing assets.

Politicians and activists use word choice to influence their constituents’ opinions all the time. That’s why we have terms like “pro-life” and “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.” It’s a form of manipulation, but if you’re using this technique to benefit your financial situation, no one can blame you for misdirection.

Using these tricks — replacing old habits with new habits, adding barriers to bad behaviors, removing barriers to good choices, and changing the words to describe what you do — can help you overcome the difficulty of putting what you know about “spending less than you earn” into effect. There’s a bridge between knowledge and action, and unfortunately, many people mistakenly think that the reason so many people in the United States are suffering financially is due to lack of knowledge. The prescribe solutions like money management class in high school and other financial literacy initiatives. Having more information is not going to solve financial illiteracy. On an individual or family level, taking steps to modify behavior will certainly move finances in the right direction.

khrawlings

{ 10 comments }

As a continuation of President Obama’s jobs proposal (economic stimulus) for curbing spending and increasing federal government revenue, the administration is taking a cue from famous investor, Warren Buffett. On many occasions, Buffett has claimed that wealthy Americans do not pay a fair share of the tax burden relative to their means to do so. In his famous example, Buffett describes his effective tax rate as being lower than his secretary’s.

Many wealthy people earn income through investing returns, not ordinary income, which are taxed at a rate of 15 percent rather than a marginal rate schedule with a maximum of 35 percent in 2011.

Warren BuffettCritics of Buffett’s outspoken desire to reform the tax code say that Buffett can help reduce the deficit by donating a portion of his net worth to the U.S. Treasury, as the government allows for such donations. Those who feel that Buffett’s comments, if they influence policy, could hurt them today or in the future say that Buffett could voluntarily not take deductions that lower his tax liability, but like a good capitalist, Buffett will continue to take advantage of every avenue the tax code provides his for saving money.

Economists have crunched the numbers to show that tax law changes fashioned after Buffett’s statements would not raise enough revenue to cover the gap between government spending and revenue, but there doesn’t seem to be any implication by the plan’s supporters that this would be the case; cutting back cable television service won’t allow a poor family to afford a house, but it’s still a beneficial change.

People who once respected Buffett’s investing prowess now call him a socialist, despite the fact he’s one of the most successful capitalists the modern world has seen. I have no interest in defending Buffett’s philosophies, but he is a literal capitalist, as through his company Berkshire Hathaway he provides the means in the form of capital for other companies to thrive. Like a good capitalist, Buffett invested $5 billion in a struggling bank, with conditions only he could negotiate, such as a significant discount on the investment and influence among management for operational decisions.

To take advantage of Warren Buffett’s name, the president is informally calling his tax-related measures the “Buffett Rule.” If I were Warren Buffett, I wouldn’t my name attached to a politically-charged discussion even if I believe in the core aspects of the proposal. Buffett doesn’t mind that his name is being used in such a manner and is publicly supporting the measure.

What’s included in the Buffett Rule

Simply put, the Buffett Rule is a minimum tax on taxpayers with an income over $1 million. This would replace the misdirected Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The original purpose of the AMT was similar: wealthy households should pay a fair share of taxes. Over time, though, as the income range for middle class grew, the AMT was not automatically adjusted. The AMT began to hit an increasing number of families who would not consider themselves wealthy.

In addition, the Buffett Rule would limit the tax deductions available to families in this income range and end subsidies to major corporations such as oil companies.

Another key to the revenue portion of Obama’s proposal is to let the tax cuts enacted under President Bush expire for couples with incomes over $250,000. That’s not necessarily part of the Buffett Rule, and the proposal has been making the rounds since at least the beginning of Obama’s presidency.

A Congress unfriendly to tax increases will make passage of the Buffett Rule difficult. Wealthy families believe they are already paying their fair share of the tax burden and want to see low-income families pay more. According to the U.S. Census, the gap between the top and the bottom of the income scale has expanded to its widest point in history, and a situation in which both the rich and the poor feel the government unfairly discriminates against them will not lead to a solution.

The desired outcome in this case would be enough revenue to cover the government’s obligations plus the feeling among the systemically lower class that they have a fair opportunity to succeed and a feeling among the wealthy that they have an obligation to pay for a representative bulk of the country’s expenses.

Photo: Aaron Friedman

{ 38 comments }

Update: The Buffett Rule, if implemented, could help pay for the American Jobs Act.

As long as the public holds the general impression that economy isn’t favorable, and that’s certainly the case, for example, when unemployment is high or after a stock market crash, political leaders will propose stimulus plans to help move the country in a more favorable direction. The focus of the 2011 stimulus package is jobs, with unemployment a lagging factor in today’s economy. President Obama has pitched his 2011 stimulus plan with a total cost of $447 billion and is looking for Congress to quickly sign off on the plan to boost the economy.

There are politics at work here, of course, with an election looming next year and one political party eager to blame the other for the inevitable fact that the economy won’t look great by the time citizens in the United States head to the polls.

Dollar - 2011 Stimulus PackageThere is no stimulus check for American citizens this time, but here is what is included in the $447 billion 2011 stimulus package called the “American Jobs Act.”

  • Cut the payroll tax in half. Today, employees pay 4.2% on the first $106,800 of wages, an already-reduced rate from the normal 6.2%. The 2011 stimulus proposal would reduce the payroll tax to 3.1%. The proposal would also reduce the payroll tax rate paid by businesses to 3.1% on the first $5 million paid in wages.
  • Payroll tax exemptions for new hires and raises. Any new hire will be exempt from payroll taxes, both from the employee and the business side. The same is true for any employee who receives a raise; they will be continue to be taxed on their old salary.
  • Tax credit for business that hire the unemployed. If a business hires an individual who has been unemployed for over six months, the business will be able to claim a tax credit of $4,000.
  • Deductions for companies that invest in infrastructure. Companies that spend capital on equipment and plants will be able to deduct certain expenses from their taxes.
  • Creation of an infrastructure bank. After a round of federal funding, a new facility will be able to offer loans to help fund local infrastructure improvement projects. Once the infrastructure bank is operational, it should pay for itself through interest collection on the loans.
  • Transportation improvement projects. In addition to the infrastructure bank, the 2011 stimulus plan includes immediate funding for highways, mass ground transportation, and aviation.
  • Modernize schools. Part of the stimulus package will include spending to repair, rebuild, or outfit 35,000 public schools.
  • Fix vacant property. The federal government will dedicate funds for fixing up properties, residential or businesses, that have been foreclosed or abandoned.
  • Extend unemployment benefits. Although employee benefits have already been extended to 99 weeks, the stimulus proposal would extend benefits even further. For unemployed individuals who choose to build their skills through job training, the plan would extend benefits as well as provide a stipend.
  • Fund teachers and first responders. Obama would send $35 billion in federal money to local communities to help hire and keep public school teachers and emergency personnel.
  • Offer more home refinances. The President has already proposed extending mortgage refinancing at today’s low rates to more homeowners.

How to pay for the 2011 stimulus

The total cost of the tax cuts in the 2011 stimulus package is $254 billion and the total cost of the spending measures is $194 billion. To pay for the tax cuts and spending, Obama’s plan for the most part is to raise taxes on individuals with incomes over $200,000 (or $250,000 for couples filing jointly). These are the adjusted gross income values, which are often much lower than gross revenue from a job or a business. For business owners, adjusted gross income is the resulting number after business expenses are deducted; for all individuals, adjusted gross income is the resulting income after most retirement contributions are removed from the number.

Much of the following is part of the Buffett Rule proposed by President Obama on September 19, 2011.

  • Cap itemized deductions at a rate of 28%, not affecting anyone other than those in the top two income tax brackets. For every $100 in deductions, the most any America would be able to receive back is $28. Those who use major charitable donations to reduce taxable income, for example, could see a significantly higher tax bill.
  • Tax carried interest at ordinary income rates. Hedge fund managers and others in the financial industry have benefited from the long-term capital gains rate of 15%. When a compensation is paid out of investment returns, it can qualify as carried interest. The stimulus plan would combined carried interest with ordinary income and the total would be subject to the tax bracket calculation, with a rate as high as 39.6%.
  • Repeal oil subsidies. The oil industry has benefited from help from the government at a time when the industry seemed to be successful regardless of the subsidies. Paying for the stimulus plan could be assisted by removing these subsidies and allowing the industry to flourish on its own.

Obama’s proposal for the 2011 stimulus package has little chance of being approved by the Congress in its current form. There will likely be competing priorities between Republicans and Democrats to be settled first, and competing bills between the House of Representatives and the Senate in need of a compromise. As the situation changes, this article will contain the latest details.

What do you think about the 2011 stimulus package in its current form? Will it help to push the economy in the right direction? Is it completely unnecessary?

{ 34 comments }

The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, the 2009 economic stimulus bill, provided an opportunity for homeowners in trouble to qualify for mortgage modifications. The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) and the “Making Home Affordable” provided support for lenders who worked with homeowners.

Part of the requirement for qualifying for the modification program is for borrowers to have missed a number of payments. This put homeowners who could benefit from the program, in trouble but not yet delinquent, in a tough position. They would need to skip payments, even if they could pay, ruining their credit in the process. In addition, lenders made it difficult to qualify, with understaffed departments handling the cases, a lack of communication, mixed messages from customer service, and overall disorganization.

Mortgage RefinanceA more pressing problem with HAMP was that borrowers were required to owe less than 125% of a home’s value — and in a tough market where home values were falling, it was much easier for a homeowner to find himself in that position — and to have a high credit score.

Without HAMP delivering the desired effect, the Obama administration is looking at improving the concept as a part of the latest economic stimulus package. A third round of quantitative easing is unlikely to gain wide support, at least not in that form, so the federal government is looking for ways to reduce the risk of a second recession, a double-dip recession, or any other type of economic problem.

The Obama administration is seeking feedback on a new round of stimulus designed to help more homeowners qualify for a mortgage refinance. After a decade of lax lending standards, following the recession and credit crunch they have tightened, making it difficult for consumer with marginal credit histories — or even something not too out of the ordinary, like self-employment income without W2 income — to qualify. The new program will seek to allow more homeowners to refinance at a time when mortgage interest rates are very low.

Another aspect of this program would take federally-owned housing and convert the buildings into rentals, turning them over to investment firms to manage.

The plan could actually help pay down the deficit, as there are unspent funds that have been set aside for stimulus:

The idea is appealing because it would not necessarily require Congressional action. It also would not tap any of the $45.6 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Funds that was set aside to help struggling homeowners. Only $22.9 billion of that pool has been spent or pledged so far, and fewer than 1.7 million loans have been modified under federal programs. But Andrea Risotto, a Treasury spokeswoman, said whatever was left would be used to reduce the federal deficit.

Photo: Tom Hilton
New York Times

{ 12 comments }

America’s Lost Decade

by Flexo

Larry Summers, former economic adviser to Barack Obama and Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton’s presidency, shared his thoughts on the economy through opinion pieces in the Financial Times and Washington Post. His concern is the possibility that the United States is heading for a “lost decade” similar to Japan’s lost decade in the 1990s. This ... Continue reading this article…

10 comments Read the full article →

20 Ways to Use the Payroll Tax Holiday

by Flexo

When Congress passed the Tax Hike Prevention Act earlier this year, it included an economic stimulus in the form of a payroll tax holiday. As Leigh Mutert, CPA explained in our podcast interview, the payroll tax will be reduced in 2011 from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. As a result, paychecks will be a little more than ... Continue reading this article…

15 comments Read the full article →

Making Work Pay Credit Extension

by Flexo

The 2009 economic stimulus came to the middle class in the form of the Making Work Pay credit, which provided a $400 credit for single taxpayers or a $800 credit for married taxpayers filing jointly across two years. The credit was embedded in W-2 paychecks, hardly noticeable to many. The credit was also designed to ... Continue reading this article…

8 comments Read the full article →

Obama’s Proposed Investment in American Infrastructure

by Flexo

President Obama proposed yesterday spending more than $50 billion over the next six years to modernize the transportation infrastructure in the United States. He is calling for renovations to or creation of 150,000 miles of roads, 4,000 miles of rail, and 150 miles of airport runways. The $50 billion would be an up-front cost, paid ... Continue reading this article…

11 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1012345···Last »