Quit, Leave, & Roll
The common mantra of financial advice is to roll the 401(k), 403(b), or other employer sponsored retirement plan into an IRA after quitting and leaving a former employer. However, rolling a retirement plan into an IRA does have its drawbacks, especially for high-earners. Rolling a 401(k) plan into an IRA can close the door on Backdoor Roth IRA, which could substantially increase the tax liability on a Traditional IRA that is predominately funded with non-deductible contributions.
The Backdoor Roth IRA is the term used to describe the process of making a non-deductible contribution into a Traditional IRA and immediately converting to a Roth IRA. The purpose of the Backdoor Roth IRA is to avoid taxes on the growth of post-tax contributions. If an individual earns more than $72,000 (>$119,000 married filing jointly), the contribution into an IRA is non-deductible. The Backdoor Roth immediately converts these post-tax monies to a Roth IRA to avoid taxes on the growth. If the non-deductible contribution remains in a Traditional IRA, the growth on this money is subject to income tax when it is withdrawn.
Our paper, Stop, Drop, But Don't Roll: Keep The Backdoor Roth Open, covers the merits of keeping money in a 401(k) plan and not rolling into an IRA to maximize after-tax returns.
If you have questions on Backdoor Roth IRAs or on your employer retirement plan, please feel free to reach out to us.
The market believes that the Fed will increase interest rates with ~99% probability based upon trading in the futures market. With the Federal Reserve set to announce their targeted Federal Funds Rate on June 14th, we believe that this is a proper time to reevaluate the risks of fixed income as well as the metrics used to evaluate interest rate risk.
Bond prices move inversely to yields. If yields increase, the price of a bond goes down and vice versa. The price of a used car is analogous to bond prices in a rising rate environment. For example, an auto enthusiast is trying to sell a two year old car with 30,000 miles and squeaky brakes. A new car with the latest safety features, better performance, and zero miles can be purchased for $35,000. In order for our auto enthusiast to sell his used car, it would have to be priced less than $35,000. Much in the same way a bond that pays $40 a year would have to be priced lower to entice a buyer if new bonds pay $50 a year. In the auto market, Manheim Market Reports can be utilized to estimate the depreciation of a vehicle. Fixed income enthusiasts utilize duration to gauge the price change of a bond due to a change in yields.
While we do believe that Janet Yellen will proclaim higher rates, we do not believe it is time to panic and take action driven by emotion. Rather, the time prior to the eight scheduled meetings of the Fed is a good time to evaluate the risk exposure of a fixed income portfolio and reconcile this with required returns and tolerance for risk.
In this paper, Peak Capital explores the optimality of investing versus paying off debt. We hope to provide assistance in the decision making process through our analysis; however, there is ultimately no 100% correct answer. The answer will be dependent upon each person's unique situation and aversion to risk. The answer to "Pay or Save" should not be limited to a binary outcome.
The optimal choice to invest or pay off debt cannot be determined by comparing expected returns and financing costs in isolation. A holistic approach should be incorporated in the decision which includes consideration of volatility of investments, risk tolerance, need for future cash flows, and tax implications.
Be cautious when using "Invest vs Pay Off Debt" calculators. It is critical that the outputs are questioned and given their due diligence. One of the primary limitations of these calculators is the assumption of static rates of return without consideration of investment volatility.
At the most fundamental level, the decision to pay off debt or invest comes down to one simple question: Is it worth the risk?
The sixth part of our Investor's Alpha series focuses on the importance of reducing or eliminating common fees investor incur in the management of their portfolio. A majority of these fees can be avoided almost entirely or lowered through investor action.
- Account Service Fees
- Brokerage Commissions
- Expense Ratios
- Advisor Fees
Reducing investment management expenses is a simple, easy method to improve portfolio performance. In investment management, the less you pay, the more you keep. Reducing investment expenses by $1,000 annually combined with a 3% rate of return is ~$49,000 after thirty years.
Investors through their own actions have the ability to control the outcome of their portfolios compensating for the inability to control the markets. Managing the cost of investing is one of the investor controlled inputs that drives the wealth equation:
Wealth = Factors You Control + Investment Return
The fifth part of our Investor's Alpha series illustrates the extra return an investor can harvest by properly locating their investments among taxable and retirement accounts. An investor can enhance their long-term returns by reducing taxes by placing investments that are subject to high taxes inside of retirement accounts to minimize tax drag. In addition to properly locating assets, an investor can also increase portfolio longevity in retirement by withdrawing assets strategically from a combination of taxable accounts, Traditional IRA, and Roth IRA accounts.
Proper asset location is an investor driven controlled input that can enhance returns with a low amount of time and effort. As in real-estate, location can help increase portfolio returns during the accumulation phase and increase longevity during the distribution phase.
Wealth = Factors You Control + Investment Returns