Nerd's Eye View blog

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Apr 20-21)

April 19, 2013 05:09 pm 1 Comment CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's issue starts off with some breaking news about new legislation from Representative Maxine Waters that would authorize the SEC to collect user fees to increase oversight of RIAs (although it's not clear the legislation will gain momentum, it's viewed by many as a favorable alternative to FINRA oversight of RIAs). There's also a call from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for a fresh crackdown on "senior designations" and a good in-depth look at the potential fiduciary rule coming out of the Department of Labor in the next few months.

From there, we look at a few articles on notable industry trends, including a review of recent Aite Group research suggesting that there may be more unhappy advisors in RIAs than working in wirehouses, a look at how CFP certificants are geographically distributed around the country, and a review of InStream Solutions financial planning software and its numerous innovations in how advisors can use its software to enhance their outcomes with clients.

In addition, there are a couple of research and technical articles this week, including a good summary of this week's Reinhart and Rogoff research controversy and exactly what the purported flaws were in the original study, a discussion of whether dividend investing is really just a value tilt in disguise (and that dividends might actually be a detractor from performance after adjusting for value!), and a look at a recent research brief from the Center for Retirement Research which finds that "nudges" like automatic enrollment programs may actually be a more effective government policy to encourage retirement savings than just providing a subsidy in the form of tax deductions.

We wrap up with two practice management articles - one with a list of good tips for using LinkedIn, and the other about how to introduce new technology tools to your clients - and close out with an article suggesting that advisors may be talking to clients with more jargon than they realize (and what to do about it), and another looking at financial planning trends in the future and suggesting that while expert knowledge is important, the best financial planners will be differentiated by their ability to use "left-brain" abilities to connect with clients emotionally to really leverage their right-brain knowledge. Enjoy the reading!

Why Cancelling An Existing Whole Life Or Universal Life Policy May Be A Bad Idea

April 17, 2013 11:05 am 26 Comments CATEGORY: Insurance

The fundamental purpose of insurance is to protect against and manage risks that can't otherwise be borne by an individual, from homeowner's insurance to protect against the risk of a disaster to the home, to permanent life insurance to protect against the financial impact of an untimely death. While term insurance can and does fulfill the latter function for most, in many cases clients currently maintain an existing permanent insurance policy, in anticipation of an insurance need that will last for the rest of his/her life. Often that need really does continue for life, but sometimes it does not.

In situations where permanent insurance is no longer needed - whether because the individual accumulated enough wealth than the death benefit protection is simply no longer necessary, or perhaps because the insurance was intended to provide liquidity for estate tax exposure that is simply no longer relevant at the newly permanent and portable inflation-adjusting $5.25M estate tax exemption - the default decision is often to cancel the coverage. After all, what's the point of paying for life insurance that's no longer needed, when it can be surrendered for cash value instead?

The caveat, however, is that in today's low yield environment, many permanent life insurance policies indirectly provide another potential value: a remarkably favorable internal rate of return if simply held until death. Given this potentially appealing "bond alternative" many clients should not only keep an existing permanent policy - despite no need for the death benefit - but even consider making ongoing premiums, paying down loan balances, or even increasing contributions to maintain the policy in force for life! Of course, if the client really needs the cash value or cannot afford premiums, this strategy is not viable, but the policy can still be sold as a life settlement instead to harvest most of the underlying value.

The bottom line, though, is that given the internal rate of return on life insurance held until death, for those who don't need the policy - but don't need the cash value, either - the best decision for unnecessary life insurance might not be to surrender it, but actually keep it anyway!

Joining The Advisory Board Of BrightScope

April 16, 2013 11:01 am 14 Comments CATEGORY: Nerd's Eye View

Determining whether an advisor is any good is a remarkably difficult task for consumers; in fact, just determining whether an advisor has ever committed a regulatory violation could require contact to as many as 102 different agencies - from 50 state insurance departments and 50 state securities regulators, to FINRA and the SEC. While all the information is technically part of the public record, and to that extent is "transparent," the difficulty to view it in any consolidated manner - much less as an easy resource - renders its value remarkably limited as a consumer protection.

One company trying to tackle this problem is BrightScope, which is drawing all the publicly available information together into a central resource that consumers can use to check out their advisors and determine if there's a clean regulatory record. Recently, BrightScope announced it is also aiming to draw on fee details disclosed by RIAs in their Form ADVs to make this information readily to consumers, and is looking to add more pertinent information as well, to ultimately provide a one-stop resource for consumers to find out key information about an advisor's experience, education, costs, and regulatory record.

While shining such a bold light of transparency on the activities of advisors will no doubt draw some criticism, I believe that this kind of transparency is crucial for consumers to develop better trust with financial advisors, and ultimately can help ensure that consumers always know the truth about who they're working with as "Brightscoping" your advisor becomes a routine form of due diligence check for consumers. At the same time, the reality is that the nature of our industry is complex, and oversimplification of these realities will not help consumers either.

Accordingly, I'm excited to announce that I will be joining the Advisory Board of BrightScope in a consulting capacity, to try to help support their efforts in finding the right balance between fair information about advisors and the transparency that consumers need and deserve.

Proposed $3 Million IRA Cap, Estate Planning Crackdowns, And Other Proposals Of President’s Budget

April 15, 2013 11:02 am 2 Comments CATEGORY: Retirement Planning

Last week, President Obama released his proposed government budget for the coming 2014 fiscal year. Of course, the reality is that the budget itself is just proposed and has not yet been approved, and many of the suggestions contained in the budget may be reformed before being set forth in actual legislation (or fall by the wayside entirely, or be written into legislation that ultimately doesn't pass). Nonetheless, proposals in the President's budget often signal areas that the Administration may be targeting for reform, and/or line items that could end out as a bargaining chip in future legislation.

In the 2014 budget, the Administration reiterates several reforms that have been suggested in the past, including an array of high-net-worth estate planning crackdowns, and even a reversion back to the 2009 estate tax exemption and rates. However, the proposal also includes several notable new provisions, including a potential tax credit for establishing automatic enrollment retirement plans, a shift to chained CPI that could impact everything from Social Security benefits to income tax brackets to the return on TIPS, a series of estate planning crackdowns on GRATs, IDGTs, and dynasty trusts, and in what has already been picked up by the media as a controversial provision, a potential "cap" of $3.4 million on retirement accounts beyond which no further contributions would be allowed.

In addition, surprising new proposals outside of gift and estate planning were included, including favorable relief allowing inherited IRA rollovers and an extension to the tax-free treatment of mortgage debt cancelling in a short sale, and the elimination of Required Minimum Distributions for those with less than $75,000 in retirement accounts. On the other hand, the proposals also include an increase to Medicare Part B and Part D premiums, especially for higher income individuals, a potential cap on itemized deductions at a 28% tax rate (even if the individual has a higher tax bracket), and a new requirement that all stocks in the future must use average cost (eliminating the ability to make lot-level gain and loss harvesting decisions).

The reality at this point is that information and details on many of these provisions are still limited; nonetheless, we highlight all of the most important proposals that would impact financial planners and their clients, and consider their feasibility and the potential planning implications.

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Apr 13-14)

April 12, 2013 05:05 pm 3 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's issue starts off with discussion of two noteworthy news events this week, including an announcement by BrightScope that later this year it will begin to include details of advisors' fees based on their Form ADV filings to help consumers evaluate cost, and a release of new Cerulli research that finds tactical asset allocation is about to become the majority strategy for advisors.

From there, we look at a few articles on notable industry trends, including a recap of the top industry trends from Chip Roame at the event spring Tiburon CEO Summit, a discussion of the latest iteration of the Merrill Lynch training program (now salaried for 43 months, with CFP certification required!), and an overview of up-and-coming RIA custodian TradePMR that may be about to take integrated and mobile investment adviser technology to a whole new level.

In addition, there are a couple of research and technical articles this week, including a good discussion of the research on what does (and doesn't) work in trying to choose a good active investment manager, a Journal of Financial Planning article that effectively summarizes the long list of disparities between the theory and practice of portfolio construction, some tips on how to handle college financial aid offers, and a look at the recent White House announcement to delay parts of the Small Business Health Options Program for small business health insurance exchanges in 2014 and how this may accelerate the trend of separating health insurance from employment.

We wrap up with three very interesting articles: the first looks at the research on where money does and doesn't impact motivation and (job) satisfaction; the second explores from behavioral finance research that suggests telling clients they need to change behavior to avoid the "retirement crisis" the nation faces may actually be a harmful approach; and the last is a creative look about how we can all manage and build our personal assets, regardless of whether we're a business owner or an employee, in financial services or otherwise! Enjoy the reading!

Strategies For Existing Variable Annuities With GLWB Or GMIB Riders

April 10, 2013 11:03 am 17 Comments CATEGORY: Annuities

While some advisors recommend annuities more often than others, virtually any advisor may have to deal with situations where clients have existing annuities. And because of the significant "living" and death benefit riders offered over the past decade, the reality is that the decision about what to do with an existing variable annuity is not as clear cut as it was in the past; in fact, failing to do proper due diligence before recommending a client cancel a variable annuity can land an advisor in more hot water than just selling one in the first place!

Unfortunately, the due diligence process is complicated by the fact that almost no two variable annuity riders work the same, with a broad range of GLWB and GMIB riders from one company to the next, each with their own unique features and benefits. As a result, there's more pressure than ever on advisors to read through the details of each and every contract, to try to make a good assessment of the situation and what the client should do next. On the plus side, though, a growing number of third-party providers are available to assist - including a notable new offering aptly titled "Annuity Review" - giving advisors the opportunity to gain outside expertise to help go through the details of contracts with which they may not be familiar.

News Highlight – New SEC Social Media Policy Makes Twitter The New Center Of Financial News?

April 9, 2013 12:28 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Industry News

Last week, the SEC announced a change to its rules for social media, permitting companies to use social media channels like Facebook and Twitter to announce important and timely news, rather than "just" the company's website or via a news release. The companies just have to tell investors which social media outlets will be used in the future, so that investors have fair notice of where to tune in to get the latest information.

What's notable about the change is not just that social media will become a permitted channel, but that given the speed of social media, it may have just become the necessary go-to channel. In fact, last week may mark the turning point for when Twitter went from being "just" a social media platform, to being an essential primary source of key news and information!

Where Should Financial Planning End And A Government Safety Net Begin?

April 8, 2013 11:04 am 6 Comments CATEGORY: General Planning

Earlier this year, former LA Times journalist Helaine Olen - who was responsible for their popular Money Makeover series for many years - published a controversial new book entitled "Pound Foolish: Exposing The Dark Side Of The Personal Finance Industry." In the book, Olen tears apart most of the personal finance industry - tracing it from the roots of Sylvia Porter to Jane Bryant Quinn to today's world from Suze Orman and David Bach to Jim Cramer, the MoneyShow, and Robert Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad" series, and showing along the way how the conflicts of interest rife in the industry serve to undermine much of the value personal finance is purported to give.

Although Olen also shines a harsh light on many segments of the financial advisor space as well, the most notable part of the book is not merely that so much of the financial services world is conflicted and acts in its own interests at the expense of consumers, but that the underlying implication that the problems of most Americans are a result of their poor spending habits and failure to get financially educated may be placing too much blame on consumers and too much of an expectation on even the best that personal finance has to offer. Instead, Olen suggests that many of these issues must be viewed in a broader social light, where the struggle of bringing financial planning to the masses may be less about the problems of our industry business models and more about the fact that what financial planning has to offer simply isn't enough to rectify the real world challenges the average American faces.

The kinds of government safety net and paternalistic solutions implied by such concerns are likely unappealing to many planners, but Olen's book is nonetheless a worthwhile read for some fresh perspective on the intersection between what personal finance and financial planning have to offer, and the limits on what they can achieve without perhaps some social and economic reform and government oversight and assistance.

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Apr 6-7)

April 5, 2013 05:02 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's issue starts off with an announcement of the CFP Board's new "Financial Planning Competency Handbook" which is intended to become the "Merck manual of financial planning," an announcement from the SEC that companies will now be allowed to release and disseminate key news and information through social media rather than (or in addition to) traditional media channels, and a surprising recent study that found advisory firms run by Gen X and Gen Y practitioners may already be generating more profits than the practices of baby boomers due in large part to their better use of technology.

From there, we have a few more practice management articles, including a discussion of how to break out of the "PR slump" if you're using blogging and social media but not getting the results you want, a look at how to rethink employee compensation to recognize that while it's important not to underpay employees it often doesn't help to overpay them either, and a review of the "Hidden Levers" software program that allows advisors to stress test current and prospective client portfolios through a variety of macroeconomic scenarios.

In addition, there are a couple of research and technical articles this week, including a study that finds whether clients think short-term or long-term in moments of financial stress may actually be related to their socioeconomic status as children, a look at whether projecting retirement accumulations in the amount of future income it can buy may be more effective than just showing a future account balance (it helps only modestly, but it helps), and a discussion of the recent new rules allowing intra-plan Roth 401(k) conversions and when they do (and don't) make sense.

We wrap up with three very interesting articles: the first is looks at how we seem mired in complexity, and what it takes to truly simplify the products or services we provide clients (even though simplicity is actually much harder to deliver than complexity!); the second is an intriguing interview with Michael Mauboussin on his book "The Success Equation" with some innovative thoughts about the interrelationship between luck and skill; and the last is an amusing - or perhaps not - April Fool's send-up by fiduciary expert Ron Rhoades about a hypothetical SEC temporary rule that would apply a uniform and very-watered-down fiduciary standard for RIAs and brokers, which is sad not just for the fiduciary outcome it portrays but the fact that several journalists and professors thought the announcement was actually true! Enjoy the reading!

Harvesting Losses Or Harvesting Gains – Planning Around Four Long-Term Capital Gains Tax Rates

April 3, 2013 11:04 am 15 Comments CATEGORY: Taxes

Traditional tax planning for portfolios has been relatively straightforward - given that the same maximum capital gains tax rate applied regardless of whether someone had $100,000 or $1,000,000 of income, the dominant strategy was simply to defer capital gains as long as possible, and harvest capital losses to further maximize the benefit.

In today's world, however, the introduction of both a new top 20% long-term capital gains tax rate, and a 3.8% Medicare surtax on portfolio income, makes the picture far more complicated. Instead of just having two long-term capital gains tax brackets that reach a cap at $72,500 of income (for married couples), there are now four capital gains tax brackets, that extend as high as $450,000 before the top rate is reached!

The end result of this graduated four-tax-rate structure is that now it's no longer best to just defer capital gains indefinitely, which - just like accumulating a huge IRA - could eventually drive the client's tax rates higher as income is ultimately recognized in the future! Instead, tax planning for portfolios becomes more proactive, where some years it's still best to harvest capital losses, but in other years it's better to harvest the gains, instead!