Download Shawn Tydlaska's "Client Service Calendar" below, and check out "#FASuccess Ep 215: Tracking The Client's (Non-Portfolio) Results To Price Your Financial Planning Retainer Fee" for more tools, tips, and strategies on calculating the "real" value of financial planning, hiring to grow your firm, and using tax planning to increase client retention.
Shawn Tydlaska’s Client Service Calendar
![Social Image Financial Advisor Fee Trends And The Fee Compression Mirage](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/social020821-150x150.png)
Despite the rising popularity of new fee-for-service financial planning service models, remarkably little has actually been published about how financial advisors price their services. Which is an important topic for both consumers – who want to know what a plan might cost – and for financial advisors themselves, who may want to benchmark whether the pricing for their financial plans is “reasonable” relative to their advisor peers and competitors (rather than solely setting the price based on its time-and-labor cost to the advisor), especially in an environment where fees on financial products have been under intense price competition and fee compression!
In our latest 2020 Kitces Research survey on “How Financial Planners Actually Do Financial Planning”, we examined both how financial advisors are charging and how much they are charging their clients for financial planning services. Although there has been concern that the fee compression evident with financial services products would also apply to financial planning advice, we found little evidence that this was the case. On the contrary, our data suggests that the median fees in 2020 significantly increased, relative to 2018 fees, for standalone fees (12.4% increase) for retainer fees (25% increase), and for hourly fee rates (25% increase). Median AUM fees, though, remained relatively steady, with no apparent increase (though there was an 8% increase at the 10th percentile and an 8.7% increase at the 90th percentile for fees charged for a $1 million portfolio).
We also observed pricing trends by industry channel, with advisors in the RIA channel charging higher median fees than those in the B/D channel for work completed on a standalone or retainer basis, as well as for a complete financial plan billed on an hourly basis. Similarly, financial advisors with a CFP designation generally charge higher fees than those who are not CFP professionals.
When it came to team structure, there was not much difference in standalone fees charged by solo advisors, solo advisors with support, and ensemble advisors, although silo advisors do appear to charge lower standalone fees than other team structures. For financial plans completed on an hourly basis, silo teams had the highest median fees and solo advisors the lowest, while there was the opposite trend observed for retainer fees, with the highest median fees charged by solo advisors and the lowest median fees charged by silo teams.
Because advisors provided us with detailed information about their business practices and pricing, we were also able to compute implied hourly rates for advisors using non-hourly billing models, which can be helpful in understanding what "reasonable" rates are for hourly advisors. At median levels, we found that primarily AUM advisors are generating revenue at rates that would imply hourly fees between $350 and $800. This is in stark contrast to the $100 to $300 implied hourly fees generated by advisors operating on a primarily hourly basis, and speaks to the challenge of building an hourly practice that is as financially successful as advisors operating on an AUM basis at common fee levels. Furthermore, when we look at top-earning AUM advisors (defined here as those between the 85th and 95th percentile), we find that these advisors are generating implied hourly fees in the $950 to $1,600 per hour range.
Ultimately, the key point is that there does not appear to be any overall trend of decreasing financial planning fees, despite common claims that fee compression is coming for financial advisors. Rather, the trends we actually see in our financial advisor research are increasing fees. Furthermore, these trends are observed consistently across advisor fee models. Which suggests that, despite strong proclamations to the contrary, financial planning fee compression may be largely a mirage.
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Feb-03-2021-Featured-150x150.png)
The Registered Investment Adviser was established by the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, with an explicitly stated intention of separating “bona fide investment counselors” from the “unscrupulous tipsters and touts" trying to just sell the next hot investment scheme. Accordingly, from its very start, a key pillar in the regulation of investment advisers has been various prohibitions against any form of marketing or advertising that might be deemed ‘misleading’ to the public about the investment adviser’s anticipated investment returns. Which in 1961 was formally codified into an advertising rule that explicitly prohibited RIAs from using any form of client testimonial, under the auspices that the results and returns of any one client wouldn’t necessarily be representative of what any/all kinds could expect in the future… and that therefore testimonials were inherently misleading and a danger to the public.
In the years since, though, the world of marketing and advertising has evolved greatly, as have the services of RIAs themselves. As financial advisors expand into financial planning services beyond just portfolio management and are judged on the quality of their service beyond just the literal steps of managing the portfolio itself, it becomes harder and harder for consumers to evaluate an advisor’s quality and expertise with respect to the full breadth of their services. For which one of the most straightforward ways to assess is simply to ask other clients what their experience has been – a common approach in most industries that has led to a bonanza of various third-party review sites, from Google My Business to Yelp and more… but has remained remarkably absent from the realm of financial advisors due to the ongoing prohibition against client testimonials!
But now, the SEC has announced a new marketing rule – it’s first substantive refresh in nearly 60 years – which will, for the first time, allow financial advisors to proactively use testimonials (from clients), endorsements (from non-clients), and highlight their own ratings on various third-party review sites. Which means, simply put, that as the SEC’s new marketing rule takes effect in the coming months, it’s a new dawn for financial advisor marketing.
Not surprisingly, though, the SEC is not granting carte blanche permission for RIAs to use testimonials and endorsements however they wish. Instead, the new rules provide both a series of 7 general prohibitions that still apply to testimonials and endorsements (e.g., that they not be untrue or misleading regarding any material facts), a series of specific requirements that apply to testimonials and endorsements, from new required disclosures to additional oversight and compliance obligations regarding both the RIA and the “promoter” for the RIA, and certain limitations on who can even be a promoter providing an endorsement or testimonial in the first place.
In addition, the SEC’s new marketing rule provides additional clarity about when and how RIAs can leverage various third-party rating and review sites (e.g., Yelp, or various ‘Top Advisor’ lists), including a due diligence obligation (to affirm that the reviews had equal opportunity to be favorable or unfavorable) and additional disclosure requirements regarding the criteria used to determine the rating or review and what it actually pertains to (e.g., explicitly disclosing that a “Top Advisor” ranking is based on AUM alone doesn’t necessarily speak to the quality of the advisor’s advice).
Notably, though, the new marketing rule and its permissiveness of testimonials, endorsements, and the use of third-party review sites are technically only for SEC-registered investment advisers. Those RIAs that are registered at the state level will still need to conform to their state’s own marketing rules, which may or may not incorporate (or be updated for) the SEC’s new rule going forward. And FINRA-registered brokers are ultimately still subject to FINRA’s own rules on advertising and communications (not the SEC’s rules for RIAs).
Nonetheless, the reality is that the SEC’s new marketing rule represents a dramatic shift in the regulatory environment for RIAs when it comes to marketing and a recognition that when the business of advice goes far beyond just investment returns, testimonials and endorsements – and more generally, the perspective from those who have actually paid for and used the adviser’s services – can be an effective way to communicate the value the adviser brings to the marketplace. Albeit with the kind of (very reasonable) disclosures and compliance oversight that would still be expected to ensure that the adviser’s marketing is still reasonable and not misleading about the financial advisor’s services!
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FAS-Ep-214-Olivia-Summerhill-02-150x150.png)
Welcome back to the 214th episode of the Financial Advisor Success Podcast!
My guest on today's podcast is Olivia Summerhill. Olivia is the founder of Summerhill Wealth, an independent RIA based near Seattle that exclusively works with women who want help adjusting to and maintaining their standard of living after a divorce. What's unique about Olivia, though, is the way she's focused her practice on a particular segment of ultra-high-net-worth divorcees allowing her to set her fees at $20,000 for an engagement, and then commit to working with no more than five active clients at any particular time.
In this episode, we talk in-depth about how Olivia crafted a niche of working with divorcees, how she leverages the expertise of her CDFA designation to work with divorce mediators and collaborative divorce attorneys, the way Olivia developed her unique pricing model and found the confidence to charge $20,000 for her services, and the depth of hand-holding services she provides to her clients after they complete the divorce process. From helping them set up credit cards in their own name to helping them buy a house on their own for the very first time.
We also talk about how Olivia has been able to find and attract ultra-high-net-worth clients with upwards of $100 million in net worth. From the way Olivia has built networks of affiliated professionals who themselves are sought out by ultra-high-net-worth clients as a way to first connect with them. The philanthropic and other organizations that Olivia joins and gets involved with in order to meet the professionals that work with that type of clientele. And why it's so crucial to understand that professionals serving the most affluent clients aren't necessarily looking for reciprocal referrals, but instead are focused on their own role as gatekeepers for their clients who are trying to identify truly trustworthy professionals to work with.
And be certain to listen to the end, where Olivia shares her own path to taking the leap of entrepreneurialism that she never thought she'd take. The career coach who helped Olivia better identify her own natural talents and find her own confidence. Olivia's unique 'informational interviews' approach that she takes to everything from networking for new clients to finding the firms and professionals she wants to work with herself. And why Olivia decided that the best path forward was to keep her firm focused on this niche from its day-one launch.
So whether you’re interested in learning more about why Olivia decided to obtain her CDFA designation, how she builds her network of trusted professionals, or why she decided to provide a high-touch service at a premium fee for a limited number of clients, then we hope you enjoy this episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast.
![Advisory FinTech 300x300 Final](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Advisory-FinTech_300x300_Final-150x150.png)
Welcome to the February 2021 issue of the Latest News in Financial #AdvisorTech – where we look at the big news, announcements, and underlying trends and developments that are emerging in the world of technology solutions for financial advisors!
This month's edition kicks off with the big news that Walmart has partnered with Ribbit Capital (one of the FinTech VC firms that backed Robinhood) to begin creating its own FinTech solutions for Walmart customers and employees… which would instantly create one of the largest distribution platforms for a FinTech solution (as Walmart reaches nearly 40% of all Americans on a weekly basis!) and also a Financial Wellness platform (as the world’s largest private employer). Yet the reality is that, as the world’s largest superstore, Walmart is arguably well positioned to become a financial products superstore as well – taking a page from the playbook of Sears, the 20th-century retailer that expanded into financial services and, in the process, spawned Allstate Insurance and the Discover card – though that still doesn’t mean that Walmart will necessarily want to enter the far-more-challenging-to-scale services business of financial advice itself.
From there, the latest highlights also feature a number of other interesting advisor technology announcements, including:
- Former Vanguard CEO McNabb joins the Altruist advisory board, signaling that it’s not just RIAs themselves but also asset managers that would like to see a breakup of the current RIA custodial oligopoly
- Milemarker launches a new “Integration-as-a-Service” as AdvisorTech integration fatigue hits new depths even as cross-platform integration becomes more essential than ever
- DPL raises $26M of private equity capital to scale its new fee-based annuity platform for RIAs
- MaxMyInterest tries to expand the reach of its cash management solution for advisors not by integrating with their investment platform but via Redtail’s CRM instead
Read the analysis about these announcements in this month's column, and a discussion of more trends in advisor technology, including:
- Focus Financial launches its own cash management solution in partnership with Orion and competing with the RIA custodians its partner firms use
- National Guardian Life acquires Everplans as more insurers look to acquisitions as the means to facilitate their own digital transformations and overcome their Innovator’s Dilemma
- Chalice Network launches a new “Certified FinTech Advisor” designation for financial services enterprise executives trying to get up to speed in the world of Advisor FinTech
- Financial personality assessment tools are on the rise as client profiling goes beyond “just” risk tolerance to a wider range of client financial behaviors that advisors may be able to help (or, alternatively, want to screen for!)
And be certain to read to the end, where we have provided an update to our popular “Financial AdvisorTech Solutions Map” as well!
*And for #AdvisorTech companies who want to submit their tech announcements for consideration in future issues, please submit to [email protected]!
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Episode-52_Featured-150x150.png)
Over the past several years, the technological capability for financial advisors to implement dynamic, interactive websites has evolved dramatically. Gone are the days of needing to publish static brochure-style webpages with images of lighthouses, compasses, and winding roads, and instead, advisors are able to publish robust portals that allow them to share content that demonstrates their expertise, provide information about the advisor(s) and their team, communicate directly with those they hope to serve, share the details of their pricing and the value they provide, and (if everything goes to plan) have visitors become a lead or even outright book an appointment. Yet the end result is that the advisor’s website becomes a sort of Swiss Army knife… chock full of little tools that can do a lot but don’t necessarily work nearly as well as a tool with a singular purpose. Which, in turn, raises the question: Are advisors asking their websites to do too much?
In this our 52nd episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss the one important thing that all advisor websites should do, ways to create awareness and become relevant to a specific audience over time, and why some advisors have unrealistic expectations from their website.
At its core, the key to marketing success as a financial advisor is learning how to solve the specific problems of a specific group of people better than anyone else (rather than trying to be ‘everything to everyone’, and in the process, not actually being especially relevant to anyone). Because having a clear focus on a clear target market niche clientele allows the advisor to differentiate themselves in a crowded and competitive marketplace, by being able to clearly stand out to the clients they are best able to serve. Which also means moving away from having a website that tries to be everything to every visitor, and instead simply gives a clear statement about who they serve… and an obvious next step for those prospects to actually move forward with the advisor.
Which, in almost every instance, isn’t going to be a newly minted client deciding to hand over their life savings. Because, outside of referrals who are doing their last bit of due diligence before reaching out, most visitors to a website simply aren’t ready to do business with an advisor upon their first visit.
Instead, by simplifying a website’s design and ‘just’ having a well-defined audience and clear next step, advisors can build a targeted mailing list that they can use to share out relevant and actionable content, so that when someone who’s been on that list realizes they have a problem that needs solving, they will remember that the advisor who serves ‘people just like them’. In other words, an advisor's website should have one purpose, and that’s to gain permission to communicate with a visitor again. And use those subsequent communications to build the trust relationship necessary to actually do business with them whenever they are ready.
Ultimately, the key takeaway is that advisors should shift their mindset around what their websites are meant to do, and recognize that it’s extremely rare that a first-time visitor has arrived ready to do business. And that, unless it’s clear who the advisor serves and what the next step is, the odds are that all those first-time visitors will also be last-time visitors as well (even if they are exactly who the advisor serves in the first place) unless there’s a simple way (and a reason) for them to give their permission (by sharing their email address) to hear from the advisor again. While advisors who can find a way to stay in front of people in the future after they come across the advisor’s website once have at least a fighting chance of being top of mind when that one-time visitor eventually needs to actually hire a financial advisor!
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Jan-20-2021-Featured-150x150.png)
Dave Ramsey has hosted the popular “Dave Ramsey Show” radio program since 1992 and founded Financial Peace University in 1994. Since then, he has helped millions of people with personal money management issues and has authored several best-selling books. Despite his popularity, though, many financial advisors have criticized the investment and debt management advice Ramsey frequently gives his listeners and readers. And while some of the advice that Dave Ramsey has given (e.g., assuming a 12% stock return, endorsing the debt snowball method of reducing overall debt, and encouraging 8% retirement distributions) may not result in optimal outcomes from a strictly technical perspective, the reality is that Ramsey’s advice has effectively helped millions of individuals and families reduce their debt, manage their money responsibly, and get on track to establish good financial habits.
For instance, while most advisors would agree that Dave Ramsey’s 12% return assumption for stock market investors is an alarmingly high return assumption, the reality is that using a high return assumption helps clarify the power of compound interest and the magnitude of potential wealth that can accumulate when new investors start saving early. In other words, the more compounding you see yourself missing out on, the more “FOMO” (Fear Of Missing Out) motivation it can inspire… which in practice, has been an effective motivator for many of Ramsey’s followers to start developing good savings habits!
Similarly, Ramsey’s advice to use the ‘debt snowball’ method – which advocates paying down one’s smallest debts first (in contrast to debts with the highest interest rates) as a means to tackle personal debt – is also under frequent attack. Yet while there’s no question that mathematically, paying off loans with the highest interest rates first is the most financially efficient method of debt reduction, borrowers who feel overwhelmed by debt are often more motivated to stick to a debt paydown plan when they experience the small psychological victories of eradicating their debt one at a time. Which means the most psychologically motivating approach really is to tackle the smallest debt first – actually pay it down successfully – changing one’s self-image to someone who can successfully tackle the rest of their (higher-interest) debt, too.
And many financial advisors, especially those who observe Bill Bengen’s 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate rule as the established norm, have also criticized Dave Ramsey’s 8% retirement distributions as dangerously high. However, while an 8% withdrawal rate is high, it is not necessarily as catastrophic as most advisors would suggest, given both the reality that many retirees can and do adjust their spending later if it becomes necessary… and that in practice, most retirees reduce their spending in the later years, anyway. Furthermore, higher withdrawal rates can be rational when we account for a retiree being willing to take some risk of running out of money, particularly when they have some guaranteed income, like Social Security, to provide a spending floor. And in practice, particularly for the audience that Ramsey is trying to reach, which may include individuals who got into debt trouble or started saving at a later point in life, a 4% withdrawal rate necessitates so much in retirement savings that it may simply feel unachievable for many – which, again, could de-motivate them from retiring (or saving) at all – while an 8% withdrawal rate target may feel like the goal is more achievable… which, again, helps them to actually follow through and take positive steps that improve their financial situation!
Ultimately, the key point is that even though Dave Ramsey may draw a lot of criticism from financial advisors who analyze his recommendations from a mathematical and technical perspective, he is very effective in helping a large number of people to change their financial behavior for the better, particularly those who need to get started on a substantively different path than the problematic one they are currently on (and may feel stuck on). His ability to help people modify their behavior may not rely on optimal advice from a technical standpoint but, notably, being ‘right’ isn’t necessarily always the most important factor for motivating and encouraging people to take the first major step of change in the first place. And so from a behavioral change perspective, there is quite a bit of ingenuity within Dave Ramsey’s advice (and the systems he has created to deliver that advice) that advisors may want to reflect on when helping their own clients change their behavior for the better!
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/FAS-Ep-213-Dave-Yeske-02-150x150.png)
Welcome back to the 213th episode of the Financial Advisor Success Podcast!
My guest on today's podcast is Dave Yeske. Dave is the co-founder of Yeske Buie, an independent RIA based in San Francisco that oversees 740 million of assets under management for more than 300 affluent clients. What's unique about Dave, though, is the way he has blended together academic financial planning research with the practice of financial planning, culminating in a policy-based financial planning approach that frames financial planning, not in terms of the recommendations he makes for specific client situations, but the policies he set with clients to help them confidently handle any number of future scenarios that might arise.
In this episode, we talk in-depth about how Dave applies his policy-based financial planning approach at Yeske Buie, the monthly reports they generate for retired clients to help them see whether they're in their safe spending policy guidelines, the quarterly tax reports they create to coordinate with their clients' outside accountants. The Money Quotient questionnaires they use on an annual basis to be certain that they're covering all the bases with their clients, and how using a policy-based approach to financial planning can help reduce client stress during turbulent markets.
We also talked about how Yeske Buie structures its own approach to financial planning with clients, why the firm has chosen to take a team-based approach for all clients it serves, the reason Yeske Buie chooses to charge a single consolidated assets under management fee despite the fact that in Dave's own words, 75% of what they do for clients is around the financial planning and not the investment management.
And why after hearing of the impending death of the AUM model for nearly his entire 30-year career, Dave now thinks it's more important to be nimble and adapt to changes in financial planning services and business models over time, rather than just trying to predict what the future may hold. And be certain to listen to the end, where Dave shares why he has such a passion for academic research despite being a self-admitted late bloomer in his own journey through college.
The reason that Dave got so involved in the Financial Planning Association and how volunteering back to the profession has advanced his own career, and how even financial planners who teach their clients about long-term compounding seem to under-appreciate the way that compounding works in our own advisory businesses, as Dave reflects on how painfully slow and difficult was for the first six years of his business, but how dramatically the growth began to accelerate in the years that followed and has continued ever since.
So whether you’re interested in learning more about why Dave pursued getting his doctorate while running his own firm, how he may have created the first-ever online client portal, or why he is trying to become 'dispensable' in his firm, then we hope you enjoy this episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast.
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Jan-25-2021-Social-150x150.png)
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Jan-25-2021-Social-150x150.png)
The financial advisor website has become the equivalent of a financial advisor’s digital storefront, a staple of attracting clients and growing the business. By investing resources into designing attractive website pages and writing relevant articles to include on their website, advisors aim to give clients a sense of the firm’s scope of services and breadth of knowledge. However, a digital storefront isn’t effective if no one ever walks by to see it in the first place… which in the internet era, means implementing a strategy to optimize how the advisor’s website can be found by search engines and the prospective clients who may be searching there for a financial advisor!
In this guest post, Taylor Schulte – founder of Define Financial, an independent RIA based in San Diego, CA – discusses two primary strategies that he has implemented to optimize the content on his own firm’s website to maximize its Search Engine Optimization (SEO). These tactics have helped improve his online visibility, grown organic search traffic by over 1,500% in three years, and, most notably for the business, generated an average of 15 high-net-worth leads per quarter, through his website, for his advisory business.
The first SEO strategy is to upgrade an advisory firm’s descriptive meta tags on its website, which serve to provide search engines with important information about how web pages should be displayed in search results (in the hopes of persuading more prospective clients to click through). Accordingly, it is important to conduct keyword research and select relevant keywords that identify unique features about the firm (e.g., who the advisors are, what they do, who their ideal clients are, and where they are located) that help increase the probability of the website being ranked highly as a search result for someone explicitly looking for what the firm has to offer. Fortunately, there are many SEO analytics tools and plugins (e.g., Ahrefs, Yoast, Google Analytics, and Ubersuggest) designed to help advisors easily conduct keyword research for their websites (as well as help advisors conduct regular website audits to maintain and improve SEO results, which should be an ongoing process).
The second advisor SEO strategy is to improve the internal and external links tying to the financial advisor’s website, effectively improving the quality and value of a website’s content (and its perceived credibility in the eyes of search engines). The two types of links to improve for SEO purposes are: 1) internal links that send a visitor to a new page on the same website (e.g., a link on a site’s home page that sends a visitor to the “Meet the Team” page), which help visitors easily find site features and relevant content; and 2) external links that send visitors to a new page outside the website (e.g., a link in a blog post on one website that sends a visitor to an unrelated vendor website that sells a product mentioned in the blog), which offer visitors a useful (and time-saving) resource to delve deeper into topics of interest (and make the advisor’s website seen as a valuable source of information). Fortunately, SEO plugin tools again typically have features to help advisors assess opportunities to add both internal and external links (and also to minimize the potential number of broken or orphan links on the website).
Another way for advisors to improve website SEO is to take steps to increase backlinks, which are links on other websites that point back to the advisor’s website. Three ways to increase backlinks include: 1) optimizing the firm’s or advisor’s profile pages on industry network or organization websites (e.g., industry-wide organizations that offer “Find An Advisor” services); 2) offering to write guest posts for websites or blogs that are read by the advisor’s target demographic; and 3) responding to media queries (and including your website link with the submissions) through organizations such as XY Planning Network, the Financial Planning Association, or Help A Reporter Out (HARO), where the reporter hopefully links back to the advisor’s website as part of the source attribution for the quote.
Ultimately, the key point is that there are simple steps that financial advisors can take to improve their website’s SEO. By conducting some basic research to select effective keywords for meta tags, optimizing and auditing their internal and external links on a regular basis, and connecting with other organizations and websites to increase backlinks, advisors can improve their website’s SEO results, making it easier for their ideal visitors to find their website, and potentially even to become new clients!
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Jan-20-2021-Featured-1-150x150.png)
![](https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Jan-20-2021-Featured-1-150x150.png)
For many financial advisors, helping affluent clients with charitable planning strategies is a common objective, particularly those who have more than enough to satisfy their own retirement and family goals and also wish to make substantial charitable contributions that will help others in need. Which in recent years has become even more flexible, as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act increased the percentage-of-AGI limit on cash contributions from 50% to 60%, and the CARES Act (as extended by the Coronavirus Stimulus Act) further increased the limit from 60% to 100%(!) of AGI, making it possible for the most charitable inclined clients to fully offset their income and reduce their tax bill to zero! Yet as it turns out, reducing one’s tax bill all the way to nothing actually produces tax savings at the lowest tax brackets… such that in the end, the new 100%-of-AGI charitable giving limit actually is not such a great deal after all!
Taxpayers who itemize deductions on their Federal income tax return can generally deduct contributions made to qualifying charitable organizations up to some percentage of their Adjusted Gross Income (AGI), traditionally ranging from 20% to 50% of AGI, and is dictated by such factors as the nature of the asset donated (e.g., cash gifts vs Capital Gain property) and the type of charitable organization receiving the gift (e.g., “50% Limit Organizations”, which include churches, educational institutions, hospitals, government entities, and public charities; and “Other Charitable Organizations” which include any charity not considered a 50% Limit Organization).
As a result, charitable contributions can be categorized into four primary groups: 1) cash contributions to 50% Limit Organizations, 2) cash contributions to Other Charitable Organizations, 3) Capital Gain property contributions to 50% Limit Organizations, and 4) Capital Gain property contributions to Other Charitable Organizations. And when contributions in a given year overlap between multiple categories, there is a specific order of operations to be employed, which first prioritizes cash over Capital Gain property contributions, and then 50% Limit Organizations over Other Charitable Organizations.
With the CARES Act of 2020, though, a new 100%-of-AGI limit on deductions for category 1 – certain “qualified” cash contributions to charities – was implemented (and extended through 2021 with the passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act) to provide some additional incentives for charitable giving in the face of the financial impact that COVID-19 has had on Americans. Which means that taxpayers can technically offset all of their taxable income with charitable contribution deductions, resulting in a tax bill of $0!
Still, though, the fact that one can take charitable contribution deductions up to 100% of their income doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good deal to actually do so. Because it is often simply be better for a taxpayer who normally finds themselves in a higher ordinary income tax bracket to go ahead and actually pay taxes on a portion of their gross income at lower tax rates (and not offset it with a charitable deduction), thereby preserving their charitable giving (or at least their charitable deduction) for future years when their rates may be higher again. And by spreading charitable contributions out over multiple tax years (and leveraging the five-year carryforward allowances for unused charitable contribution deductions), they can effectively offset income in years when they would be subject to higher tax rates, thereby producing a greater total tax benefit.
Ultimately, the key point is that while the new CARES Act (now extended by the Coronavirus Stimulus legislation) makes it possible to claim Qualified Contribution deductions (with 100%-of-AGI limits) and zero out one’s tax bill, in practice it is rarely a good idea to do so. As while there is a small group of ultra-high-income individuals who can occasionally still benefit from using the increased deduction limits they provide, in most cases, high income donors are better served to stretch out or carry over a portion of their charitable giving (and charitable deductions) across multiple high income years instead. Though for financial advisors who have clients who won’t necessarily benefit from the provision, simply being able to explain why the better option would be not to take potential deductions as soon as possible can be a valuable service, in and of itself!