Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Carrie Schwab Pomerantz :: Townhall.com Columnist
Retirement: Not So Simple Anymore
by Carrie Schwab Pomerantz
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Retirement. Today's economic turmoil has changed the equation for many who are either nearing retirement age or who have recently left the workforce. Millions of Americans are finding that their savings aren't adequate -- or that they miss the challenges and rewards of the workplace. Whatever the reason, the financial and psychological implications of that decision can be significant. Here are some things to think about as you decide if you are going to stay on the job or go back to work.

Good for Your Bottom Line

If you're still in the workforce but nearing retirement, think about working longer -- particularly if you enjoy your work. Or think about going after that new job you've always dreamed about -- the one that might pay less but be more rewarding. The personal benefits can be immense. It's important to feel needed and engaged, and that you're making a contribution. But working longer can also give a real boost to your financial health.

Obviously, working longer helps you build assets: You won't need to tap your retirement assets as early, which means you'll have more opportunities for your existing assets to grow. That might be especially important for folks around retirement age now with a lot of assets tied up in the stock market. And, of course, you can continue to put assets away for future use. As long as you're working, you can contribute to workplace retirement plans regardless of your age. (Note that although there is no age limit for contributing to a Roth IRA, you are no longer allowed to add to a traditional IRA starting in the year you turn 70 1/2.)

And that raises an interesting issue for people working in their 60s and beyond: Should you contribute to a tax-advantaged 401(k) or an IRA, or should you just invest in a traditional -- i.e., taxable-account? If your employer offers a plan with a match, definitely contribute enough to capture the maximum match. But beyond that, you'll need to think about your current and anticipated tax situation to decide how to proceed.

A Roth IRA or Roth 401(k) might be a good choice if you're eligible and expect to be in a higher income tax bracket when you take withdrawals or expect to leave the balance to your heirs (no tax break now, but qualified withdrawals are free from income tax). Otherwise, a tax-deductible traditional IRA or regular 401(k) is a great choice if you expect to be in a lower tax bracket when you start taking withdrawals. If you're not eligible for either a Roth or a tax-deductible traditional option, saving and investing in a regular taxable brokerage account could be a better choice than making a non-deductible IRA contribution. There's no upfront tax deduction, but you'll give yourself the ability to eventually withdraw funds (that you've held for over a year) at the long-term capital gains rate rather than your ordinary income rate.

Of course, tax law is subject to change! Under current law, taxes on long-term capital gains are considerably lower than taxes on ordinary income. But these rates are scheduled to expire after 2010. Also realize that you're required to begin taking minimum distributions from an IRA account once you turn 70 1/2, but there are no such requirements for taxable accounts (or, for the record, for Roth IRAs).

Given the myriad of choices, if you keep working, you'll want to do some comprehensive financial and tax planning to determine the optimal approach to your retirement savings. The main thing to keep in mind is that by postponing your retirement you are able to continue saving and investing.

Increasing Social Security Income

The other tremendous benefit to postponing retirement is that it allows you to increase or possibly maximize your Social Security benefits, which for many people represent a key component of retirement planning.

You can begin to take Social Security benefits as early as age 62, but your benefits will be higher if you wait at least until you reach what the Social Security Administration defines as your "full retirement age" (FRA; it's from 65 to 67, depending on the year you were born). Wait until you're 70, and you'll collect even more. Here's an example. Assume you were born in 1949 and your FRA is 66. Let's say that your monthly benefit at age 66 will be $2,100 (the actual figure would depend on how much you've worked and earned over the years, of course). If you took benefits early, at age 62, you'd get just $1,550/month, about a 25 percent reduction. And if you waited until age 70, you'd get $2,900/month, an increase of almost 40 percent over your FRA benefit (and almost double the 62-year-old figure)!

Of course postponing is more beneficial to those with a long life expectancy; if you're in ill health, you might be better off taking the earliest payment you can get. You can run some scenarios for yourself at www.ssa.gov (the Social Security Administration's website).

Here's another reason to postpone taking Social Security benefits: You'll get penalized for working until you've reached your full retirement age. In fact, your Social Security benefits will be reduced by $1 for every $2 you earn above $14,160 if you reach your FRA after 2009. If you reach your FRA in 2009, benefits will be reduced at a rate of $1 for every $3 in earnings above $37,680. However, if some of your retirement benefits are withheld because of your earnings, your benefits will be increased starting at your FRA to account for those months of reduced benefits (in other words, you'll be "paid back"). (Your benefits will also likely be taxed, at different levels depending on your income. Check with your tax planner or the Social Security Administration for more details.)

Save on Health Insurance

If you are 65 or older, and your new job offers health insurance, compare the cost and coverage to your Medicare coverage. It's possible to suspend Medicare while you have private insurance and then resume it later. Or you might decide that the Medicare coverage is a better value. Check with Medicare to see if your extra income bumps you to a higher premium. In fact, it's always smart to compare coverage based on your individual health and medication needs; coverage varies, and you might find a better deal for yourself.

Money Isn't Everything

It should be obvious that working longer -- or going to back work -- can be great for your financial health. But that's not the only reason to consider staying in or returning to the workforce. For many people, a job can be a great way to stay engaged and energized, especially if that work offers new challenges and new opportunities. (My dad is still going strong at 71, and I know his work keeps him energized. And my grandfather still goes to the office at age 95!) "Retirement" might just be a great chance to reinvent yourself -- while bolstering your savings at the same time.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Carrie Schwab Pomerantz is a Motley Fool contributor.

Be the first to read Carrie Schwab Pomerantz's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.


 
Popular Articles By Pomerantz

FeargalX PA Feb 18, 2009 - 10:22 PM EST

Interesting points, and well said.

You are very correct about the company retirement benefits changes and the tax incentives that were missing. Too bad about that. I would like to have had the companies continue the program, but in consideration of the multinational nature of business since 1990, and the effort for companies to reduce costs, I doubt that any company would want to continue retirement benefits under any circumstance. Such programs would just make the company non-competitive in the marketplace and cause it to lose customers.

I think Obama's efforts to reward the unions, an obsolete part of business, is a huge mistake. Unions will just make American companies even less competitive internationally, and cause us to lose additional revenues here at home.

We do have to lower our tax rate for businesses - the U.S. is number two in business tax rates in the world. As I mentioned above, why would anyone want to invest in America today?

Having acknowledged all of that, there are serious questions about how big an impact any president, including Bush, has on the economy. Blame is more often legitimately placed on Congress because Congress starts the budget process and creates the legislation.

If Bush made any mistakes regarding the economy, it was in forgetting his conservative roots and trying to cross the aisle to accommodate the Dems. Dems don't make very good partners with anybody.

Have a nice day.

what went wrong
In the past, even hundreds of years ago, many people who lived long enough received pensions. For example, my great-great grandfather received a civil war pension for his service for the union when he turned 60. It paid him (in today's money) about 1200 per month. Big businesses and governments all had pensions for employees in the past. That gave people some stable and predictable amount for retirement. About 20 years ago this began to unravel. 401K programs were never designed for retirement -- they helped wealthy avoid tax liability and helped put money in the market. Those are both legitimate goals -- but are bad for society if that is what retirees are using.

If the whims of the market control retirees -- indigent retirees many of whom cannot work -- will demand more taxes to stop poverty. So, we will become more socialistic.

Companies should have received tax benefits for pensions, but not for 401K. Then, we would not be in such a mess -- and people could plan their life. The fact is that is how America did things for the most part between 1950 and 1990 -- those who claim it is "socialist" are ignorant of history. They also will likely usher in a huge socialism as huge numbers of baby boomer idigent people will vote for people to give them monetary aid. Once again, Bush should get credit for that disaster.

To Highlander Juan-ME
I don't have *a dog in this fight* but it's very obvious to me that zapdoodoo is being overtaken by an overdue case of *Buyers" Remorse * and he's not likely to give up on blaming Bush or whoever anytime soon..But U can make him nervous!! HAVE A GOOD UN..

zapdoodat MA Feb 18, 2009 - 2:54 PM EST

Look, I'm not looking for a fight with you, and it seems rather futile for you to fight with me.

My comments are my opinions on what is happening and my opinions on what we, as Americans, can do about it.

Both parties are acting like royalty in a country that doesn't allow royalty. They like being considered royalty, and are not volunteering to change and give control back to the people.

So, forget the blame game and the B.S. about Bush and the Republicans doing this or that. It doesn't matter. It's over. We're where we are, regardless of who led us there.

It's us, the American voters, who let this happen, and it ain't gonna get fixed until we do something to change it - like throw the bums out.

So, my question for you is, do you want to work to fix this series of problems facing America, or are you just going to continue to sit on the sidelines and whine and complain about what the Republicans have done?

Highlander Juan
"reduce the size of our government by about one third."

How well did the Republicans accomplish your goal when the president was a Republican for the past eight years?

How well did that work out when the Speaker of the House was a Republican for 12 of the past 14 years?

In fact government grew less when Clinton was president, didn't it?

zapdoodat MA Feb 18, 2009 - 11:14 AM EST

Politics aside, I guess you didn't read my comments carefully enough, so I'll repeat:

On the economical side, the multinationals are heading offshore, so jobs are leaving at a rapid rate, due largely to our lousy educational system, the higher wages demanded by our unions, our high tax rates and government controls, the higher costs of materials, and the low return on investments. Actually, why would anyone want to invest in America right now?

It is my opinion that until we return to being a low tax country, reduce the size of our government by about one third, have our government return to being a lawful government, refocus on the future of the family and on our children's education, put sundown clauses on federal legislation, and generally get back to doing our business profitably, we're screwed. Big time.

Clearer now?

Obama's Deficit
"We all remember the regulations Bill Clinton imposed through executive orders in the last weeks of his administration that hurt the economy."

You are, yet, another simpleton and victim player. If Bill Clinton imposed those odious executive orders then how come George Bush didn't un-impose them on day one of his presidency?

Stop being a mouthpiece for the Republican party propaganda machine and be a 'real' conservative.

Obama's Deficit
"We all remember the regulations Bill Clinton imposed through executive orders in the last weeks of his administration that hurt the economy."

You are, yet, another simpleton and victim player. If Bill Clinton imposed those odious executive orders then how come George Bush didn't un-impose them on day one of his presidency?

Stop being a mouthpiece for the Republican party propaganda machine and be a 'real' conservative.

The Clinton Years

As all educated people know, the amount of greed and excess during the Clinton years that created the artificial bubble economy, really highlights the damage that Washington can do to the economy.

We all remember the regulations Bill Clinton imposed through executive orders in the last weeks of his administration that hurt the economy. These regulations were so damageing that he refused to impose them early in his Administration.

Highlander Juan
"and the new American socialists (basically the Dems) have no room in their thinking.."

Dude, if you cared about your stock market performance, then who would you want?

Stock market performance under Clinton and Bushed.

--------------DJIA-----NASDAQ----S&P500
1/20/93----3242--------697---------433

1/20/01--10,588-----2,770-------1,343

1/20/09----7,949-----1,441---------805


Folks, take a look at the Destruction of Wealth under George Bush's miscreant 'Reign of Error.'

DJIA performance under Clinton was positive 227%.
NASDAQ performance under Clinton was positive 297%.
S&P500 performance under Clinton was positive 210%.

DJIA performance under the 'Reign of Error' was negative 25%.
NASDAQ performance under the 'Reign of Error' was negative 48%.
S&P500 performance under the 'Reign of Error' was negative 40%.



Retirement
We won't have to worry about having enough money for retirement. Universal Health-un-Care will take care of that! And I won't have to worry about putting enough money aside for the care of my Special Needs son - he won't be seen as having a high quality of life potential. We are so close to the bottom of that "slippery slope" that began with Roe v Wade. People are just another Darwinian species of animal, and what man made, man can take away.

Money certainly isn't everything
I'll turn 60 in less than 3 weeks. In 5 weeks I'll be retired 3 years. I had planned to work until at least 60, possibly 62. What changed my mind?
The rat race. My employer reduced the number of employees and then required too much last minute involuntary overtime of the remaining work force. Sorry, but life was hard enough. I stay home, do all the house work (inside and out. I have a nice home cooked meal ready upon her arrival from a day of auditing and we relax ater the dishes are done. We now can read, pursue our hobbies, go for a hike or bike ride evenings and weekends. Before it was mowing the lawn until 15 minutes after dark in the summer, clearing the driveway at 5AM winters, and all the other chores a home owner neeeds to accomplish.
Though our income is lower, our taxes are also much lower. When one considers the things I can now accomplish that previously may have been done by hired help,such as home repairs and cutting firewood, I save additionally.
With the continuing drum beat of means-testing for social security, I now have an added reason to be happy I'm not working to have more of my hard earned money go to undeserving others.
We've worked hard, many years each balancing both full-time and with an additional part-time jobs, wisely spending for needs while saving for the future.
Glad I'm retired. Spending quality time with my wife, grandkids and mother. Enjoying life, especially the less taxing part.

retirement
Being a seasoned nurse,it's sad to say that golden age is not fit to do bedside nursing.Most patients are getting much heavier to handle and our backs are fragile for the tasks that we must to do.I really feeling lost in retirement plan in this days.You'd wrote like changing job is as easy as your stroke of the pen you have in your hand,out of reality! But thank you for trying to comfort us.

A couple of thoughts
It seems that today retirement is a chancy deal at best due to the fact that the country has stopped growing, we now have socialists in control of our government (and we older folks know how bad that is), our money invested is basically not as valuable as it used to be, and the future is pretty dim in America for investments.

On the economical side, the multinationals are heading offshore, so jobs are leaving at a rapid rate, due largely to our lousy educational system, the higher wages demanded by our unions, our high tax rates and government controls, the higher costs of materials, and the low return on investments. Actually, why would anyone want to invest in America right now?

It is my opinion that until we return to being a low tax country, reduce the size of our government by about one third, have our government return to being a lawful government, refocus on the future of the family and on our children's education, put sundown clauses on federal legislation, and generally get back to doing our business profitably, we're screwed. Big time.

So, where does that leave the retiree? Well this one is looking off shore where the cost of living is about one tenth the cost of living in the USA. I love my country, but I have to live also, and the new American socialists (basically the Dems) have no room in their thinking about self sufficient older folks - we're just throw-aways.

I'm really sad to see our country sold out to welfare recipients in the urban areas, and I really hope there is a non-violent revolution by the common sense laden rural Americans to re-take American government and help the country become great again.

Have a nice day folks. I wish you all well. Except for the socialists - I wish to export them back to the arm pits of Europe and Russia.

This Atlas has already shrugged.

Modern Jobs
Older people staying on in todays careers can sometimes be extremely valuable to the employer -- especially when he realizes that the people coming into the business may work cheaper but they are not even able to provide value for that cheap price. In my own career of legal secretary (now called some toffe-nosed name that makes the younger people feel important) the career now involves much of what used to be done by law clerks (paralegals) and by the lawyers themselves -- and the younger lawyers coming into the field are good at *texting* (only Girls type) but cannot spell, punctuate, paragraph or write a business letter. They frequently have no vocabulary outside the legal dictionary -- at least if the words are longer than four letters -- and think LOL is a word. It is the 50 and 60-something secretaries who save their backsides from embarrassment by handling the daily formalities of their businesses. The little girls coming in at the bottom of the pyramid are even less capable than they are. (Our office had to have a series of Personal Development sessions to teach them how to answer the telphone and take notes, how to speak to irritable and bossy people from foreign countries, and that yes indeed, taking lunch orders and helping clients make copies IS part of their jobs, which by the way are nothing at all like Law and Order or LA Law.) So I daresay that anyone who wants to stay on in my position until she is 100 years old will always have a job. And apres nous, le deluge!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.