Ask an Ex-Banker: Should I open an IRA?

Planting_Money
This picture comes up when you type ‘ira investing sexy’ into Google Docs. Just FYI.

Dear Banker,

I’m ready to purchase IRAs for my husband and me. We had fun as young 20-somethings and didn’t start saving anything for retirement until our 30s, and even then, sometimes one of us was not always able to set aside money into the 401K/403b offered by employers. So, I figured an IRA would be a good option to help set aside additional funds for retirement. We already have life insurance squared away and are debt-free, apart from our mortgage, and have emergency funds set aside for miscellaneous emergencies (I’m a planner!). I’d rather be taxed now, so I know a Roth IRA would meet that requirement, but what else should I look for? I’m interested in opening the accounts with $2,000 each since I understand we won’t be held to a minimum monthly deposit towards the account that way.  

Thanks for any suggestions you might have!

Jessica in San Antonio, TX

Dear Jessica,

I’ll answer some of your questions quickly, and then go back and fill in the details to the same questions below.

Should you do it?

Yes

When should you do it?

Yesterday

Roth IRA vs. Traditional IRA?

Doesn’t matter

How much should I invest?

$2,000 each for you and your spouse is great.

For 2013 and 2014 the maximum amount per person is $5,500

What to invest in?

A low-cost, diversified, equities-only, mutual fund.

With whom should I open the account?

Well, since none of the fund companies are paying me through advertising, I’m reluctant to name…Ok, fine:  Vanguard.

Since you may want more details with each of these topics, I flesh out my answers below.

IRA_Not_Dead_Not_Poor
Sorta funny, sorta true

Should you do it?

Yes.

If you have any surplus money available for savings and investment – in your case, $4,000 this year – open your IRAs before doing almost any other savings or investment activity.

Because IRAs offer-tax advantaged investing, it’s virtually impossible to beat the returns in an IRA account when compared to any other investment account.

Why do I say that?  There are several reasons, all having to do with ‘after-tax’ calculations.

Tax advantages in the year you contribute to an IRA

If your income tax rate is, for example, 25%, then you need to earn $2,500 in order to have the equivalent of $2,000 available to invest in an account.

For non-IRA investing, right off the bat, $500 goes to the IRS, and $2,000 goes in your bank.

When you invest in a traditional IRA, however, the full contribution amount can be deducted from your taxable income.  The result – at a 25% tax rate – is that you have 25% more money to invest.

Another way of saying this is that you got a 25% ‘return’ on your after-tax investment just by putting money into a traditional IRA when compared to investing through a non-IRA account.

Does this matter in the long run? Yes!

Here are some calculations, using the magical powers of compound interest math, to illustrate the long-term difference in outcomes between IRA investing and non-IRA[1] investing.

  • Invest $2,500 in 2013 in an IRA for 30 years and earn 5% per year.  Result: $10,805.
  • Invest $2,000 in 2013 in a non-IRA for 30 years and earn 5% per year. Result $8,644.
Tax_advantaged_investing_grows_over_time
$500 tax advantage grows to $2,000 in 30 years at 5% return

That’s more than a $2,000 differential in the end, an amount higher than your initial contribution amount.  The greater the return assumption over the 30 years, the higher the final difference between IRA and non-IRA accounts.

If you invest this way, every year for 30 years, always choosing the $2,500 tax-advantaged IRA contribution rather than the $2,000 after-tax contribution, earning 5% per year on each contribution, you will have $174,402 rather than $139,522, a difference of $34,880.

Tax advantages of transactions inside your account

The tax advantages of IRAs do not stop there.

Or as the late-night television Ginsu Knife Advertisement would say: But Wait! There’s Much, Much, More!

Any time you sell a stock or mutual fund position in a traditional (non-IRA) investment account you must pay taxes that year on any appreciation (or gains) in the investment.  If you held the stock for less than a year you will owe your regular income tax rate of 25% on the money you made.

Ginsu_Knife_Now_How_much_would_you_pay
IRAs, like Ginsu knives: But Wait! There’s More!

Even if you held the stock for more than a year you would owe long-term capital gains, probably 15% in your case.  If you receive dividends or bond payments within your investment account, those will also be taxed at high rates such as 25%.  Giving back 15-25% of your investment gains when the stock went up is incredibly destructive to your future wealth-building plan.

 

For this reason, actively buying and selling stocks in a traditional investment account makes about as much financial sense as stabbing your money with a Ginsu Knife.[2]

If you sell a stock or mutual fund within your IRA, by contrast, you owe no taxes on the gains.  This, as the financially-savvy Seattle-based poet Macklemore would say, is f-ing awesome.

If you plan to sell any investments in your account over the next 30 years, you will do yourself a huge favor if those investments remain shielded from taxation within an IRA.

Macklemore_thrift_shop
This poet knows thrift like Bo knows baseball

Tax advantages of retirement income from the Roth IRA

I see from your question, Jessica, that you’re oriented toward a Roth IRA rather than a traditional IRA.  If you open up a Roth instead of a traditional IRA – and I don’t blame you if you do – you do not reap the income tax benefits in the year you invested.  You would instead enjoy tax-free income in your retirement years when you take the money out, which is also quite awesome.

roth_ira_money
Roth IRA or Traditional IRA? Both are great!

The most important financial comparison is not between a traditional IRA and a Roth IRA, but rather between a non-IRA and an IRA account

In your retirement years, when you sell your investments for income, a Roth IRA is more valuable than a non-IRA account because of the difference in after-tax income.

If you have a 25% income tax bracket in your retirement years, for example, your $10,000 in Roth IRA income is the equivalent of $12,500 in non-IRA income.

Ok, time to move on to the next answer to your questions.

When should you do it?

Yesterday.

I answer “yesterday” in a nod to the old investing saw “When is the best time to invest?” for which the correct answer is always “thirty years ago.”

The most important factor for racking up impressive investment returns is the passage of time.  Due, as always, to the magic of compound interest.

The good news, however, is that if you open your IRA now, in your 40s, you actually can take advantage of the next thirty years.  By the time you and your husband retire and need to live off your investments, you will have invested “thirty years ago.”  You will enjoy Madame President Cyrus’ administration in 2043 that much more if you feel wealthy.

Madame_President_Cyrus_in_2043
Madame President Cyrus in 2043, when your IRA has grown for thirty years

So go for it.  Today.

Roth IRA vs. Traditional IRA

Doesn’t matter.

Much digital ink has been spilled parsing the advantages of one vs. the other.  But do we really have to argue?

Beatles vs. Rolling Stones.[3]

Brady vs. Manning.[4]

Kristen Bell vs. Jennifer Lawrence.[5]

These are all awesome choices.

Kristen_Bell_Jennifer_Lawrence
Kristen Bell or Jennifer Lawrence? Do not make me choose

Both the Traditional IRA and Roth IRA beat any non-IRA option available.

Confidently choosing one over the other would require you to compare today’s income tax rates to future income tax rates in your retirement, something you can guess at, but with no certainty.

Roth IRAs boast a clever feature that allows you to pass on wealth to young heirs which I wrote about before, but income eligibility limits make taking advantage of the Roth IRA harder than a traditional IRA.[6]

How much should I invest?

Your planned $2,000 each for you and your husband is great to start.  The more the merrier.

Again, a $5,500 upper limit for you if you’re under age 50.  A $6,500 upper limit if you’re aged 50 or older.

The income limits for IRA contributions are maddeningly complex for such a simple investment vehicle, a point which I tried to make last year (probably unsuccessfully) through this purposefully confusing infographic.  For your purposes, however, the $2,000 is a great place to start, and I agree you’ll avoid charges from most investment companies with a $2,000 minimum.

A quick aside on the subject of minimum investments: 

I taught a personal finance course to college students last Spring, and one of my mandatory assignments for these 18-22 year olds was to open their own IRA.  I figured that even if they only had $100, and even if that $100 went into the wrong product, the practical and pedagogical benefit of opening the account and researching the account would more than make up for the inefficiency, cost, and their lack of any actual income that required tax-deferral.  My theory was perfectly sound.  Just ask me.

In practice, the assignment really pissed them off.  They didn’t have $100 extra (so they claimed), and they quickly discovered very limited options for their minimal investment amounts (a bank CD for example), and fees on top of that, if their balance remained below something like $1,000 or $2,000.  I endured a few weeks of complaints and hissing with steely resolve until my co-teacher intervened and made the assignment optional.  Probably saved my tires from being slashed.

The lesson: I’m a real pain in the ass as a teacher.

Also, IRAs don’t make sense for less than an initial $1,000 to $2,000.

 

What to invest in?

Jessica, I want to make your life easy.  Trust me on this next one.

An entire Trillion dollar industry – known around these parts as the Financial Infotainment Industrial Complex – would like you to pay extraordinary, mostly obscured, fees for a very ordinary financial service.

The industry would also like you to believe that an entire universe of options must be sifted through, parsed professionally, opined upon, and cleverly navigated.  You don’t have time for that.  You don’t need that.

What you want with your 30-year time horizon until retirement is the chance to receive the returns of broad equity markets.  Not beat the market, just get the market returns.

So, your goal is:

1. Pay minimal fees

2. Earn the market return

3. With a 30-year horizon, you need 100% equities.  You cannot afford the low returns of anything less risky.[7]

The words you need to know are: “a low-cost (probably indexed) mutual fund covering a broad sector of either US or global equities”[8]

Keep asking for that, and only that, until you get it.

Choose_Index_fund_every_time
One illustration of index versus managed funds

With whom should I open the account?

Vanguard doesn’t pay me to say this (which sucks for me)[9] but they pioneered this type of investing decades ago, and so they deserve credit for doing the right thing, early on.  My own retirement account is with them.

At this point, dozens of other mutual fund companies offer a similarly awesome “low-cost (probably indexed) mutual fund covering a broad sector of either US or global equities.”

If you or a friend or family member already has an account or a relationship with any of these other fine companies, by all means open up an account with that other company.  I believe in signing up for the fewest number of service providers.

But do not let them talk you into anything more complex (read: expensive and unnecessary) than what I described in quotes above.

Jessica, I hope that helps, and congrats on getting going with your IRAs.

 

Please see related posts on the IRA:

The Humble IRA

IRAs don’t matter to high income people

A rebuttal: The curious case of Mitt Romney

The magical Roth IRA and inter-generational wealth transfer

The 2012 IRA Contribution Infographic

The DIY Movement and the IRA

Angel Investing and the IRA

 

 



[1] By “Non-IRA” I just mean any old investment account that you might buy stocks in.  A regular taxable account.  Something not tax-advantaged like an IRA or 401K plan.

[2] After which, of course, the knife will remain sharp and cut easily through a ripe tomato.

[3] Beatles.

[4] Brady.  Duh.

[5] Don’t make me choose, I don’t want to break either of their gentle hearts.

[6] Incidentally – and not relevant to your original question – if I had plenty of disposable wealth and income and a large traditional IRA, I’d probably convert it to a Roth IRA.

[7] As best explained in this book Simple Wealth, Inevitable Wealth by Nick Murray,

[8] Global is better than US, for a variety of theoretical reasons simply explained in this book I recently reviewed, but investing in a broadly diversified US equity index is also not ‘wrong’ for your purposes.

[9] Hey Vanguard? Throw me a freakin’ bone here!

Post read (8445) times.

Book Review: 25 Myths You’ve Got To Avoid If You Want To Manage Your Money Right, by Jonathan Clements

When I started Bankers Anonymous, I decided I would not spend any time on “How to Invest” books, because I believed the whole genre unworthy of serious consideration.  Instead, I would consider “How Not to Invest” books as decidedly more fruitful variations on a theme, warning readers about pitfalls and snake oil pitches in the books-on-investing world.

Since then, I’ve edged closer to reviewing on this site what most people would consider “How to Invest” books.

Jonathan Clements’ 25 Myths You’ve Got To Avoid If You Want To Manage Your Money Right barely qualifies under my original restrictive criteria for books I can review.  But because he engages in a contrarian-style debunking of conventional investment wisdom – which I like – I’m going to offer him, and me, amnesty from my original rule.

What fun are personal blogging rules if you don’t break them, anyway?

Clements wrote the “Getting Started” personal finance column for the Wall Street Journal for many years, honing his writing chops for years on these topics.  Clements published 25 Myths in 1998, just 3 years after Nancy Dunnan’s laughably anachronistic Your First Financial Steps, but by contrast his advice retains its freshness well past the ‘sell by’ date.

Each chapter tackles a conventional wisdom myth of personal investing with a mini-section titled “Where We Go Wrong,” followed by another mini-section titled “The New Rules.”

While admittedly some of these myths are really straw men – few people who’ve ever thought about the topic actually embrace the old myth being debunked – Clements’ method for teaching on the topic works well.  Myth, Mistake, New Rule.  Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

In sum, I recommend this book.

In the spirit of providing value-added services for Bankers Anonymous readers – value-added or your money back! – and because these are all thoughts worth thinking, I provide Cliffs Notes for Clements’ book.

Myth #1 – You can have it all

Reality – Few of us mortals can simultaneously pay off debt, save for an emergency fund, purchase a home, maximize retirement accounts, never carry a credit card balance, pay for college, and still have something left over beyond rice and beans every day.  At least in the short run, you have to prioritize and make hard choices.  Fair enough.

Myth #2 – Get a good job and you’ll be set for life

Reality – Nobody has job security anymore, pensions are few and far between, and few people spend all their working years with the same employer, or even in the same industry.  This seems even truer today than it was when this book came out in 1998.

Myth #2 – Stocks are Risky

Reality – In the long run, not really.  In the long run, bonds and money markets are risky because after taxes and inflation, they offer no real return.  This is among Clements’ most controversial statements, and I couldn’t agree more, despite the fact that he published his book before both the tech crash of 2000 and the credit crunch of 2008.  In fact, myth #3 is where I decided this was a book worth reading, as it agrees on this point and others quite closely with one of my absolute faves, Simple Wealth, Inevitable Wealth.

Myth #4 – You can’t go wrong with IBM

Reality – This myth is short-hand for the idea that any one company’s stock offers immunity from investing disaster and, despite the headline, Clements really focuses on Microsoft as the heralded ‘blue-chip’ of the 1998 time-period.  In reality, any single company can go horribly wrong, and most individual investors would do better to focus on sector-investing in the equity markets, rather than stock-picking.

Myth #5 – You can beat the market

Reality – We are all the market, so ‘beating’ the market is both mathematically implausible for the majority of us, as well as empirically rare, and a red-herring of an investment goal.  For me, this myth ranks as the biggest lie perpetrated on us by the Financial Infotainment Industrial Complex.  The goal should not be to ‘beat’ the market, but rather to be exposed to the market, to achieve market returns.

Myth #6 – Your investment will make 10 percent a year

Reality – Here’s a bit of an anachronism from 25 Myths since few people in 2013 expect 10% returns from the stock market on a consistent basis.  If Clements wrote this book in 2013 he’d have to make the myth: “Your investment will make 5 percent a year” just to make it a plausible straw man.  On the other hand, memories are short, and we’ll have to forgive investors entering the field after 2009 for outlandish expectations.  Don’t look now, but the damn market just more than doubled in the last four years.  Pretty soon folks will think that’s the new normal.  Double my money in just 4 years!  Sweet!

Myth #7 – You can’t go wrong with mutual funds

Reality – Sector mutual funds can be terribly undiversified, expenses can be outrageously high, some investment managers still sell “load” funds, and minimum investment sizes can keep people out of the market, to name just a few flaws of mutual funds, broadly understood.

Myth #8 – You can find the next Magellen

Reality – Again, an anachronism.  People under 40 don’t think of Peter Lynch’s fund –The first $billion mutual fund and easily the most famous mutual fund of the 1980s – when they think of investment rock-stars.  Legg Mason’s Bill Miller overtook that crown in the 2000s, and hedge fund managers largely replaced mutual fund managers as the sexy geniuses touted by the Financial Infotainment Industrial Complex.  Soros, Robertson, Jones in the 1980s and 90s, Tepper, Ackman, Loeb, Cohen, Einhorn, Eisman, Paulsen in the 2000 and 2010s.  The point, however, is that few of us can realistically pick those winners before they were rock stars.  Once they are rock stars, you’re either purchasing lagging returns (an error!), or you can’t actually get into the fund (quel domage!)

Myth #9 – Index funds are guaranteed mediocrity

Reality –Index funds outperform most actively managed funds over the medium to long run, mostly due to the latter’s higher fees and higher portfolio churn.

Myth #10 – Nothing’s safer than money in the bank

Reality – Clements recommends money market funds, with check-writing capabilities, as a higher-yielding opportunity than savings in a bank.  At this point in the interest-rate cycle (zero return either way!), and with the unfortunate experience of money market funds ‘breaking the buck’ in 2008 without a government bailout, I’m less inclined than Clements to point out the advantages of money market funds over money in a bank.  But, whatever.

Myth #11 – If you need income, buy bonds

Reality – To quote Clements: “Investors love bonds.  It’s what you would call a sado-masochistic relationship.  Bonds suck investors in with their fat yields, then bludgeon them with inflation, taxes, defaults, early redemptions and more.  Yet folks keep coming back for more…What do I think?  I think bonds stink.”  The irony here is that I wholly agree with Clements despite two important situational facts: 1. I am a bond guy by training and fixed-income oriented in my investment outlook 2. At the time he published his book, bonds easily offered 6.5% US government-guaranteed yield, which any total-return-oriented equity investor would probably kill for today.

Myth #12 – Hedge your bet with hard assets

Reality – Clements points out that hard assets like real estate, precious metals, art, and collectibles should only reasonably return the rate of inflation over the medium and long run.  Despite my arguing in favor of home ownership as a particularly advantageous hard asset investment, I agree with his expectations-setting of price appreciation when it comes to hard assets.

Myth #13 – You should own a balanced portfolio

Reality – In this context, Clements means ‘balanced’ as a 60/40 split between stocks and bonds.  Clements points out, rightly, that many individuals would benefit from a more equity-oriented mix, and the specific 60/40 traditional blend doesn’t work for everyone.  Fair enough.  Although to pick a fight with him and myself at the same time: While 60/40 may not be the answer to everybody’s needs, there are also much worse ways to allocate your investments.   Any individual investor should probably deviate meaningfully from 60/40, but if you were to mandate an allocation that everybody has to follow, 60/40 isn’t a terrible place to start.  It’s not right for me, for example, but it wouldn’t completely screw me up either, as much as other potential allocations might.  To pick another fight, only with Clements this time, he’s overly proscriptive and enamored with zero coupon bonds for investors.  I get where he’s coming from, but I certainly wouldn’t send any individual out to buy zero coupon bonds today.

Myth #14 – You need a broker

Reality – Discount/low-service/online brokerages may be just fine for the do-it-yourself generation, even more true now than it was when 25 Myths first came out.  Clements wisely points out, and I concur, that a good investment advisor offers timely hand-holding when the shit inevitably hits the fan in your stock portfolio.  Their value-added is to get you to do nothing, because you made a reasonable plan, and now you need to be tied to the mast, and not allowed to sell out your equities at the bottom.  That is the true value of an investment advisor.

Myth #15 – Keep six months of emergency money

Reality – Few people can do this, and credit cards, home equity lines, or even non-retirement equity accounts may serve this purpose for many people and under many conditions.

Myth #16 – Debt is dangerous

Reality – Of course it is dangerous.  But it may be better than the alternative of not using debt, such as never owning a car, never going to college, always renting your home, or keeping too much cash earning zero return.  He points out the advantages available in stock margin accounts (too scary for me!) and home equity lines of credit, which I highly endorse under certain scenarios.

Myth #17 – Buy the biggest house possible

Reality – You can lose a lot of money buying a home as everyone re-learned, again, in 2008, because investing in housing is quite risky.  Clements supplements this chapter with wise thoughts on housing as an inflation-hedge and as a form of forced savings, which influenced my post on the advantages of housing as an investment.

Myth #18 – You can’t beat the mortgage tax deduction

Reality – Clements argues correctly that having a large mortgage ‘for the deduction’ is not clever but asinine.  You end up spending $1 to save 15 cents.  “Spend to save” is such a large part of our advertising and consumption culture that I’m not surprised the Financial Infotainment Industrial Complex has convinced so many of us of this ‘wisdom,’ but still.

Myth #19 – Invest in your house

Reality – Houses can be huge money pits, in which we convince ourselves that spending money on the structure for consumption purposes may be mistakenly considered an ‘investment.’  As Clements points out, the home improvement industry brags:

you might recoup 95% of the cost of a minor kitchen remodeling, 91% of a bathroom addition, 83% of a family room addition, 77% of a bathroom remodeling, and 72% from adding on a deck.

Using those numbers, in investment terms, you lose between 5% and 18% on the ‘investment,’ which makes it a terrible investment indeed.  It’s fine as an act of consumption, of course, but a loser as an investment.  The lesson: You’ve got to separate the consumption and investment functions when spending money on your house.

Myth #20 – Trade up as soon as you can

Reality – Trading up in terms of house size or price ‘as soon as you can’ can cost you somewhere between a lot to everything, as anyone with a  pulse, watching the 2008 credit crunch, realizes.

Myth #21 – Protect against every disaster

Reality – Clements and I sing from the same hymnal here, in that many people purchase more insurance than needed.  If it ain’t risk transfer, it ain’t insurance worth buying. (Apparently our mutual hymnal speaks in a terribly uneducated manner.)  In addition, some insurance is optional at best, useless and expensive at worst.

Myth #22 – Life Insurance is a good investment

Reality – I could kiss Clements.  It’s like his chapter lines up perfectly with my previous blog postings on life insurance as a useful risk transfer but a terrible investment.  Honestly, I wrote these things before reading his book.

Myth #23 – Invest in your kids’ name

Reality – Apparently this must have happened back in the 80s and 90s as a tax dodge.  I never hear about anyone doing this nowadays.  Maybe the parents I know are just poorer than the New York City-based parents Clements interacted with.  Or maybe parents today learned too much from the 1980s, and Studio 54, and how a lifetime of parental investments can be snorted through your child’s nose.  Anyway, in case you’re tempted, Clements doesn’t recommend this.

Myth #24 – Max out your IRA every year

Reality – Clements wants you to know that retirement-account funds are semi-permanently locked up, they change the eventual taxable nature of your retirement income to capital gains, you might have tax hassles, and you still pay taxes upon death.  I suppose he’s right, but for most of us it’s still a worthy aspiration to max out our IRA.  It’s unlikely, but you might miss out on a Mitt Romney type situation if you don’t max out your IRA – especially a self-directed IRA – and Roth IRAs have special powers on which Clements does not elaborate.  So I mostly disagree with Clements on this ‘myth.’  Let’s move on.

Myth #25 – One day, kids, all of this will be yours

Reality – Estate planning takes a lot of work, and it is available to folks who invest a lot of time and some money in the project.  He urges careful organizing, talking as openly as possible with heirs, and remaining alert to the opportunities for giving tax-free.  Fair enough.  I’m not there in my life yet to have done much thinking about this, beyond paying an attorney to prepare a simple will.

25 myths to avoid

If you made it this far, congratulations.  You don’t necessarily need to buy the book, but you could click through to it anyway and make a different purchase.  That way I can track your purchase and write a funny note about what Bankers Anonymous readers like to buy.  Would somebody please buy that Hutzler 571 Banana Slicer?

Please see related post: All Bankers Anonymous Book Reviews in one place.

Post read (14526) times.