By Steven Dudash, Contributor

Most have heard the saying, ‘Go big or go home.’ Well, events around the globe could soon have investors thinking, ‘Let’s go small instead.’

The first is trade. Without question, Donald Trump’s White House run was, in part, fueled by his fiery, campaign trail critiques of U.S. trade policy, which he claimed allowed other countries to profit at our expense and spurred the loss of millions of American jobs.

He pledged to change that, promising to renegotiate or scrap existing trade deals and to get tougher on China to swing the pendulum in the other direction. This posture has ramped up concerns that a trade war is in the offing – just as the domestic economy is showing signs of more strength – a prospect that could hamper an untold number of multinationals that depend heavily on unfettered access to foreign markets.

Ordinarily, it’d be easy to chalk up a presidential candidate’s rhetoric as politics as usual or, now that he is president, as a negotiating tactic to win better terms from trade partners. But if there’s one thing we have learned from Trump’s initial days in office, it’s that he’s going to make every effort to follow through on his campaign promises.

In the coming months, then, investors should, at the very least, expect rising tensions with major trade partners. Whether that means tariffs, no one knows for certain, but if that were to happen other countries would surely retaliate with punitive measures of their own, escalating hostilities even further and possibly sparking a full-blown trade war on multiple fronts.

That would put companies that import or produce goods abroad and then bring them back to the U.S. to sell especially at risk. Automakers, which have enjoyed blockbuster sales during the recent run of low-interest rates and cheap gas, are a prime example.

GM, Fiat Chrysler and Ford all import car parts from suppliers with factories in Mexico, while GM and Fiat Chrysler build a large percentage of their trucks – a significant driver of profit for both – there. If Trump were to slap a tariff on these goods, the added costs would get offloaded onto consumers and growth would decline.

The impact would be similar for many other large firms. Wal-Mart, for instance, already struggling to fend off Amazon, relies heavily on cheap manufactured goods produced in China. The same goes for Apple, which is dependent Chinese hardware manufacturers to achieve huge margins. Their prices would go up, and as a result Americans would buy fewer of their products, depressing growth.

Meanwhile, against this backdrop, investors also have to worry about the future viability of the European Union. Over the course of this year, there are a series of elections in Europe that are de facto referendums on whether the EU stays together – including in France, Germany and the Netherlands. Populist forces that favor withdrawal have gained momentum in all three countries.

While presently those forces are expected to fall a bit short, regional politics, as we have learned in the wake of Brexit and Trump’s victory, have become increasingly unpredictable. If another member of the eurozone goes the way of England – with trade wars involving the world’s largest economy simmering in the background – the ripple effects will reverberate around the globe.

And that’s why investors need to ‘go small.’ While large firms won’t go bust, many will have a much harder time achieving growth and producing returns if trade becomes more complicated and the EU begins to disintegrate.

On the other hand, small caps that are far less reliant on international trade or don’t have enough cache or name recognition to draw Trump’s ire will be somewhat more immune to these strains and would be poised to do much better. Think about real estate companies and firms that support infrastructure improvements that are all housed, taxed and provide jobs in America.

Given the fuller macro picture, investors should look to European small caps as well. Though the Dow has pushed through the 20,000-point barrier and markets continue to set new highs, the broader picture is more mixed, colored by full valuations, looming rate hikes and growth rates that lag historical averages.

Even without the added weight of trade-related pressures, it will be a tough slog, with domestic-focused portfolios, in our view, struggling to outpace 3-5% over the next few years. Gaining exposure to smaller European companies that can better fend off the challenges associated with an unraveling EU could help investors improve upon that.

Though it’s always been an unpredictable world, it seems like we have entered an unusually uncertain era, thanks to an uptick in the number of jolting geopolitical events around the globe. Investors should probably expect more of the same for the remainder of this year and adjust their portfolios accordingly.

Article originally published in Forbes:

IHT Wealth Management and US Wealth Management Announce Partnership and Strategic Transition Plan to Combine Firms

Phased Process to Position Combined Firm for Continued Growth through Enhanced Scale, Resources and Expertise


 

CHICAGO and BRAINTREE, Mass., Dec. 21, 2016 — IHT Wealth Management (or “IHT”), the Chicago-based super-OSJ focused on developing goals-based financial strategies for clients, and US Wealth Management, a network of experienced wealth managers providing holistic financial advice and wealth planning strategies, today announced that they have entered into a partnership and phased strategic plan to combine the two firms. The plan is expected to position the combined entity for continued growth and success by enabling it to offer advisors and their clients expanded resources, broader scale and an enhanced range of holistic financial planning capabilities, while providing a seamless succession roadmap for US Wealth Management Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Napolitano. The two firms currently manage approximately $2 billion in combined brokerage and advisory assets.

As the initial step in the transitional plan, the partnership between the two firms will enable them to benefit right away from the respective strengths and insights that each brings to the table. Effective immediately, IHT Founder and President Steven Dudash has joined the US Wealth Management leadership team as Executive Vice President, Recruiting and Strategic Development. In this role, Mr. Dudash will share best practices on advisor recruiting and practice acquisitions, and will focus on solutions tailored to help advisory firms build strong succession strategies. IHT expects to benefit from access to US Wealth Management’s extensive business development and practice management platform, along with subject matter expertise in financial planning, estate planning and tax matters, among other areas.

Over the course of the process, IHT Wealth Management will purchase the equity of US Wealth Management in stages, allowing both firms’ advisors and their clients to smoothly and seamlessly transition to the combined company structure. IHT currently has 28 advisors in its network, while the US Wealth Management network consists of 30 advisors. No other changes were announced regarding the management teams of the respective firms, their headquarters locations or other operational issues.

IHT Wealth Management Founder and President Steven Dudash said, “The next several years will be a time of profound change for independent financial advisors. Evolving client expectations, industry consolidation and regulatory shifts such as the Department of Labor’s new fiduciary rule – among other factors – are expected to converge to create a difficult environment for firms that lack a critical mass of resources or the broad capabilities to serve the full range of clients’ needs. By combining our scale and expertise in helping advisors achieve their business and succession goals, our combined firm will offer the resources, flexibility and management insight to meet the challenges that lie ahead for independent advisors and their clients.”

US Wealth Management Chairman and CEO John Napolitano said, “While our firms currently manage over $2 billion in client assets, we are very much aware that the key factor that will differentiate firms in the years ahead will not be assets, but the ability to provide customized, thoughtful and comprehensive advice to meet the full spectrum of clients’ needs. The partnership and transitional plan we have announced today is evidence that we practice what we preach. This combination puts a stake in the ground stating that the USWM / IHT partnership is poised to help advisors elevate the service they provide to clients, and to offer business development and succession strategies that work.”

Mr. Napolitano continued, “Looking further down the road, I could not have found a better successor to take the reins at US Wealth Management when the time comes than Steven Dudash. Steve is 20 years younger than I am, and has built a team that demonstrates a unique gift for understanding the specific needs of each advisor and developing solutions to help them thrive. The IHT W-2 model – sometimes referred to as a ‘wirehouse lite’ model – is very appealing to advisors looking for more of an employment situation with benefits, and who don’t want the aggravation of opening their own office in order to be completely independent. We intend to implement that model immediately in selected US Wealth Management locations. I am very excited for the future of our two combined firms.”

Mr. Dudash concluded, “I am honored to have entered into this partnership with US Wealth Management, and to be entrusted with a key role in the future of both of these exceptional firms. We are confident that the decades of management experience that John’s team brings, in addition to USWM’s robust resources, will enable us to offer the scale and broad combined capabilities that any firm needs to grow and prosper in this new age of wealth management.”

Financial terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

About IHT Wealth Management
IHT Wealth Management is an independent wealth management firm and Office of Supervisory Jurisdiction (OSJ) specializing in financial planning, legacy and retirement planning, investment management and insurance and risk management. The firm seeks to provide both advisors and investors with the freedom to pursue their goals, while always adhering to uncompromising standards of integrity, honesty and trust. For more information please visit www.ihtwealthmanagement.com.

About US Wealth Management
US Wealth Management is an independent network of experienced wealth managers who provide holistic advice and custom-tailored strategies to manage their clients’ financial future. With ten offices located nationwide, the wealth managers of the firm have a common focus – a personal interest in meeting all their clients’ investment, estate planning, and retirement needs as they change throughout their lifetime.

To see article at PRNewswire

 

Securities Offered through LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC. Investment advice offered through US Financial Advisors, a registered investment advisor. IHT Wealth Management, US Financial Advisors and US Wealth Management are separate entities from LPL Financial.

To view the original article click here:

By JANE BENNETT CLARK, Senior Editor  
From Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, January 2017

Most people don’t know even the basic rules of Social Security. That can lead to filer’s remorse—and thousands of forgone dollars.

Not long ago, I attended an all-day seminar on Social Security, my goal being to soak up as much as I could about a devilishly complicated system. By noon, my brain had started to feel numb; by late afternoon, facts were bouncing off it like rubber darts. Considering that I already had a working knowledge of Social Security, I wondered how anyone coming at it cold could possibly master all the details. 

Not very well, it turns out. A recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office concludes that most people don’t know even the basic rules of Social Security and the strategies available to them. Among the fuzzy areas: the importance of health and family longevity in the claiming decision; the availability of spousal and survivor benefits; and the impact of filing at different ages. (If you file as soon as you’re eligible, at 62, your benefit will be 25% less than if you file at full retirement age, which is now 66. For each year you delay filing after full retirement age until age 70, you get an 8% boost.)

That lack of knowledge can lead to filer’s remorse—and thousands of forgone dollars. A 2016 survey by the Nationwide Retirement Institute shows that of the women surveyed who are taking Social Security, almost 20% wish they had waited to file to get a bigger paycheck.

You’d think that a Social Security claims specialist would steer you in the right direction. In fact, claims specialists are neither trained nor authorized to give personal advice, and they have been found to provide inconsistent, misleading or inadequate information, according to the GAO report. Worse yet, sometimes their answers are flat-out wrong 

How to protect yourself. Your best protection against bad or missing information? Do your homework. Start with the Social Security website, which presents a basic overview of the system’s rules and claiming strategies. Also check out our Boomer’s Guide to Social Security ($10). For a deep dive, pick up Get What’s Yours: The Revised Secrets to Maxing Out Your Social Security, by Laurence Kotlikoff, Philip Moeller and Paul Solman ($20). This readable book presents a soup-to-nuts guide to the available options, including recent changes to the claiming rules.

You could also seek advice from a financial planner. Look for one with a solid grounding in Social Security, such as a certified financial planner (CFP), and ask what tools he or she uses to find your best filing strategy. “Professionals who are serious will use a commercial software program,” says Theodore Sarenski, a certified public accountant and CFP in Syracuse, N.Y.

Or consider subscribing to software such as Maximize My Social Security, starting at $40, or Social Security Solutions, starting at $20. These programs run scenarios based on your circumstances and show how different filing strategies affect the total payout over the same time frame.

our last hurdle is filling out the application, which can be tricky. If you’re applying online, use the Remarks box to specify the date you want the benefits to kick in—otherwise, Social Security might start the payments earlier, potentially reducing the amount you get or precluding certain filing strategies. Also make a note in the Remarks box if you are restricting your application to spousal benefits, for which there is no separate line.

You can avoid some of this confusion by filing in person, as long as you tell the claims processor “exactly what you want to do,” says Kotlikoff. If you get information you know is wrong, ask for a supervisor. Be sure to review the application before you leave and get a dated copy of it.

By Steven Dudash

November 22, 2016

Full Article 

As a wealth manager, more than a few things keep me up at night, including what the election of Donald Trump means for the markets, the country’s economy and how Brexit will ultimately unfold. Perhaps my biggest worry continues to be that investors – both on the retail and institutional side – have not adjusted their expectations in today’s interest-rate and equity market environment.

To illustrate, consider a meeting I had recently with a $250 million university endowment fund. Each year, it uses 5.25% of its assets to award scholarships and at the same time expects to keep pace with a long-term inflation projection of 2.5%. To meet these assumptions and keep the principal intact, basic math says the fund needs to generate returns of just under 8%.

Given that the next 30 years will not be anything like the last 30 years, when investors could rely on a 50/50 portfolio of stocks and bonds to produce that kind of return, that’s pretty implausible. This is not a fun message to deliver to a roomful of stern-face endowment board members. It’s equally unpleasant to have to look a retiree or pre-retiree in the eye and tell them that may be facing a future income shortfall. Nevertheless, it’s the truth. A big reason why can be found in two significant events that occurred over the course of the last three decades – the scale of which are not likely to repeat themselves anytime soon.

The first was the rise of the PC and the Internet during the 1980s and 1990s, which caused productivity to spike, breeding higher corporate profits and boosting stocks. But as technology has permeated more and more areas of the labor market, productivity growth has slowed in recent years, crimping earnings. While equities have hardly suffered, that’s a bit of mirage, having been propped up by an aggressive Federal Reserve.

The second has been the steady decline in bond rates. The U.S. ten-year bond yield hit an all-time high of nearly 16% in September 1981. Earlier this summer, it was 1.36%, and despite a rise in recent since the presidential election, yields are not expected to ramp up meaningfully in the coming years, thanks to interest rates that are all but guaranteed to remain below historical norms for an extended stretch.

Therefore, we now have a stock market that is fully valued and unlikely to repeat past performance (even if corporate tax rates decline under Mr. Trump), combined with a bond market that is depressed, and unlikely repeat past performance. So what should investors do?

Assuming that, unlike an endowment, you can’t adjust your income needs, think about upsizing your level of risk. A 50/50 portfolio simply won’t be enough anymore, period. So my advice, at least in the near term, would be to lower U.S. government bond exposure and look to European equities.

Granted, it will likely be a bumpy ride, riddled with stomach-churning ups and downs. But as the United States seems likely to begin gradually raising interest rates in the coming months, much of Europe is essentially in the middle of QE infinity, still injecting massive amounts of capital into their economies in an attempt to jumpstart lagging growth. Take advantage of this phenomenon.

Cynically, whether those efforts are successful isn’t the concern over the long haul. The more important point is that mainland Europe, for all its issues, is in many ways valued much more favorably than the U.S. market, and there as some opportunities to go bargain hunting. PE ratios aside, Euro markets are likely to appreciate, if for no other reason than the governments are willing to mortgage their futures to make that happen.

Skeptics will point to looming concerns over Brexit. But England was never fully integrated with the rest of Europe in the first place, and as we have seen in the wake of that vote earlier this year, the divorce may not be the nightmare many predicted. What’s almost certain, though, is that the rest of the European Union will remain intact.

The bottom line is that investors need to be realistic about what the next 30 years may hold. This is a case where the past is unlikely to repeat itself, which means you may need to change your outlook and be willing to venture into areas that may not be so popular in the present but offer the opportunity to achieve larger upside potential.

 

 

 

 

To view the original article click here:

By Jane Bennett Clark,

You wouldn’t dream of running a marathon without undergoing months of training. Or heading into the wilderness without making sure you have adequate provisions. Or betting your life savings on a business venture you haven’t thoroughly researched.

But when it comes to entering retirement—when a failure to plan can have devastating consequences—a surprising number of people are unprepared. More than half of workers older than 55 haven’t developed a plan for paying themselves in retirement, according to a recent study by Ameriprise, and almost two-thirds haven’t identified which investments they’ll tap first. Many wait until they’ve set their retirement date to put together any kind of plan at all.

Planning late is better than never planning, but your chances of a secure retirement will improve if you start making decisions and checking items off your to-do list at least a year out. Take a look at seven big issues you’ll face as you transition into retirement.

Sign Up for Medicare

Thinkstock

You can’t ignore signing up for Medicare. You’re eligible at age 65, and you can sign up without penalty anytime from three months before until three months after the month of your 65th birthday. Medicare Part A covers hospitalization and is premium-free, so there’s generally no reason not to sign up as soon as you’re eligible. One exception: You can’t contribute to a health savings account if you enroll in Medicare. If you have an HSA and want to keep fueling it, don’t sign up for Medicare until you retire. (To enroll, go to www.ssa.gov.)

Part B covers outpatient care, including doctors’ visits. It costs $121.80 a month for singles with an adjusted gross income (plus tax-exempt interest) of $85,000 or less ($170,000 for couples) who sign up in 2016. Above those income levels, you’ll have to pay $170.50 to $389.80 per month. You’ll also have to pay a surcharge of $12.70 to $72.90 a month on top of the premium for Part D prescription drug coverage.

If you don’t sign up for Part B during the seven-month window around turning 65, and you do not have coverage through your current employer, you may have to pay at least a 10% penalty on premiums permanently when you do sign up. If you work for a company with fewer than 20 employees, your group coverage generally becomes secondary to Medicare at age 65, so you should sign up for both Part A and Part B—otherwise, you may not be covered at all.

Employees of larger companies can choose to keep group coverage while still working and hold off on signing up for Part B. But you must sign up for this coverage within eight months of leaving your job or, once you do enroll, you’ll pay at least a 10% penalty on premiums for the rest of your life.

Make a Retirement Budget

Thinkstock

Aside from signing up for Medicare, matching your future costs to income is the most important step in the run-up to retirement. Start by identifying fixed expenses—say, for food, housing, insurance and taxes—along with more-flexible expenses, such as for clothing and gifts. Don’t ignore big, occasional costs, says Lauren Klein, a certified financial planner (CFP) in Newport Beach, Calif. “Eventually, you’re going to need a new roof or you’ll have to replace your car,” she says. “Those costs shouldn’t come as a surprise.”

In a separate column, list discretionary expenses, for costs such as travel, entertaining and dining out. Note that some expenses will go down or disappear when you’re no longer working—you won’t be paying payroll taxes or saving for retirement, and your wardrobe will cost less when every day is casual Friday. But some expenses, such as for travel and health care, could also go up.

Once you’ve identified your fixed, essential expenses, match them to your resources. Ideally, guaranteed income—Social Security and maybe a pension or an annuity—will cover the basics. If not, you’ll have to use your retirement savings to close the gap, as well as to cover the nonessentials.

If your nest egg seems too skimpy to go the distance, better to know that before you leave your job, says Joe Tomlinson, a CFP in Greenville, Maine. “You don’t want to think later, I wish I’d worked another three years.” Working longer not only lets you continue to save for retirement but also means you have fewer years in retirement to finance, and it helps you delay taking Social Security.

Make a Retirement Budget

Maximize Social Security

Thinkstock

You can sign up for benefits as early as age 62 (full retirement age is 66 for people born between 1943 and 1954). But by claiming early, your benefits will be reduced by about 25% to 30% of the amount you’d get at full retirement age. For every year you postpone taking benefits after full retirement age until you hit age 70, you get an 8% boost.

If you think you have a less-than-average life expectancy (83 for 65-year-old men; 85 for 65-year-old women), or if you know you’ll need the income to make ends meet, you’ll probably take the money when you reach full retirement age, if not before. But if you have reason to think you’ll live into your nineties or beyond and that your savings could fall short, “draw down your IRAs, keep working—do whatever you have to do to get that 8% increase,” says Klein.

Although the government recently axed two lucrative claiming strategies that mainly benefited married couples, couples still have more options than singles. But their decision is also more complicated. You can take your own benefit as early as age 62, or you can claim a benefit equal to at least 50% of your spouse’s benefit if it’s higher and your spouse has already claimed. Either way, you’ll get a lower benefit if you claim before full retirement age. If you’re divorced or widowed, you may also have access to benefits based on your spouse’s earnings, which may be a better deal than your own.

 

Review Your Portfolio

Thinkstock

For years, you’ve concentrated on accumulating savings. Now the goal is to preserve your nest egg. You’ll still need to invest for growth to beat inflation and maintain spending, but you don’t want to risk losing a big chunk of your savings. A portfolio with 55% stocks, 40% bonds and 5% cash is a reasonable mix for near-retirees and retirees. More-aggressive investors might adjust the mix to 60% stocks and 40% bonds and cash; conservative investors could do the reverse.

If you’re like many investors, you have some or all of your retirement money in a target-date fund, which starts almost entirely invested in stocks when you’re several decades away from retirement and grows more conservative as you near the target date (theoretically, about the time you retire). Now’s the time to take a look at the fund, if you haven’t already, to see if you’re comfortable with its risk level. Each fund arrives at its definition of conservative a little differently. Fidelity’s 2015 Freedom Fund, for instance, currently puts you at 57% stocks and 42% bonds and cash; Vanguard’s 2015 target-date fund sets the mix at 50% stocks and 50% bonds. Both funds continue to grow more conservative over the next several years.

Review Your Portfolio

Set Your Withdrawal Plan

Thinkstock

Consider how you want to draw down your savings once you have retired. One long-standing strategy is to use the 4% rule: You withdraw 4% in the first year of retirement and the same dollar amount, adjusted for inflation, every year thereafter. The percentage-plus-inflation-adjustment strategy provides a reasonable assurance that your money will last 30 years or so, based on historical returns, but it lacks flexibility. You could do irreparable harm to your retirement stash by following the rule during a bear market, especially if the markets tank at the start of retirement.

A second approach is to take 4% of your portfolio and skip the inflation adjustment. This strategy technically ensures that you’ll never run out of money, but it’s “highly sensitive to the market,” says Colleen Jaconetti, senior analyst of the investment strategy group at the Vanguard Group. If the market goes south in a given year, so does your payout. Vanguard proposes a hybrid strategy in which you take a base percentage each year but set a ceiling on increases and a floor on decreases over the previous year to keep spending relatively smooth.

A third approach, the bucket strategy, represents a different tactic altogether. In the first bucket you put enough cash, CDs and other short-term investments to cover one to three years of living expenses, after factoring in guaranteed income. You fill the second bucket with slightly riskier investments, such as intermediate-term bond funds and a few diversified stock funds. The third bucket, for long-term growth, is devoted entirely to diversified stock and bond funds. As you spend down the first bucket, you eventually refill it with money from the second, and the second with money from the third. The purpose of this strategy is to avoid being forced to sell investments in a down market to fund living expenses.

Setting up a bucket system takes careful planning. If you decide to go this route, start positioning your assets now (or better yet, a few years ahead of retiring). Target-date funds don’t lend themselves to the bucket approach because each withdrawal represents a piece of the whole pie.

SEE ALSO: 8 Things No One Tells You About Retirement

Set Your Withdrawal Plan

Weigh Pension Choices

Thinkstock

If you’re lucky enough to be eligible for a pension, you’ll probably be offered the choice between a lump sum and guaranteed lifetime payments. With the guaranteed payments, you’ll have the security of knowing they will last as long as you do. With a lump sum, you can invest the money yourself and potentially end up with more than you’d draw from a pension over your lifetime. Plus, you have access to the entire amount from the get-go, and whatever remains in the account when you die goes to your heirs. On the downside, your investment won’t necessarily do better than the total amount of the payouts, especially if the market performs worse than you anticipate or you live longer than you expect.

To estimate which choice offers you the biggest potential payout, you’ll have to figure out the returns you’ll need from the lump sum to re-create the pension’s stream of income over your expected life span, says Michael Kitces, a CFP who’s a partner and director of wealth management at Pinnacle Advisory Group. If you think you can reap the same paycheck by investing the money at a doable 4% over 25 years, taking the lump sum would be a reasonable choice—unless you expect to live beyond those 25 years (maybe your parents and grandparents all lived to be 100), in which case “the pension looks like a pretty good deal,” says Kitces. The same goes if you’d need to earn 8% on your money to create the same income stream.

Married couples who choose lifetime payouts face another decision: whether to take the single-life option or the joint-life option, which has lower payouts to reflect the longer time over which the pension is likely to be paid out before the surviving spouse dies. Most couples choose joint life, which is the default option; you both must sign off if you choose single life. The minimum payout for joint life is 50%, although some plans let you choose a higher percentage—say, 75%—for a commensurately lower payout from the beginning. No matter who dies first, the reduced benefit usually kicks in for the survivor.

Weigh Pension Choices

Consider an Annuity

Thinkstock

You could use a chunk of your own savings to buy yourself a pension, in the form of an immediate or deferred-income annuity. These products also guarantee lifetime income, but the key word is lifetime: Unless you buy a costly rider, the payouts stop when you die, even if it’s the month after you start getting the paycheck. Plus, buying an annuity means giving up liquidity. Don’t put all your retirement assets in this basket. One approach, says Tomlinson, is to invest enough so that the payout combined with Social Security and any other guaranteed income will cover your fixed expenses.

Annuities come in myriad forms, some so complicated they can make your head hurt. Not so a single-premium immediate annuity: “It’s ridiculously simple,” says Tomlinson. “You pay x dollars up front, and the annuity pays you y dollars for the rest of your life.” With interest rates practically flatlining, however, you won’t get much for your money: A 66-year-old man who pays $100,000 for an immediate annuity would get $543 a month. (For quotes based on your situation, see www.immediateannuities.com.)

To beef up the payout, you could ladder your annuity purchases, with the expectation that interest rates will rise over time (even if they don’t, the older you are when you buy the annuity, the bigger the payout). Or spring for a deferred-income annuity now and collect the payout 10 to 20 years down the road. In exchange for your patience, the insurer will fork out much more—in the case of the 66-year-old man, about $1,300 a month if he collects 10 years out.

You can use up to $125,000 or 25% of your IRA or 401(k) account balance, whichever is less, to purchase a deferred-income annuity called a QLAC. And you won’t have to take required minimum distributions at age 70½ on what you paid for it.

Here’s how to get better returns in your retirement account: Pay as little attention to it as possible.

That was the conclusion of a study by the investment giant Fidelity, according to a 2014 article on Business Insider. The article relayed the transcript of a Bloomberg program in which the well-known money manager Jim O’Shaughnessy said that people who had forgotten that they had accounts outperformed everyone else.

Fidelity, which has received inquiries about the study ever since, without knowing why, told me this week that it had never produced such a study.

How disappointing, given how tantalizingly counterintuitive the supposed conclusion was: Perhaps chasing headlines and darting in and out of stocks and bonds as hedge fund managers do wasn’t necessary after all.

But when the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index hits a record high, as it did on Friday, we ought to be reminding ourselves of the near certainty of stock market declines that will test us just as the ones that began in 2000 and 2007 did. The apocryphal Fidelity study still suggests two questions that we should all be asking ourselves: How often should we look? And if we do check the performance of our investments, how often should we make any changes?

Michaela Pagel, an assistant professor in the division of economics and finance at Columbia Business School, answers the first question as the phantom Fidelity researcher might: Check your account statements as seldom as possible, especially when markets are falling.

We humans tend to experience pain from losses much more acutely than whatever joy we might experience from an equal-size gain. “If you’re watching as the markets go down, you are twice as unhappy as you would be happy if they went up by the same amount,” Professor Pagel said. “So looking at the market is, on average, painful.”

So stop looking so much. Consider turning off paper statements and email notifications for retirement accounts that you won’t need to draw on for several years. Most people’s accounts fall into that category — even those on the brink of what will hopefully be a multidecade retirement. The less we look, the less tempted we’ll be to act to try to alleviate that pain.

Continue reading the main story

But many of us will look anyway. We are rubberneckers, masochists, cravers of information. We convince ourselves that since the facts are different this time, then perhaps our behavior should be, too.

So should we touch our investments the next time markets take a prolonged dive? This is something Fidelity actually has studied. After the stock market collapse in 2008 and early 2009, the company noticed that 61,200 401(k) account holders had sold all of their stock. So the company started tracking them to see whether that move would pay off.

Since then, 16,900 had not bought stocks in their retirement accounts through the end of 2015. About 13,000 of them are under 60, so they probably didn’t just cash out and take early retirement either. Through the end of 2015, their account balances rose by 27.2 percent, including new contributions.

People who had at least some stock exposure, however, saw their accounts jump 157.7 percent. That left them with an average balance of $176,500, $82,000 more than the people who got rid of all their stock. Now imagine that $82,000 difference compounding over 20 or 30 more years, and think hard about whether you want to touch the stocks in your retirement fund the next time the markets fall far.

This is an extreme example but an important one, given that plenty of smart people capitulate when faced with the pain of looking too hard at fast-falling balances. Even when market moves aren’t quite as severe, people still tend to fiddle with their holdings. In the second quarter of this year, 13 percent of Fidelity 401(k) account holders did so.

One group is not counted in those numbers, though: the people who keep all their retirement money in target-date funds. These funds are designed not to be touched, since they maintain a prescribed mix of investments that shifts slowly over the years as you age and need to take fewer risks. In other words, they buy and sell only when they are supposed to, according to the investment mix that corresponds to your age. And sure enough, only 1 percent of the Fidelity account holders in those funds made any moves during the second quarter. If this sort of investing is attractive to you, automated investing firms like Betterment and Wealthfront work in similar ways.

Left to our own devices, picking and choosing among a variety of funds, we’re likely to change our minds often and flit in and out of things. According to Morningstar data examining 1,930 stock mutual funds over 15 years ending in June, the difference between what the funds would have delivered to steadfast investors and what the average investor (who did not hang around for that long) actually earned was 0.99 percentage points. That doesn’t seem like much, but a one percentage point difference in returns can mean missing out on many hundreds of thousands of dollars in returns over the decades.

So why do we keep touching? It may be because it’s so easy to fall under the influence of people who seem to know what they are talking about. In the “Seers and Seer Suckers” chapter of his new investing guidebook, “Heads I Win, Tails I Win,” Spencer Jakab explains in fine and uproarious detail how consistently most of them fail to predict the future.

He should know, as he used to be one. A former top-rated stock analyst in what he describes as the “fortunetelling business,” Mr. Jakab reveals in the book that he actually had no idea how his stock picks performed against any kind of market average, and still doesn’t. No one at his firm kept track, and neither did he. He’s now doing more honest work in the Wall Street Journal newsroom. He also keeps a shelf of books at home filled with what he believes is bad investment advice — just to remind himself how hard it is to achieve any kind of genius.

While Mr. Jakab did not repeat the legend of the Fidelity study in his book, it did show up on a Columbia University webpage promoting Professor Pagel’s research. She hadn’t known its origins either. (Turns out Mr. Shaughnessy first heard about it from a now former employee, who has not returned emails about where he heard of it, according to a spokeswoman.)

But when I told Professor Pagel that Mr. Shaughnessy’s interviewer, Barry Ritholtz, had wondered whether the punch line to the study might be that the most successful Fidelity account holders were the dead ones, she thought he might be onto something. “Even if it’s not true, it’s actually true,” she said. “Dead people can’t get upset from seeing the market go down.”

To view the original article click here:

Not all Americans prepare for retirement as early as they should, which unfortunately leaves them with few options when they want to call it quits. When that time comes, many people are left dipping into their Social Security benefits, even if that means cashing in earlier than they intended. Unfortunately, the sooner you apply for Social Security benefits (which you can do beginning at age 62), the less money you’ll receive monthly. The good news is that there are ways to retire early and still delay filing for Social Security benefits.

Prepare your finances in multiple ways.

One basic way to plan for your retirement is to start additional savings accounts with different purposes in mind. In general, you should have an emergency fund with a few months of expenses tucked away, but you should also be saving for the future. Some ways to do this are through investment vehicles, like IRAs, annuities, mutual funds, and many other options. Depending on your age, when you want to retire, what benefits your employer offers, and how much you already have saved, your retirement strategy should be tailored to your particular needs. Making these decisions is something that a retirement counselor can help you with.

Meet with a retirement counselor.

This may be the best option to figure out the most successful strategy for your unique situation. There are specific products and plans that can help you achieve your retirement goals, and a retirement counselor can help you feel confident that you’re making the smartest choice. Retirement counselors have specialized knowledge in the newest retirement and investment solutions and they are experienced in helping people make their futures more secure. Explain your plans to retire early and be prepared to share your goals and how much you’ve saved. Your retirement counselor can give you guidance and share some tips about effective saving and budgeting methods.

Make life changes.

If your retirement accounts won’t provide enough of an income stream to make ends meet without filing for Social Security, then try to reassess your expenses. Are there any areas where you can cut spending? Some retirees choose to downsize their home. Relocation may also be another option, even if it means going outside of your current state where you may be able to benefit from a lower cost of living without making drastic changes to your lifestyle.

Work part time.

If you’re retiring, you may not want to work anymore at all, but for some, an encore career can be very rewarding—both financially and personally. This can be something as simple as teaching a community class using a skill that you already have, or as adventurous as pursuing a long-forgotten passion in a completely different field. Not only will you be making money, but you’ll also be staying active and will be engaging in a a line of work that you enjoy. The key is to find something that won’t make you feel like you’re working at all!

You’ll end up working for 35-plus years to earn your Social Security benefits, but hold off on filing until the time is right for your particular claiming strategy. There are many ways to retire early and we can help!

To view the original article click here:

By Jane Bennett ClarkSee my bio, plus links to all my recent stories., From Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, October 2014
Read the headlines about retirement readiness and you’d think that at least half of us had forgotten to go to class, do our homework or study for one of the biggest tests of our lives. When exam day arrives, we’re totally unprepared.

But what if it’s just a bad dream and we wake up to find that we are on track after all?

In fact, researchers are suggesting that assessments of Americans’ retirement readiness are too dire and that most of us are in pretty decent shape. How so? Some studies underestimate people’s ability to catch up on saving after the kids are grown or overstate the level of income workers need to replace in retirement, says a report by Sylvester Schieber, the former chairman of the Social Security Advisory Board, and Gaobo Pang, of benefits consulting firm Towers Watson. Others neglect to factor in resources outside of employer-based retirement plans, such as IRAs and home equity, or the relatively high benefits that Social Security pays low-wage earners.

Part of the disconnect is that retirement benchmarks are created for large segments of the workforce rather than individuals, says Schieber. “If you’re designing a plan that’s trying to cover 10,000 people or even 1,000 people, you’re going to have to make some assumptions about how they behave. But every household’s circumstances are different.” Families whose situations don’t fit the assumptions, he says, “can’t rely on that rule of thumb for a road map to success.”

No one disputes that some portion of the population—maybe 20%—will arrive at retirement vastly unprepared. “Those are households with lower wages and lower levels of education who have struggled with basic savings skills, or people who have suffered terrible economic hardships,” says Stephen Utkus, director of the Vanguard Center for Retirement Research. But overall, the black-and-white, ready-or-not assessments of past years have given way to “a more nuanced view of preparedness,” he says. “You have to look under the covers—it’s person by person.”

Taking a closer look is key to your own retirement planning. Before you conclude that you’ve fallen short of the mark or that you don’t dare spend an extra dime of your retirement funds for fear of running out, decide what you really need based on your own finances and expectations.

Calibrate your saving

You’ve probably already gotten the memo to stash 10% to 15% of your annual income (including any employer match) in your retirement account, starting with the first month of your career and ending with the last. That strategy not only lets you take advantage of the magic of compounding (a no-brainer way to build savings), but it also encourages the habit of saving and keeps your contribution level in step with pay raises. At the end of a 40-year career, you should have enough in the kitty to see you safely through a 25- or 30-year retirement.

Straightforward as the plan may be, however, it fails to acknowledge the bumps and potholes that inevitably show up on the path from young adulthood to retirement age. Kids constitute a major detour, says Schieber. “People who have a child are probably going to be consuming differently and saving differently than if they don’t have children and don’t intend to have children,” he says. Other savings off-ramps include buying a house, paying off student debt and suffering a job loss.

How to choose between setting aside money for, say, college or a house and saving for retirement? “When I talk to people who say they are going to stop saving for retirement and start saving for college, I suggest they adjust downward, not stop,” says Utkus. Easing up on retirement savings for a few years shouldn’t slow you down too much if you’ve fueled your accounts early on.

Eventually, kids grow up, mortgages get paid off, and income rises. By the time you’re in your mid fifties, you may be able to free up 20% or more of your annual income for retirement savings. And once you hit 50, you can make an annual catch-up contribution of $5,500 to your 401(k) in addition to your maximum annual contribution ($17,500). You can also add $1,000 to your IRA on top of the annual max of $5,500.

Still, keep in mind that a late-life crisis, such as a health problem or forced retirement, could affect or even destroy your ability to recoup. Letting your savings grow over time remains the recipe for retirement readiness, says Thomas Duffy, a certified financial planner in Shrewsbury, N.J. “When you make tomato sauce, you have to let it simmer. Money’s the same way.”

Assess your target

Retirement planners generally recommend that you have enough savings at the end of your working life to replace 70% to 85% of preretirement income. The targets take into account that you’ll no longer be saving for retirement, getting dinged for payroll taxes or covering work-related expenses, such as commuting costs. To get you to an 85% replacement ratio, Fidelity recommends that you save eight times your final salary, minus Social Security and any pensions.

Some planners go further, suggesting that you aim to replace 100% of your preretirement income, on the theory that what you’ll save in some categories, you’ll spend in others. “Even if you’re not paying payroll taxes, that cost will likely be offset by a new hobby or travel. Or if you’re staying at home more, you’ll want to remodel. There always seems to be something,” says Leslie Thompson, a managing principal at Spectrum Management Group in Indianapolis, which advises clients on retirement planning.

But maybe your hobby involves reading by the fire, not skiing in Vail. Or maybe your mortgage will be paid off, or you’ll move to an area where the cost of living is much lower than where you are now. Given that your biggest spending years are when you’re raising kids, you might get along just fine with 60% of your preretirement income. A recent survey by T. Rowe Price showed that three years into retirement, respondents were living on 66% of their preretirement income, on average, and most reported that they were living as well as or better than when they were working. If you scrimp to meet a benchmark designed for somebody else, “you could be over-saving now and shorting your current lifestyle,” says Duffy.

Then there’s a retirement asset you are likely to have in abundance: time. Maureen McLeod of Lake Como, Pa., retired last year from her job as a professor at Commonwealth Medical College, in Scranton. Now, she says, “my husband and I don’t eat out as much, by choice. At the grocery store, I shop around a little more and compare prices, so I’m spending less on food. We’re not so rushed.” The fresh sushi she routinely picked up during the workweek? She buys it once a week, on senior discount day.

McLeod’s experience echoes research done by Erik Hurst, of the University of Chicago, and Mark Aguiar, of Princeton University. They report that people save on food costs in retirement not because they are eating less or buying hamburger instead of steak but because they have more time to compare prices and prepare meals. The time payoff extends to other activities, such as shopping for travel bargains or taking on household chores you might once have paid someone else to do.

Crunch your own numbers

To get a handle on how you’ll spend your time and money in retirement, make a detailed analysis of what your expenses are now, says David Giegerich, a managing partner of Paradigm Wealth Management, in Bridgewater, N.J. He recommends starting the process about five years before you turn in your office keys. “In the first two years, don’t try to clip coupons, and don’t stop going out to dinner,” he says. “Live your life so you can get a realistic picture of what you’re really spending.”

Among the obvious expenses: housing, utilities, food, gas, clothing and entertainment. The not-so-obvious? “Even if you retire your mortgage, you still have to pay property taxes and homeowners insurance,” says Thompson. Other off-the-radar expenses include annual payments for insurance premiums and future big outlays for, say, a new car or a major trip. “People say, ‘This is a one-time-only thing.’ But there tend to be a lot of one-time-only things,” says Thompson.

Add up health costs

One expense that won’t go down in retirement is health care. In 2012, premiums and other out-of-pocket expenses represented 14% of household budgets for Medicare enrollees, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation—almost three times the health spending of non-Medicare households. Fidelity estimates that a couple who retire at 65 will need an average of $220,000 to cover out-of-pocket health expenses, not including the cost of long-term care.

But hold the panic attack. Fidelity’s number represents the total a 65-year-old retired couple might pay over their average life expectancy (82 for the man, 85 for the woman). It is not the amount they would need on day one of retirement. Most retirees with health coverage spend about $5,000 a year (or $10,000 per couple) on Medicare and medigap premiums and other out-of-pocket expenses. That’s not peanuts, but the cost is factored into your salary-replacement ratio. You aren’t tasked with saving an additional $220,000 on top of it. And health care expenses aren’t unique to retirement. You probably devote a significant part of your budget to those costs now.

The first step in doing your own cost calculation is to review your health coverage. If you’ll have retiree health benefits from a former employer, you’re lucky—those benefits are increasingly rare. Most retirees rely on Medicare, including Part A for in-patient hospitalization and Part B for doctor visits; many also buy Part D policies for prescription drugs and a medigap policy to fill holes in Medicare coverage. Dental and vision care are among the expenses for which you’ll have to buy separate insurance or pay out of pocket.

That’s also true of long-term care. Medicare covers very little of this expense, so if you don’t have long-term-care insurance, consider buying it. Pricey and imperfect, it nonetheless provides some protection against one of the biggest potential financial shocks in retirement. The median annual rate for a private room in a nursing home is $87,600, according to the Genworth 2014 Cost of Care survey. The median annual cost for assisted living is $42,000. (See Options for Covering Long-Term-Care Costs.)

While you’re taking stock, also consider your health status and life expectancy. Chronic conditions, including cancer, can mean that you’ll pay much more than the average out-of-pocket amount over your lifetime. Ironically, robust health exacts its own price. “Some people think, I’m healthier than average, so maybe my health care costs will be smaller,” says Bill Hunter, director of Personal Retirement Strategy and Solutions at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “But the danger is, healthier people live longer, so they’re paying those premiums for a longer time.”

Where you live also plays into your retirement math problem. Premiums for policies that supplement Medicare, and for Medicare Part D prescription-drug coverage, vary according to coverage level, the part of the country you live in and the companies offering them. (To see the range of plans and costs in your area, go to the Medicare Plan Finder.)

Expect to bring in a decent income in retirement? If your modified adjusted gross income was more than $170,000 (for married couples filing jointly) or $85,000 (single filers) in 2012, this year you’d generally pay a monthly surcharge that raises the Part B premium from about $105 a month to as much as $336. For Part D, the surcharge adds up to about $70 a month to the premium in 2014.

Calculate withdrawals

Arriving in retirement with a big stash of cash presents yet another conundrum: How much can you withdraw each year without running out of money? Two decades ago, financial planner William Bengen addressed that question, running scenarios that used a diversified portfolio of 50% stocks and 50% bonds. His conclusion: If you withdraw 4% in your first year of retirement and take the same dollar amount, adjusted for inflation, every year thereafter, you should have money left in your account after 30 years.

Many retirement planners still rely on that formula, not only because it has generally worked over time but also because it helps new retirees manage their wealth. “People say, ‘We have $1 million. We’re millionaires. We can spend whatever we want.’ The reality is, if you spend 10% a year, you have a high likelihood of running out of money well before your nineties,” says Stuart Ritter, a vice-president of T. Rowe Price Investment Services.

On the other side, diligent savers can be too conservative when it comes to tapping their accounts. “If you spend only 1% of your assets a year, forget about visiting your grandkids—you’re never leaving your house,” says Ritter. The 4% rule strikes a middle ground, he says. “It gives people a starting point.”

That said, benchmarks designed to take the long view don’t turn on a dime based on the current investment climate. Retire in a bear market and you could cripple your portfolio by taking that initial 4%; retire at the beginning of a bull run and a few years in you might safely bump your withdrawal to 5%. Retirees who are invested mostly in bonds might be better off starting with a withdrawal of 3% or less in this low-interest-rate environment. Retirees who are heavily in stocks should be mindful of potential corrections when they set their withdrawal strategy; if stock prices appear to be at their peak, you might want to take a smaller percentage to hedge against a future downturn.

Rather than blindly follow any benchmark, use it as the basis for devising your own plan, says Thompson, either on your own or with help. Betterment.com, an online investment service, gives its clients a tool that lets them tailor their withdrawal strategy to their goals and risk tolerance. Says product manager Alex Benke, “You can specify a lifetime horizon, and if you want a very high chance of success in terms of having your money live as long as you do, we’ll tell you over that amount of time how much you can safely withdraw from your account.” Betterment recommends that clients check in on the plan once a year. “As the variables change,” says Benke, “the advice changes.”

What if you wake up on the first day of retirement and discover you got a few things wrong after all? You’ll adjust, says Utkus. A standard of living that substitutes weekend getaways for lavish trips, and dinner out once a week instead of twice, “may actually be quite satisfying. I’m talking about people who can meet basic living costs and are thinking about how they manage the rest of their budget.”

Also remember that no one strategy or formula represents the complete solution, says Giegerich. “Retirement planning is a blending. It’s a symphony, not just the horn section.”

 

 

Robo advisers offer some advantages, but the most comprehensive financial guidance still requires human touch.

For years, the financial services industry made all of the rules when it came to investing. If consumers wanted to assess their financial situations, determine appropriate investments, or buy and sell securities, they had to work with a financial professional. In the late 1990s, advancing technology opened the financial floodgates, and everything changed. For the first time, without the involvement of a financial adviser, consumers could easily access company information, the industry’s best investment research and trade securities economically. For some consumers, it was the answer they were looking for. Suddenly they had all of the necessary information at their fingertips; they could save money and choose not to share their intimate financial information with anyone.

When it comes to investing, individuals who do it themselves are a unique breed. Some are very knowledgeable; some are confident enough to make their own investment decisions; some are thrifty; and some are too arrogant to ask for help. But the do-it-yourself approach doesn’t work for everyone, and the majority of consumers feel more secure when working with a knowledgeable industry professional.

Do robo advisers offer the best of both worlds?

According to the firms offering these automated services, in today’s world expert investment guidance and competitive investment performance are commodities. They do not require human intervention, can be delegated to a computer and cost much less than a financial adviser. The process is simple: A consumer begins by filling out an online questionnaire that asks questions about their goals, financial situation and experience. Once that’s finished, the firm’s computer does the work of matching the individual’s investment resources, goals and risk tolerance to one of its model portfolios. If the consumer likes what she or he sees, the money is transferred, the investments are made on behalf of the individual, and the portfolio is managed. At last, these investment management firms suggest, consumers have a way to get expert portfolio management without having to choose between doing it themselves or hiring a financial adviser. Who could ask for anything more?

As it turns out, most of us.

Why financial advisers are critical

There’s no question that low-touch portfolio management will work for some, but for the vast majority of consumers, hiring a financial adviser still makes sense because:

1. Financial advisers do much more than manage investment portfolios.

Unlike the “investment brokers” of the past who only bought and sold stocks and bonds, today’s financial advisers provide a broad array of services, including goal setting, financial planning, insurance planning, investment planning, estate planning and legacy planning. Online money managers focus solely on managing investment portfolios, which makes their work somewhat one-dimensional.

2. Investing is grounded in science, but at its best, investing is an art.

Gathering economic, market and investment-related information and data; determining an investor’s resources; gauging risk tolerance and computing cash flow needs are variables that influence investment decisions, but they do not represent the entire investment process. The best investment plans integrate the scientific, data-driven strategy with the artistic flair that the financial adviser has developed from his or her years of experience, knowledge of what it takes to achieve goals and understanding of human beings, their motivation and emotions.

3. By definition, advice requires opinion and counsel.

Advice is defined as “an opinion about what could or should be done about a situation or problem; counsel.”

While market and investment opinions are readily available from a variety of sources—such as the media, the Internet, well-meaning relatives and all-knowing friends at a cocktail party—counsel is formal guidance that is delivered by a human being, not a computer. Computers are wonderful, but no computer on Earth can do what financial advisers do best: protect their clients from themselves and their emotions by calming them when life transitions throw them off-course and managing their anxiety during market downturns.

Many think of investing as a purely intellectual exercise. Intellectually, the case for investing in financial assets makes perfect sense. Our intellect, the rational mind, understands that over the long-term, investors have been rewarded for investing in stocks and bonds, staying the course and remaining invested for 10, 20 or 30 years.

Unfortunately, when markets are volatile and news is gloomy, that intellectual exercise becomes an intestinal challenge. When money is at stake, human beings become emotional and anxious. Emotions and anxiety trigger our most primitive instinct of “fight or flight,” and when that happens, we make decisions that are not in our best interest, such as selling investments into declining markets.

Consumers benefit most when they form a relationship with and receive human counsel from a financial adviser. Despite what the robo advisers say, there is never one answer, never one size that fits all. When the dust settles, it’s likely that investors will reap the rewards of technological advances in portfolio management by working with experienced financial advisers who use algorithm-driven portfolio management tools to benefit their clients.

To view the original article click here:

When you hear the words “retirement destination,” places in Arizona and Florida probably spring to mind. But broaden your horizons, and you can find plenty of other great options all across the country.

The following 15 spots may not be popular with retirees now—but contrarian living comes with benefits. Some of these places may offer tax breaks or other perks to try and lure in more older residents. Plus, the existing younger crowds might help keep you young and active.

By Stacy Rapacon,
15 Surprising Places You Never Considered for Retirement

Juneau, Alaska

Cost of living for retirees: 32.6% above U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 8.4% (U.S.: 14.5%)

Alaska’s tax rating for retirees: Most Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Above average at $426,047 (U.S.: $394,954)

Seniors don’t seem too interested in facing the Last Frontier in retirement. Only 7.7% of the entire state’s population is age 65 and older. But if you crave adventure—and don’t mind long winters and vast swaths of wilderness—it pays to live in Alaska. Literally. The state’s oil wealth savings account gives all permanent residents an annual dividend. In 2015, the payout was $2,072 per person. Plus, Alaska has no state income tax or sales tax (although municipalities may levy a local sales tax), and the state doesn’t tax Social Security or other retirement benefits. No wonder Alaska ranks as the most tax-friendly state for retirees.

The capital city offers seniors an additional tax perk. For $20, residents age 65 and older can purchase a card that exempts them from the local 5% sales tax. It entitles you to free bus rides, too. Naturally, Juneau offers endless outdoor activities, from kayaking to whale watching, as well as a charming downtown.

SEE ALSO: Great Places to Retire in All 50 States

Juneau, Alaska

Boise, Idaho

Cost of living for retirees: 7.3% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 11.2%

Idaho’s tax rating for retirees: Mixed

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $366,449

Boise is a great college town for your retirement. Boise State University provides plenty of intellectual stimulation to help keep an aging mind sharp. Its Velma V. Morrison Center for the Performing Arts hosts symphony concerts, dance performances and Broadway shows. You can also take classes at the school through the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute; membership costs $70 for a year.

Off campus, you can walk, run or bike the more than 20 miles of paved trails of the Boise River Greenbelt. Other outdoor activities to enjoy around the area include kayaking, boating, fly-fishing, golfing and skiing, just to name a few.

Boise, Idaho

Des Moines, Iowa

Cost of living for retirees: 9.1% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 11.0%

Iowa’s tax rating for retirees: Mixed

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $372,712

There are retirement destinations of all sizes to choose from in Iowa, one of our 10 best states for retirement. For retirees looking to live in a big city on a small budget, Des Moines is a good choice. Affordability is just one reason the Milken Institute ranked the state capital seventh out of 100 large U.S. metro areas for successful aging. Des Moines also boasts a strong economy, numerous museums and arts venues, and plenty of health care facilities specializing in aging-related services.

Des Moines, Iowa

Bangor, Maine

Cost of living for retirees: not available

Share of population 65+: 14.4%

Maine’s tax rating for retirees: Not Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $372,692

The cold never bothered you anyway? Then Bangor is a lovely retirement destination. The area’s great outdoors offer cross-country skiing and snowshoeing, as well as dog-sledding and snowmobiling. In the warmer months, the same trails can be used for walking, hiking or biking. And the waterfront along the Penobscot River is home to the annual American Folk Festival, as well as other concerts during the summer. Plus, despite being home to the King of Horror, Stephen King, you have little to fear in Bangor—there were only 55 violent crimes reported in 2014. That’s just 168.8 per 100,000 residents, compared with the national rate of 365.5, according to the FBI.

While the Pine Tree State can be painfully pricey, the relatively small city (population: 33,000) is more affordable than other well-known areas such as Kennebunkport (where the wealthy Bush clan has a compound) and Mount Desert (a favorite of the Rockefellers). The median home value in Bangor is $145,400, compared with $174,500 for the state and $176,700 for the U.S.

Bangor, Maine

Rochester, Minnesota

Cost of living for retirees: not available

Share of population 65+: 12.7%

Minnesota’s tax rating for retirees: Least Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Above average at $403,562

If the cold winters and equally harsh tax situation don’t put you off of the North Star State, Rochester is a great place to retire. In fact, the Milken Institute rates it as the seventh-best small metro area for successful aging. It offers an abundance of health care providers, including the renowned Mayo Clinic; hospital units specializing in Alzheimer’s; and top-rated nursing homes. The local population also exhibits a healthy lifestyle, with long life expectancies and low obesity rates.

Housing costs won’t wipe out your nest egg. The median home value in Rochester of $163,700 is below the national median of $176,700 and the state median of $187,900.

Rochester, Minnesota

Columbia, Missouri

Cost of living for retirees: 4.8% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 8.5%

Missouri’s tax rating for retirees: Mixed

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $370,190

Columbia is a great place to retire, due in large part to the three colleges that call it home. The University of Missouri, Columbia College and Stephens College bring sporting events, concerts and other artistic and cultural entertainments to the city. You’ll also find no shortage of bookstores, shops and restaurants around town. Adults age 50 and older can take courses through Mizzou’s Osher Lifelong Learning Institute; the cost is $80 for each eight-week class in the spring and fall.

The city’s top-rated hospitals and health care services are another big advantage, and they’re a big reason the Milken Institute ranking Columbia the third best small metro area for successful aging. Plus, the care is relatively affordable. For example, the median annual rate for one bedroom in an assisted-living facility is $35,640 in Columbia, less than the national median of $43,200, but more than the $30,300 median for the state. Housing costs for retirees are 13.3% below the national average.

Columbia, Missouri

Bismarck, North Dakota

Cost of living for retirees: 0.8% above U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 15.4%

North Dakota’s tax rating for retirees: Not Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $372,433

The capital of the Peace Garden State offers a strong economy that allows your retirement to bloom. Especially if you’re considering an encore career, Bismarck is a good choice. It boasts employment opportunities for older adults, particularly in the service sector. For this reason, as well as the robust presence of quality health care, the Milken Institute ranks the city the fourth best small metro area in the country for successful aging.

If you’re hoping for a more leisurely retirement, there are a number of biking and hiking trails and parks around the city, as well as on the banks of the Missouri River. You can also enjoy cruising, boating, kayaking and canoeing the river during warmer months. Living costs are on par with the national averages but pricier than most of the rest of the state. The median home value in Bismarck is $163,900, while the rest of the state sports a $132,400 median. A one-bedroom occupancy in a local assisted-living facility costs a median $41,010 a year, compared with $43,200 for the U.S. and $38,865 for North Dakota, according to Genworth.

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Cost of living for retirees: 11.6% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 12.5%

Oklahoma’s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $379,464

Tulsa is a very affordable big city. With a population nearing 400,000, it’s the second largest city in the Sooner State, behind Oklahoma City. But the living costs are small; for retirees, bills for everything from groceries to health care fall below average. Housing-related costs for retirees are particularly affordable, at 34.9% below average. The median home value is $122,200, well below the nation’s median of $176,700. A private room in a nursing home costs a median $64,788 a year, compared with a median annual $91,250 for the U.S., according to Genworth.

The area also offers plenty of amenities. For active retirees, there are 23 public golf courses, 135 tennis courts, 50 miles of biking and running trails along the Tulsa River, and more hiking trails on Turkey Mountain. There are also lots of dining and shopping options around town, as well as galleries, museums and theaters, including the Tulsa Art Deco Museum, Woody Guthrie Center and the Tulsa Performing Arts Center downtown. High crime rates for the city are notable but tend to be concentrated in the north side; areas of midtown and downtown offer more safety.

SEE ALSO: Great Places to Retire in All 50 States

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Cost of living for retirees: 0.3% above U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 13.8%

Pennsylvania’s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: About average at $390,204

The Steel City is a good deal for retirees. Overall living costs are on par with the national average, and the median home value is just $89,400, compared with $164,700 for the state and $176,700 for the nation. Plus, the Keystone State offers some nice tax breaks for retirees—Social Security benefits and most other retirement income are not subject to state taxes.

Despite being light on costs, Pittsburgh is still heavy on attractions. (It’s one of our picks for cheapest places where you’ll want to retire.) You can enjoy the Andy Warhol Museum, the Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre, a plethora of jazz joints and all the offerings of local universities, which include Duquesne, Carnegie Mellon and the University of Pittsburgh. And if watching all the collegiate and professional sports isn’t enough activity for you, you have plenty of opportunities nearby to golf, hunt, fish, bike, hike and boat.

Sioux Falls, South Dakota

Cost of living for retirees: 5.8% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 10.9%

South Dakota’s tax rating for retirees: Most Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $370,154

If you’ve never considered moving to South Dakota, perhaps you should. For one thing, it’s really easy to avoid crowds there. The entire Mount Rushmore State is home to fewer than 900,000 people, or 10.7 people per square mile. (By comparison, New Jersey, the most densely populated state, holds 1,195.5 people per square mile.) But Sioux Falls is filled with advantages, including a booming economy, low unemployment and hospitals specializing in geriatric services. For all these reasons, plus the city’s recreational activities (including regularly scheduled pickleball), the Milken Institute dubbed Sioux Falls the best small metro area for successful aging.

And all that comes pretty cheap for retirees. Along with low overall living costs in Sioux Falls, the median home value is $152,200, compared with $176,700 for the U.S. (The median for the state at $132,400.) Plus, the state’s tax picture is one of the best for retirees.

Chattanooga, Tennessee

Cost of living for retirees: 6.0% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 14.7%

Tennessee’s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $382,360

The Volunteer State is a good choice for most retiree budgets. On top of the friendly tax situation, most areas have below-average living costs across the board for retired residents. Chattanooga’s housing-related costs for retirees are notably low, at 12.9% below average. The city’s median home value is just $138,100, compared with $176,700 for the U.S. Single occupancy at an area assisted-living facility costs a median $41,400 a year; the national median is $43,200 a year.

The city’s vibrant arts scene is a nice draw, with many galleries scattered throughout the Bluff View Art District, as well as the NorthShore and Southside districts. You can also enjoy a lot of quality music events, such as the nine-day Riverbend Festival and Three Sisters Bluegrass Festival, and you can take in theater performances year-round. For outdoor recreation, you can take an easy bike ride or stroll along the Tennessee River, or challenge yourself with area rock climbing, mountain biking, white-water rafting or hang gliding. Be aware of the high crime rates for the state and city. But also recognize that you can certainly find safe neighborhoods, such as Ryall Springs and West View—the safest neighborhoods in Chattanooga, according to www.neighborhoodscout.com.

Sherman, Texas

Cost of living for retirees: 13.0% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 13.2%

Texas’s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: About average at $393,414

With a population of less than 40,000, the small city of Sherman offers retirees big savings. Overall living costs are cheap, and housing-related costs for retirees are particularly affordable, at 24.8% below average. The median home value is $98,100 in Sherman proper and $79,100 in Denison (also part of the greater metro area)—well below the state’s $128,900 median. Residents can save on taxes, as well: The Lone Star state levies no income tax.

In Sherman, you can enjoy boutique shopping, unique cafés and several community gatherings throughout the year, including an Earth Day festival and free “Shakespeare in the Grove” performances. Also explore the 12,000-acre Hagerman National Wildlife Refuge, home to about 500 different wildlife species. And when you feel the urge for big-city stimulation, Dallas is about an hour’s drive away.

Spokane, Washington

Cost of living for retirees: 6.0% below U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 12.8%

Washington’s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: About average at $392,810

Located about 300 miles east of Seattle, between the Cascade Mountains and Rocky Mountains, Spokane is a nice choice for retirees looking to retreat to nature. On top of all the hiking and biking afforded by the mountains, as well as the 37 miles of the downtown Centennial Trail, the area boasts 76 lakes and rivers for you to enjoy swimming, boating, fishing and more. There are also 33 golf courses, more than 20 wineries and many breweries and distilleries around the region.

Spokane also offers affordability. Although health care costs for retirees are 10.5% above the national average, housing-related costs are 13.4% below average. The median home value is $160,500 in the city; by comparison, Seattle’s median home value is $433,800. Single occupancy in an assisted-living facility is typically about $48,000 a year in the Spokane metro area. That’s more than the national median of $43,200 a year, but less than the $55,500 state median.

Morgantown, West Virginia

Cost of living for retirees: 0.9% above U.S. average

Share of population 65+: 8.1%

West Virginia ‘s tax rating for retirees: Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: Below average at $389,905

West Virginia University offers a number of benefits to retirees in Morgantown. Residents 65 and up can take WVU courses at a discount. Or if you’re 50 or older, you can join the local chapter of the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute. Membership gets you access to interest groups, trips, social gatherings and program classes, including local and international history, music, computers, yoga, and more. To be a full member for a year costs $100.

The school also helps boost local health care services with its many medical facilities, including the Eye Institute, Heart Institute and Ruby Memorial Hospital. The Milken Institute actually credits the area’s large pool of doctors, orthopedic surgeons and excellent nurses for contributing to Morgantown’s high ranking (15th) among small metro areas. Health care is also relatively affordable, at 2.1% below average for retirees.

Cheyenne, Wyoming

Cost of living for retirees: not available

Share of population 65+: 13.5%

Wyoming’s tax rating for retirees: Most Tax-Friendly

Lifetime health care costs for a retired couple: About average at $395,273

Loner types should love the Cowboy State. It has a population of fewer than 585,000—that’s just six people per square mile. (By comparison, the country’s smallest state in size, Rhode Island, hosts more than a million people, with more than 1,000 people per square mile.) Even the capital city is relatively small, with fewer than 63,000 residents.

The lack of crowds doesn’t leave you a lack of activities. You have plenty of outdoor diversions, such as miles of trails for hiking, biking and horseback riding; fishing and boating; and birding and other wildlife viewing. Train aficionados can enjoy the area’s railroad history and displays of locomotives, including the world’s largest steam engine (also retired). Another big local attraction: Every summer since 1897, Cheyenne hosts the world’s largest outdoor rodeo and Western celebration, Frontier Days, now a 10-day event.