B (4:09)

It's because of the name. Larry is a grown up.

A (4:10)

Doesn't sound like a baby. No, but Larry, if he were to start today, what would that look like? If it wasn't just around educational planning. So we think about, oh, it's time to start at 529, the year your child is born. And it makes total all the sense in the world. But there are more and more reports that Americans are falling behind in their savings. Goldman Sachs did a report not too long ago that talked about the financial vortex that was we face in America, which is higher housing costs and higher healthcare and the average age to be able to buy your first home in America has now gotten into the, to the 40s. It used to be in the 20s. So everything has gotten more expensive more quickly than Americans have been able to really keep up. And really one of the things you can control when it comes to saving for retirement is the amount of time you save. And if you can extend the game as long as possible that can help make up for what is a really big challenge, and that's getting to levels where people can stop working and still maintain their lifestyle. So the way I think about these new accounts, it's great that you get the free thousand dollars. That's cool.

B (5:26)

That's not terrible.

A (5:27)

Who's not going to take that? You're eligible. You get there. You get a $1,000 seed money, free money from the government, a little happy

B (5:34)

birthday card, if you will, from day zero. Yeah.

A (5:37)

And then what it does is I think it shifts the conversation towards not just a little bit. Well, you should save younger and younger. It shifts it to the very beginning of life. And that's what I think is kind of interesting about it. So think about how this could work not just for how we typically think about starting to save early for Larry so he can afford school. What about if the whole family thinks of savings as a whole lifetime, not just, I'm going to get started in my 20s or 30s. And that's what this, I think, gives us the opportunity to do. So think of it this way. It's $1,000 right out of the gate. You can put up to a maximum of $5,000 in per year. Let's do this math here. The math is the way I see this, and the Wall Street Journal wrote about this too. If you start in year zero, so the day Larry is born, you get the $1,000 and you add $5,000 every single year for the first 18 years, that's $90,000 worth of savings. Now, that's a lot. But grandparents can contribute, parents can contribute. Employers, if they sign up for this, can even contribute part of that.

B (6:52)

Yeah, I've seen, I think some big employers are playing ball with this, right?

A (6:55)

It's up to half of that $5,000. So it can be up to $2,500 a year. So now we start doing this math, but we're doing it over an enormous timeframe. You're doing this over six decades. So baby Larry starts with this contribution. Every year it adds up to 90,000 at a 7% rate of return. Let's say it's in US equity markets. And the options are going to be things like that, low cost index funds. And let's assume it gets 7% rate of return. You end up with about $280,000, $278,000 by the time Larry is 24.

B (7:37)

That is a big old chunk of debt.

A (7:39)

It's a huge amount of money. Then you can convert that, let's say, to a Roth at some point after age 18. And let's just assume now this is also the assumption that they talked about. It also would be very generous for mom and dad or someone else to pay the tax bill to convert it to a Roth. So who knows if that happens? But we're just going with those numbers. Then we end up with that 280,000 again. If Larry never touches it and says that's retirement money, it ends up being a little over $3 million by the time he's 59 and a half.

B (8:13)

And that's without him actually adding anything else.

A (8:15)

Well, it's still a lot of contributions from friends, families, parents, et cetera. But it just illustrates the one of the few things we can really control is time. And this is a dramatic shift in thinking about saving for retirement. Somebody's in their 20s saving, you're super young, and that's early. But if we were to radically start thinking, wow, maybe we should start thinking about this as savings forever. And it can really move the meter. And that's just the math that goes into this. There are also other parameters. These accounts essentially turn into IRAs at age 18 when they become the property of the beneficiary. Then there's rules around it about not taking out money before the age of 59 and a half. But I like thinking of these as really long term accounts that could really move the meter. Even if you do half of this, do a quarter of this, Even if it's 10% of this, it still could really move the meter long term when you're starting retirement.

B (9:20)

Amazing.

A (9:21)

Let's get to some questions.

B (9:22)

Let's get to some questions.

A (9:23)

This is the point of the show where Krista usually starts asking me questions that and I'm jotting down these numbers as quickly as I can.

B (9:30)

You just let me know if I need to repeat, okay?

A (9:31)

Okay.

B (9:32)

All right. The first one comes from Ann in Pennsylvania. She asks. My husband and I have been out of the stock market for years now. We instead have bonds and CDs. I'm 64 and retired. He is 74 and likely to retire next year. We have about 5 million in savings and no debt. We have one adult child and would like to leave some money to her. All the advice I read assumes a long time horizon with the market overvalued in our opinion and talk of an AI bubble. I'm worried about investing now, but also about not keeping up with inflation. Do you have any advice? Thank you.

A (10:08)

Ann, from my home state of Pennsylvania. You're caught in the. Everything's overvalued trap. And it's very understandable because if you're really paying attention, you're thinking there's an AI bubble. And obviously now we have a worry about oil prices and inflation. There is always something to worry about and think about. And if we only were invested in markets and when things were undervalued, we wouldn't be invested all that often. So we'd miss an enormous part of that journey. We cut out half of the time the market was we have available to us. So that in itself is one part of where I'm going here, the second part, and I'm sitting here drawing out what is called the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier was the economic research by a guy named Harry Markowitz, who eventually won a Nobel Prize in economics for this. And it essentially says that there is a portfolio that can be constructed along this efficient frontier that is designed to optimize the amount of risk you're taking and amount of return you're getting. And what always stuck with me, and I learned about this, it was one of the first things I learned about in the investment world, is that the curve bends backwards at a certain point. And that bend shows us that if you think about this curve, stocks are at the upper part. There's a lot of risk in stocks, but there's also a lot of return. Then as you, as you start adding safety assets, in your case, you're mostly in bonds today. And as you add safety assets, the portfolio risk comes down and so does the return. But it's an interesting point that about where the curve starts to bend is about an 80% bond, 20%, so still super conservative account, the curve starts to bend there. What I mean by that is that when you get to 100% in just in bonds, and I know your situation may be a little bit different because you have bonds and CDs, you get to a situation where the risk, even though you think, oh, I'm adding more and more safety assets, the risk actually goes up for that portfolio relative to a 20% stock, 80% bond. And the return, this is all expected return, actually goes down. So it's this fascinating point where in my mind, if I ever want to be the most humanly possible conservative person portfolio that I think makes any sense is when you go all the way down to 80% in bonds, but no more than that, you still want to have 20%. So that's just a suggestion, is that over time, and that's still a super conservative portfolio. So maybe, and I'm just trying to Help you psychologically figure out a way to participate again so we can address your second fear, which is almost a guarantee that our money will wilt, our dollars wilt if they're in our wallet, not invested because of inflation. For Ann, my thought is that think of a conservative portfolio that does have some balance, and then you can figure out how you would want to get to that point. So maybe you do 10% in markets today to the portfolio, and in six months you do another 10%, and maybe that's all you need and you're at 20%, but at least you have some balance. So think about the efficient frontier. And what always resonates with me is that the most conservative portfolio on, on that curve, according to this research and this theory, is that your, your risk can actually go up and your return expected can go down if you get too far along the curve.

B (13:57)

Wow. This is crazy.

A (13:58)

Wild. Yeah. We never had a question. We've never. I've never brought that up here.

B (14:01)

No. And it's so fun. Yeah. You really think that if you're all in cash savings, well, technically it's portfolio

A (14:07)

of all bonds, so. So it is the, the part of that curve, that frontier portfolio, different portfolio mixes along the way is a balance between assets that are not necessarily correlated. They don't move necessarily together over time. That's the key.

B (14:21)

Oh, I see. Well, we're going to go to the next question from Patrick in Florida.

A (14:25)

Hopefully it's a little less complicated.

B (14:27)

I make no promises, Patrick. All right, so Patrick says, my spouse and I have 2.5 million in TSP IRA accounts. We both receive military pensions and VA disability benefits as a result of injuries sustained while on active duty. Both are annual COLA adjusted. What are your thoughts on keeping the above 2.5 million fully in stocks and mutual funds and treating our pensions and VA money as dry powder?

A (14:52)

Patrick, thank you for your service.

B (14:54)

Thank you.

A (14:54)

I will say that it's a concept that I agree with. So I'd say mostly. The short answer is mostly yes is what I would say. If you have a pension, a pension is, quote, guaranteed from the company paying it. In this case, you have the federal government, so that's about as good of a guarantee as you can get. So it's a highly, highly safe and secure pension. I like to take an annual amount and translate that to what it would be in money sitting in an account. So you just divide it by 5%. So if you have a pension, that's $50,000 a year, as an example, $50,000 divided by 5% should be 1.25 million. Is that right, Mallory? 50,000 divided.

B (15:38)

This is why I let you do the numbers. I don't.

A (15:40)

It's a million. I'm sorry, It's a million dollars. So that's a $50,000 a year guaranteed pension with COLA is really worth. It's like having a million dollars sitting. Now, it's not exactly the same, obviously, because you can't go get $250,000 out of that account, but it does give you the safety and security of income coming in, which is the whole reason you would have dry powder to begin with. So going back to. Could you just put everything in equities that hold 2.5 million in TSP and IRAs? And the answer is yes, you could. If you have the risk tolerance for it. If you feel you're totally fine with 20%, 25, 30%, stock market moves lower, you can handle that mentally, and you can still sleep at night, then I think it's okay. From my perspective, this is just my opinion. I still would at least have some balance and safety, maybe go back to that efficient frontier.

B (16:40)

There you go.

A (16:41)

I could see having 80 or 90% in equities, but just I always like to have some sort of balance. And we go through really rough periods of time through the equity markets or stocks. I like to have a piece of the equation that may be uncorrelated, that's either going up or staying steady.

B (16:59)

All right, well, I've got one more question for you for this portion. This is from Alan in Georgia. He asks our US Citizen daughter lives in Germany and has only German earned income. Is it legal for me to fund her Roth IRA with my after tax dollars?

A (17:15)

Donkesha, did he say danke?

B (17:17)

He said Duncan.

A (17:18)

Oh, that's cool. Okay, so, all right, Alan just goes back to earned income, being able to contribute to a Roth. Whether your daughter's putting money in or you're helping her fund it, it just comes back to, does she have earned income? And I think that's the crux of your question. If she claims the. And again, this is for a cpa, and I'm not a cpa. So this is not tax advice. This is what I'd be asking. A CPA is if she's using the foreign earned income exclusion, the feie, and she's using that and has no earned income in the United States, then the answer is likely, no, you can't do it. If you're using the foreign tax credit, then it's very possible that she ends up with income which means that yes, you can help. Either she can fund it or you can help her fund a Roth really comes down to the tax return, which again, you want to consult a CPA on this or tax attorney and even more so someone that understands foreign income. That's a whole nother layer. But see if it's the earned income or the foreign earned income exclusion or the tax credit, that's what I'd be asking cpa. And I think that gives you the answer to earned income in the US or not. Hence Roth contribution available or not.

B (18:37)

Well, I think we're going to run to a quick break and then when we come back, we are going to discuss the difference between the retire sooner method and the fire savings.

A (18:44)

Oh, fire versus retire sooner. Let's get realistic right straight ahead. Welcome back to ASK AN Advisor, Wes Moss here today along with Mallory Boggs because Krista is traveling, hopefully not in a giant long TSA line.

B (19:03)

They're so long these days it's just scary. But hopefully that's not her case.

A (19:07)

We're going to go with a we talked about the zero year savings plan

B (19:12)

and getting Larry set up for life,

A (19:15)

getting baby Larry, offensive lineman Baby Larry set up for his future. The next topic here, and this is kind of inspired from a question we've got a couple of weeks ago and I've had a few of these right here on the Clark Howard Show. But the difference between retire sooner and fire, maybe we should start it the other way. The difference between fire because everybody knows fire.

B (19:37)

Well, I think maybe we should define fire.

A (19:39)

Okay. So fire for those who don't know. And by the way, 53% of Gen Z identifies and says they're part of the fire movement. That's a huge 53% financial independence. Retire early. That's what FIRE stands for. And the basic formula is save 50% or more or maybe even more than that of everything you make. And you do it as soon as you start working, you invest aggressively and you do that right out of the gate as well. You live on a hyper, hyper lean budget. So you're spending as little as you possibly can. Then you keep that budget lean for decades and decades. And I think that it doesn't often assuming that you don't have a whole bunch of kids too, because I think that it's almost impossible to stay lean when you've got a whole bunch of kids. So it's.

B (20:31)

But kids are budget busters in a lot of ways.

A (20:33)

They're a budget buster. They are. I've got four of them and you can still be lean and be on a budget.

B (20:40)

Clark Howard has kids. So like, clearly even people who are budget sensitive do still have children. You have to be okay with spending a little more.

A (20:47)

But it's tough to be fire. And fire meaning that you are financially independent. Retire early. And the, the movement for a lot of folks is really, really early. Like age 35.

B (21:01)

That's a really age 40 age.

A (21:02)

Really, really, really age 45. And to me, as I think our audience probably already knows, I wrote a book almost 15 years ago called you Can Retire Sooner Than youn Think. And I have a book coming out this year called the Retire Sooner Method. So I'm a big believer in being able to retire sooner than the traditional retirement age in America. Right. For most Americans that are still not collecting Social Security yet, their full, their fra. Full retirement age is 67. So that's the quote, normal retirement age. I still think of it as A zone of 62 to 67 is the quote, normal retirement age. And to me, retire Sooner is about making sure that you don't make big mistakes, knowing that you have a GPS that's getting you there in the most efficient route and not having a giant detour that can take you extra time or into overtime. And if you can do that and have a really nice roadmap and avoid big mistakes, that I think that if you're intentional about it, Retire Sooner method to me is a realistic version of fire, where you shave off 10% of the journey, maybe 15%, and that may be shaving off four years, five years, six years, maybe it is 10 years. But to be able to be age 40 and totally stop working and then have to fund a life that could take you to age 100, that's 60 years of retirement. And I think that that's just, that's almost too much to ask for anyone mentally and and financially all put together. So to me, I appreciate the idea of fire. And I know there's a lot of different levels. There's lean fire, and that's the one that may get the most press. The lean fire. Yeah, I think, I think minimal life, minimalistic life. And then you retire and then you have a minimalistic life for the rest of your life. Then there's fat fire, there's coast fire, and then there's. I think it's barista fire.

B (22:57)

Yep, yep. And it's so funny, there's so such a wide variety here. I will say one thing that I like about the Gen Z, such a large percentage identifying as fires. I hope that that Means they're really good at saving. I figure even if they don't make it to fire, at least they're gonna have some great savings and be set up for retirement, hopefully at least sooner rather than later.

A (23:15)

The reason the concept has never really sat well with me is that a lot of the fire mentality or at least the folks that I've met, and it's a little bit centered around deprivation and perfect spreadsheets rather than in my research, has so much to do with what retirees are doing and the habits that they're engaging in for a very happy, fulfilling, purpose filled retirement. And that comes with tons of core pursuits. It comes with a real emphasis on family and community. Again, not that fire folks can't do that. But I think that if you're so tight, if you want to stop working cold turkey light switch at such a young age, it really makes it difficult a to get back into the workforce, particularly in the fast forward world we live in today. And it sets you up for such a long journey that it's easy for things to go off track. And that's to some extent the reality here. So when I hear can I retire at 40? I think, okay, well if you're going to do it that early, then you need to get into the money green zone. And the money green zone really, whether it's fire or anywhere, you need to be able to generate, you need 25 times in savings what you need in income. So if you need $50,000 in a given year and that's going to be what you are spending or needing to pull from your investments, 50,000 times 25 is $1.25 million. So you've got to be able to do that. If it's $100,000 a year, it's $2.5 million. And that's really hard to be able to get to that in your 30s and early 40s for the vast, vast majority of Americans. So those aren't magic numbers. That's just based on the 4% rule. You can get to it by multiplying by 25. It also says that on that amount of money, you can have that 4% of that over the course of your life plus inflation. So what I tell super young couples that are looking to retire super early is think of the no longer working as more of a dimmer switch versus a light switch. So as opposed to saying, okay, I'm going to be done and I'm totally done working, even if I've saved my 25 times what I need per year, so I've got my 1.25 billion or I've got my 2.5 million. Think of that next phase as dimming the switch on work as opposed to just cutting it off. And I think that's where you get a ton of flexibility. Now, I think that the fire movement would probably say, well, that's similar to barista, maybe it is. But staying engaged in work to some extent, particularly as the world evolves. And I know there's a lot of fear about what AI will do with jobs and the job losses that will come with that. I think it will ultimately be the opposite of that. I think there are going to be more jobs that are created because of the technological need. But from now moving forward, not that this is that big of a change from history, we really need to be participating in this workforce or else the train is moving really fast and you can get left behind, I think, really quickly. So to be able to just say I'm out of the workforce and having to be able to jump back in as opposed to dim the switch and work less to me is I'd rather be dimming the switch. The other thing I love about thinking about this retire sooner, not super, super young, is that once you do hit some of these green zone numbers, whether it's a million dollars in liquid assets or you figured out a way to have $100,000 a year in income, that's another green zone level by your retirement age. The minute that starts to come to fruition is the minute your job now should have at least mentally less stress and less pressure because you've reached things financially, you've gotten there. And I do find that folks, once they reach the financial point where they could say yes to quote retirement or not working, work gets a little bit more enjoyable.

B (27:35)

And we do love when people actually enjoy work. It's a small percentage of people.

A (27:39)

It is the varying surveys about the studies around that. It's 1 in 5, 1 in 4, 1 in 5 people love.

B (27:46)

Smaller percentage than you'd like for it to be, for sure.

A (27:50)

So I think the dimmer switch is a healthier version than stopping working. Never working again at age 40 or 45 is just a little bit too young. I appreciate the sentiment. I love that it gets people supercharged on savings. But I think real life dictates being able to retire five to 10 years before traditional retirement ages, not 20 to 25 years soon.

B (28:14)

Makes sense. Well, listen, Wes, you can't retire yet. Let's get to some questions.

A (28:17)

Okay? Not today.

B (28:18)

Not today, not yet. Not today. All right, so we have Dave from Detroit wrote in and he said, now

A (28:24)

that's a great name.

B (28:26)

Great name. So Dave from Detroit asks longtime fan of the show. I am of the age where most of my money is In a traditional IRA, 2/3 of it. I often hear the advice to convert traditional accounts to Roth before having to take a required minimum distribution rmd. I don't understand why the advice wouldn't be that if you are not in the highest tax bracket to just spend down the traditional IRA and not draw on Social Security until 70 instead of converting to a Roth.

A (28:55)

Dave for Detroit, the simple answer here is that the Roth conversion has taken on its own virality. It's like, whoa, you gotta do a Roth conversion. Everybody needs to do a Roth conversion or else you're crazy. That's not true at all. It is great if you are in a position where a Roth conversion makes sense, but it always comes back to a tax question, which is an income management question. And for Dave, you're saying, well, wait a minute, it's about taxes today versus taxes tomorrow. If you're going to convert IRA money to a Roth and pay 20% to do it or 25% to do it, but you know in retirement you're going to be in the 15% bracket federally and your state tax may end up at zero, then why would you pay 25% to get money out of an IRA and put it in a Roth when you're only going to be paying 15% in the future? It really is about taxes today versus taxes tomorrow. And if you can convert at 20% in taxes and know your future rate will be 25 higher, then it makes sense. It's almost as though it's been painted with this brush that can do no wrong. It's been painted with a golden brush. Roth conversion, of course everyone should do it. The reality here is that it's always, it's very much a tax today versus tax tomorrow problem. So for you, Dave, your income management is what you're asking about when to take social. The taking social question is a, is a break even question. Among other things, it is, if I don't take social until I'm 70, when do I earn back? How many years to take me to break even on the money I left behind because I didn't take the payments? And that is a break even question and a longevity question and an income stream question. But the Roth conversion don't feel as though you're crazy because it doesn't make sense to you, because it doesn't make sense for a lot of people. Some people it does. Some people it does not.

B (31:03)

Awesome. All right. Well, it's. The next question is from Andrew in Missouri. He asks, my wife has retirement money going into the Fidelity Target Retirement 2035. She will be able to retire in three years for her last three years of employment. Should we move her monthly retirement allotment to a Fidelity Target Retirement 2040? We have enough in other retirement accounts that I don't see us needing these funds until 2040 or later. So I was thinking that we should keep the money in a slightly more aggressive fund to keep it growing.

A (31:34)

So is Andrew from Missouri just saying they don't need to touch the money for five years beyond when she is

B (31:42)

going to retire for the last three years of the next. The next three years of saving?

A (31:48)

The next three years of saving. So. Okay, Andrew, the short answer is I think that's fine. I'd say mostly yes. Target date funds get a again, also painted with a golden brush, as in they are set up exactly to do everything for you in the year you need them to do that for you. And the reality is they're really just a branded asset allocation mutual fund that slowly gets more conservative over time. It gets branded with a year and people think, well, I got to pick the right year. But you're on the right track because the year of the labeling, the moniker, if you will, is when it starts to get, I would say, even more conservative. And it gets very, very conservative starting in that year, usually for retirement funds. And this is a broad brush here. By the time you get to whether it's 2035 or 2040 in that year of demarcation, it's usually down to about 60% in stocks and it's about 40% in bonds. And now it's got US International and maybe some other components like small and mid cap. But then over the course of the next 20 years or so, it goes down to something closer to 20% in stocks and 80% bonds. So it gets really conservative. So what I would say that it is good to line up that allocation with when that allocation is right for you. And if you guys really don't, you don't need this money for the next three years, then the clock maybe shouldn't start of getting more conservative if the clock's starting in three years. And again, it's, last time I checked, it was 2026, so we're talking about 2029 slash 2030. But I think you're just looking out in the future and it makes sense that if you don't even need to start relying on that money until the year 2040, then that target date fund might work for you. The overarching key on any of these conversations is to always go into the target fund, whether it's a webpage or it's a prospectus, to show you what that allocation, how it migrates over time. I think that's the key, and you should be checking anyway every year or a couple times a year to know what your allocation is. And target date funds make it very easy for you to look that up. It's all about the mix inside. It's less about the year and more about understanding the mix once you open up the hood.

B (34:23)

Awesome.

A (34:24)

Thank you, Andrew.

B (34:25)

Thank you, Andrew. Thank you. And thanks for all of the questions that were submitted. We really appreciate it. That wraps up today's show.

A (34:31)

Thank you for just hopping in here. Christa dibias off traveling the world, probably standing in a long line somewhere.

B (34:38)

I hope she's actually on a hot beach with a coconut in her hand. And I can't wait to see pictures when she gets back.

A (34:44)

All right, well, thank you so much for tuning in.