(Should You) Fund Your HSA Before Your IRA?

The HSA (Health Savings Account) has been around for decades, but is not widely understood. This is partially because not everyone qualifies for one. If you do qualify, it might help your current budgeting, as well as potentially providing a boost for your later retirement funding. Originally sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy and others, the HSA was a wonderful idea – so good, in fact, that Congress limited the number of people who could open one in any given year. What a ridiculous way to treat a good idea!

HSAs are used in conjunction with qualified high-deductible health insurance policies, which are low in cost due to their large annual deductibles. Amounts contributed to HSAs are tax deductible, and qualified medical bills may be paid pre-tax from the HSA. But, those bills don’t have to be paid from the HSA. This is where the HSA as a retirement planning tool captures our attention.

People whose cash flow allows them to pay out-of-pocket medical bills from their monthly income do not need to withdraw funds from the HSA. Annual HSA contributions are tax-deductible in the year made, and any unused money in the account is rolled over from year to year. While the HSA cannot be funded further after age 65, funds remaining in the account at age 65 can be used for paying qualified medical expenses incurred beyond that age.

Regardless of when the funds in the account are tapped, as long as they are used for qualified medical expenses, withdrawals are not taxed. This setup essentially creates a hybrid of the Traditional IRA and Roth IRA. What a deal! Deductible funds in, non-taxable medical expenses out, and applies even to earnings and investment growth in the HSA.

Depending on the custodian of the HSA assets, the owner may be able to invest in a panoply of market-based assets, the same as a Traditional IRA. For those who are able to pay their daily medical expenses out of pocket, their HSA amounts to an additional IRA, and can make a significant impact on both current taxes, as well as future retirement expense reduction and/or income enhancement.

Like Traditional IRAs, HSAs have named beneficiaries. Therefore, a surviving spouse can inherit the HSA as his/her own, and continue to pay family medical expenses just as before. It might seem likely that HSA contributions would be mutually exclusive with Traditional IRA deposits, but that is not the case. Having both is allowable, as they are independent of each other. Contributions to both in any tax year are deductible, although IRA deductibility is subject to the usual income limitations.

Should a person who is eligible for both a Traditional IRA and an HSA, but is financially unable to fully fund both, start with the HSA? We doubt that many people have ever pondered that dilemma. There are instances where starting with the HSA makes more sense, especially for young, healthy people, without sufficient cash flow to fully fund both the HSA and the IRA. These people have very low annual medical bills, and may be able to leave most of their annual HSA contributions in the account for future compounding.

Saving money is the quickest and surest way to make money, and Van Wie Financial is constantly striving to help the process through education.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

Most Americans are aware that IRS suspended Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) from Tax-Deferred Retirement Accounts, including IRAs, 401(k)s, etc. for calendar year 2020. This followed an earlier change permanently raising RMD age requirements from 70-1/2 (a number no one could explain) to 72. Another lesser-known benefit was the passage of new 2021 RMD Withdrawal Tables, which extend useful lives of Retirement Accounts to match our increasing life expectancies. New RMD Tables take effect just as RMD requirements are scheduled to resume in 2021.

Because these Congressional actions were passed in response to COVID-19 and were not announced until well into 2020, rules got changed after many 2020 RMDs had already been taken. Affected account owners include some who would prefer not to incur unnecessary taxable income from RMDs. This minority of “Seasoned Citizens” were trapped with little or no way to take advantage of the 2020 RMD waiver. Van Wie Financial recognized that this was unfair to those taxpayers, and surmised that Congress and IRS would most likely issue subsequent rulings to equalize the impact.

Initial IRS rulings were released as Notice 2020-50, which allowed some, but not all, RMD replacements. While better than the original law, many people who withdrew early in the year were still left out, unable to receive equal treatment under the law. IRS eventually recognized the problem (we are sure they were “reminded” several times by citizens and taxpayer advocates).

On June 23, 2020, IRS released Notice 2020-51, which opened up the RMD replacement process to all who care to participate. In the newest Notice, IRS extended and expanded relief until August 31, 2020, for all RMD replacements. We commend this IRS action, which lifted all prior restrictions on which 2020 RMDs were eligible to be replaced.

Not taking an RMD reduces Taxable Income, thereby reducing the taxpayer’s 2020 actual Income Tax. Some taxpayers will be fortunate enough to have their marginal tax brackets reduced, saving even more in current taxes, and/or reducing next year’s Medicare costs. But that’s not all; leaving more money in tax-deferred accounts allows for further tax-deferred asset value growth. In a year when markets are struggling, these changes present solid benefits to some owners of Qualified Retirement Accounts.

Relatively few Americans are actually affected by the 2020 rulings, but it is extremely helpful to those who are. As financial planners, we are pleased that both Congress and the IRS did the right thing this time, and we salute them.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

Mortgage interest rates recently set an all-time low, due to our coronavirus-induced financial sluggishness. As someone who is reluctant to use the word “never,” I do not anticipate seeing rates like this again. It seems a shame to miss out on this momentous opportunity, whether through a home or other major purchase, permanent refinancing of a primary mortgage, or any other leverage we might utilize to enhance our personal financial situations.

In times like this, we hear from people who are contemplating borrowing against their homes to invest the proceeds in the market, hopefully pocketing returns in excess of the borrowing rate. Generally speaking, we recommend that people flush this idea from their consideration, due simply to the complexity and the risks involved. Generally, but not always. In order to evaluate a potential investor’s success probability, many questions need to be answered. Among them are:

• Do you have sufficient home equity to cover the requested funds, while maintaining a reasonable loan-to-value ratio (at a minimum, under 80%)?
• Can you borrow at a fixed rate, or would the borrowing rate vary with the market over time?
• What is your expectation for interest rates in 3, 4, 5, or more years?
• If you invest the money into the market, do you have a minimum of 5 years to stay invested?
• Is your cash flow from other sources sufficient to cover any and all up-front and ongoing costs of maintaining extra indebtedness?
• What is your targeted annual return rate from investing?
• Can you design a portfolio with that expected return over time?
• Do you work with a professional financial advisor?
• How much investing experience do you have?
• Are you planning to sell your home any time soon?
• What would be the closing costs on your mortgage refi or HELOC?
• How would borrowing more money affect your credit rating?
• Do you understand the tax consequences of borrowing and investing?

Investors need to understand some basic principles before making rational decisions regarding this concept. One is the relationship between interest rates and time. In an ideal world, a homeowner could borrow against home equity at a fixed rate, and then place the money in a CD, bank account, U.S. Treasuries, or another stable asset at a higher interest rate. This is NOT an ideal world, and that will not happen.

There has never been, there is not now, and there will never be, a principle-protected investment that matches the maturity date of your home loan, but carries a higher interest rate. Mortgages and HELOCs are tied to longer-term interest rates, which are higher than rates paid on short-term investments.

Qualified financial advisors understand that in order for a portfolio to produce a total return higher than current borrowing rates, the portfolio must have exposure to riskier assets, including stocks. Stock prices rise and fall, which is why we previously mentioned that a 5-year minimum time window needs to be established. Market-invested money needed before 5 years carries an unacceptably high risk of losing value through simple market fluctuations.

No matter how tempting current borrowing rates seem, risks abound in any “borrow-to-invest” plan. Understand those risks before taking the leap.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

FairTax supporters have long fantasized about April 15 becoming “just another day on the calendar,” rather than our dreaded annual Income Tax filing deadline. We got our gift in 2020, but it came in the wrong wrapper. This year’s COVID-19 inspired Filing Day is coming on July 15, along with all the incumbent hassles and inconveniences of this national nightmare.

Americans can’t avoid facing up to our responsibilities, but opportunities do exist between now and then to help us help ourselves financially. We have listed a few for a quick reference so that our readers may see what applies to them.

• Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) from retirement accounts were suspended for 2020, but some people took RMD distributions early in 2020, prior to the announcement of the suspension. Any RMD taken after January 31, 2020 may be repaid, in whole or in part, on or before July 15. This will render repaid funds non-taxable for 2020, lowering current tax obligations. Any income tax withheld from the RMDs will have to be repaid from personal funds, but the taxpayer’s refund in 2021 will include the amount withheld in 2020. The money is not lost, it is merely delayed.
• IRA Contributions for Last Year, normally due on or before April 15 of this year, can be made up to July 15, 2020, and the usual deductibility rules apply. There is still a chance to lower your 2019 taxable income and/or enhance your retirement savings.
• Quarterly Tax Deposits using Form 1040-ES will have until July 15 to make both the first and second installments, which would have been due on April 15 and June 15, respectively.
• Underpaid 2019 Tax Liabilities, normally due on April 15, may be paid on or before July 15, this year only.
• Self-employed Individuals and Small Business Owners can still open new SEP-IRAs and Individual 401(k) Plans before October 15, and 2019 contributions may be made up to the filing date. Filing can be delayed until October 15 by completing a timely Automatic Extension (Form 4868, available at irs.gov)

Van Wie Financial is a financial planning and asset management firm, and is not qualified to render tax advice and/or to prepare tax returns. We do include tax planning among our comprehensive planning services. Always check with your tax professional prior to executing any individual tax strategy. Once in a while, we encounter opportunities that arise from changes in the U.S. Tax Code, and our goal is to educate our listeners and readers as to what might be done, rather than to specify what they should do individually.

Listen to the Van Wie Financial Hour every Saturday morning at 10:00 for current information and suggestions for making and saving money.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

“Who owns Twitter?” That’s a question nearly everyone will get wrong, usually responding, “Jack Dorsey.” Is that important? Yes, it is very important, because it is wrong. The real owners of Twitter likely include you, since you are reading a financial blog. You most likely own Twitter shares in your Pension Plan, IRA, 401(k), 403(b), and/or Brokerage Accounts, directly or through Mutual Funds and Exchange-Traded Funds. Jack Dorsey is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Twitter, but a quick Internet search revealed that he owns only 2.3% of the company. In fact, he is not even the largest single shareholder in the company.

You have probably heard some media “experts” claim that, “Twitter is a private company, so it can do whatever it wants.” This statement displays an appalling ignorance regarding our economic system. Private companies do not trade shares of stock among the public. Shares of companies like Twitter are bought and sold by the public on stock exchanges (“TWTR” is the ticker symbol for Twitter). Twitter is a public company, not a private company.

Like all public companies, Twitter’s executives have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. This responsibility is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. The “watchdog” SEC regulators have no tolerance for executives who “do whatever they want.”

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is under assault in 2020. We fear for its continued existence, unless Americans everywhere wake up and demand that it be restored and preserved forever. Over-reaction by government officials to the coronavirus has placed Freedom of Speech, Assembly and Religion in a precarious position. Recently, Twitter also cracked opened Pandora’s Box in the arena of Free Speech, exercising what edges up closely to censorship of competing political ideas. The target, of course, was President Donald J. Trump.

Ultimately, investors will get hurt if our free market gets damaged in the rubble of these disputes. Stock and bond investments will be devalued, and we will all pay the price. Therefore, we should all care enough to fight the actions of Twitter in disparaging President’s Trump’s stated opinions. (Note that this concept should apply to all users, with only the most dangerous posts, such as “yelling fire in a crowded theater” type statements being suppressed.)

In 1996, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act, or CDA. Within the DCA is Section 230, which expressly limits the liability of providers of “interactive computer services,” which is now held to include Social Media companies. It is a “carve-out” from the degree of liability most companies endure.

Van Wie Financial believes that this carve-out privilege is absolutely necessary to protect Americans’ Free Speech rights. Twitter (and Dorsey himself) displayed appalling arrogance and indifference by their smackdown of free speech. Also, it highlighted public ignorance of “things Wall Street.” Losing Section 230 privileges would seriously hurt Social Media companies, and they know it.

Watch carefully the fallout from this ill-advised and very personal assault on the First Amendment. In our opinion, the issue will most likely be dragged through all three branches of government, as Trump’s retaliatory Executive Order will be challenged, and Congress will feel their age-old urge to “do something.” Whatever happens, it will wind up in the court system for actual decisions. If the system doesn’t function properly, First Amendment rights of Americans are likely to wind up diminished.

Let’s hope that both sides come to the obvious conclusion; our First Amendment needs to be protected, so that all Americans are the winners.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

With passage of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or “CARES” for short, earlier this year, several tax provisions for Tax Year 2020 were modified. You have probably read or heard about some changes, such as elimination of Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) from retirement plans for this year only. We have studied the CARES Act since it was announced, but only recently did one interesting provision come to light.

Americans are very generous people, with millions of Americans making annual contributions to qualified charities. The U.S. Income Tax Code has always encouraged charitable giving by including donations in the list of available Itemized Deductions. Taxpayers only receive these deductions if they choose itemizing over taking the Standard Deduction.

Following passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), many former itemizers no longer received any additional benefit from itemizing, and opted instead to use the new, larger Standard Deduction. Charitable donations no longer played a direct role in further reducing Taxable Income.

Recognizing this fact, and considering the economic pain being experienced this year by so many taxpayers, Congress added a provision that will hopefully improve the plight of America’s charities. For this year only (so far, anyway) any taxpayer is allowed to deduct the first $300 of qualified charitable donations made during the tax year. The limit (again, so far) is $300 regardless of filing status; single or joint, itemizing deductions or taking the Standard Deduction.

Because this provision has a direct positive effect on your actual tax bill, we would encourage all taxpayers to make their fist charitable contributions, up to the $300 limit, from personal (taxable) accounts. Keep good records and get receipts to document your generosity. If you need to know whether a charity is qualified, check IRS Publication 590, which is available online at irs.gov.

We should note that qualified donations do not fail to help your tax situation. Included in the larger Standard Deduction is a consideration for Charitable Giving; it is simply not split out on Form 1040. If your generosity is above the estimated average giving, you simply change to itemized deductions and receive a tax break for the excess.

Van Wie Financial is engaged in all areas of Personal Financial Planning, including Tax Planning, but is not qualified to prepare tax returns or to give tax advice. Always consult with your tax professional for verification before proceeding with actions that may affect your personal tax situation.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

Last week we discussed why a current proposal in Washington, D.C. to implement a so-called “Payroll Tax Holiday” is not a good form of Economic Stimulus. It seems only fair, having been critical of one concept, to present an alternative, given the wretched state of our current post-COVID-19 economy.

One worthy topic, previously mentioned by President Trump, is a proposal to cut the Capital Gains Tax. Capital Gains are realized when certain items are sold for more than the Seller paid for those same items. These include stocks and bonds, real estate, and several other categories. Capital Gains are taxed at varying rates, based on total taxable income of the taxpayer.

Van Wie Financial believes that Capital Gains Taxation needs at least two reforms. First, Capital Gains should carry a single, low, flat tax rate (preferably zero, but that is politically unrealistic). Low Capital Gains rates encourage needed economic activity. When Capital Gains rates were reduced in the 1990s by President Clinton, revenues to the government soared (as some economists predicted).

Another primary problem with our Capital Gains Tax system is taxing inflation. Many assets, especially real estate, are owned for a long period of time prior to selling. Depending on the holding period, some or all of the Capital Gain is due to simple inflation, and yet the Gain is taxed as if it were 100% profit. Indexing Capital Gains to inflation has been widely discussed, including in the current Administration, but it never sees the light of day because it is so easy to demagogue the issue as “favoring the rich.” In reality, many Middle-Class Americans also report Capital Gains and Capital Losses.

For extra measure, we could also propose a third change to taxation of Capital Gains and Capital Losses. Currently, all Capital Gains and Capital Losses within a single tax year offset each other. In addition, Losses in excess of Gains can be deducted from Gross Income, up to $3,000 annually. The $3,000 annual limit has been in effect since most people can remember, with (ironically) no adjustment for inflation over time. Van Wie Financial believes that the $3,000 limit should be repealed, allowing 100% of Capital Losses in excess of Capital Gains to reduce taxable income each year. We live in a risk-based economy, one in which tax policy can be used to stimulate economy activity.

We are at a period in time when Congress and the American People must be made to understand that our current approach to Economic Recovery is killing the patient. Spending our way to prosperity is not the answer, as it is impossible. De-taxing and de-regulating the Economy and the American People will regain the path to our recent, and not forgotten, prosperity.

Governments can print money, but they cannot print wealth.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

During economically stressed times, the subject of “economic stimulus” plays a prominent role among inevitable political arguments. Whether the general public agrees with Washington’s elected officials is of little consequence, as Washington will inevitably do what Washington does – print money (electronically) and throw it around. This time it is in the name of Economic Stimulus.

Americans recently witnessed the first rounds of Congressional “Stimulus Spending,” as Trillions (12 zeros) of previously non-existent dollars were created out of thin air, then distributed to a variety of individuals and organizations. Ongoing Stimulus Spending suggestions include a so-called “Payroll Tax Holiday,” such as that implemented by the Obama Administration in 2011 and 2012. In those years, the “Payroll Tax” was reduced by 2% of gross pay (up to the Social Security contribution limit) in order to leave more cash in workers’ paychecks.

Most serious Payroll Tax Holiday proposals today call for suspension of all Payroll Taxes for a period of time, such as the remainder of 2020. Philosophically, Van Wie Financial is against any Payroll Tax Holiday. FICA (Social Security) and Medicare withholding dollars are not Federal taxes, per se. Rather, they are insurance premiums paid by individuals and matched by employers. These premiums are used to calculate individual eligibility and individual lifetime benefits under Social Security and Medicare. When insurance premiums are either not paid or reduced, lifetime benefits are adversely affected.

Also, Social Security and Medicare would themselves be degraded by hastening their estimated upcoming insolvency dates. The resultant dilemma is obvious; either General Revenue tax collections will have to be used to bail out social insurance benefit programs, or tax rates will have to skyrocket. Or both.

There are cogent and valid arguments on both sides of the Payroll Tax Holiday argument. On balance, this short-term “solution” becomes a long-term pariah, as our most popular Social Programs accelerate their paths to bankruptcy. Using General Revenues for Social Security and Medicare bailouts would increase our annual Budget Deficit, thereby adding to our accumulated National Debt. “We the People” quite literally can’t win. A classic dilemma, to be sure.

Whatever happens, there will be ample time and opportunity for finger-pointing as the U.S. economic recovery rebuilds and resumes generating government revenue in large quantities. Prior to the COVID-19 reaction, government revenues for the first half of fiscal 2020 (Oct. 1, 2019 through March 31, 2020) set an all-time record, even after accounting for inflation.

Economically, we need to get back to where we were such a few short weeks ago. Will a Payroll Tax Holiday be implemented, and if so, will it prove effective?” Stay tuned.

We should remember the negative reaction of Americans in January of 2013, when the full Payroll Tax was restored following the 2011/2012 Payroll Tax Holiday. When it ended, workers everywhere were astonished to see a reduction in their own “take-home pay.” Who could reasonably blame them, when keeping food on the table is paramount in life?

Very few Americans understand the true nature of so-called Payroll Taxes. This was recently made evident by Senator Rick Scott (R-FL), in response to Governor Cuomo (D-NY), who claimed that $30 Billion (9 zeros) of New Yorkers’ tax money were sent annually to Washington, only to be forwarded to Florida. Scott pointed out that the funds in question did not belong to New York. Rather, they were individuals’ Payroll Taxes paid in while people were stuck working in New York. When New Yorkers eventually escape by retiring to Florida, Washington returns their premiums in the form of Social Security benefits, which are then taxed at Florida rates, rather than being confiscated by New York’s high tax rates.

As Sen. Scott remarked, “It is not your money.” Refreshing, yet also another stark reminder that Truth in Labeling has never applied to Washington jargon. Were these Payroll Taxes to be called Involuntary Insurance Premiums, perhaps the Payroll Tax Holiday would be a tougher sell to the public. After all, it is their collective futures being put on the line.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

Investors love dividends and interest, right? Receiving a “guaranteed” dividend flow means that we can feel better in bad times, knowing that at least our investments continue to send us money. After all, things will get better in the market; we all understand that.

Many studies over several decades have concluded that investors’ long-term returns were at least 90% due to their asset mix, or diversification (the other diminutive factors are securities selection and market timing). In no way can diversification of a portfolio limit the holdings to dividend-paying stocks and interest-bearing bonds. A long-term successful portfolio needs a component of growth, exposure to other asset classes and geographic areas, and likely some alternative assets.

All asset classes (and the investment options within them) have variable year-to-year returns. That variability defines risk in investing. Volatility is measured by standard deviation, which is amathematical calculation of changing returns over time. Portfolio construction is the process of mixing asset classes together such that individual asset’s performance differ from one another over time. Ideally, they should have low or negative correlations with one another.

Investors seek to maximize investment return for any risk level at which they are comfortable. Diversification among asset classes accomplishes this objective, unlike holding two or more types of assets that move in tandem. A classic example of how this can be misunderstood is within our memories. During the “dot-com” boom of the 1990s, many investors claimed that they were diversified because owned 30 or 40 Internet stocks. Unfortunately, in the ensuing crash, those stocks all fell as a group, leaving behind a puddle of heartache like the aftermath of a Florida rainstorm.

During uncertain times, the laser focus of some investors narrows to historical dividends. That can be problematic when the economy is troublesome, because dividends are generally declared quarterly by the Boards of Directors of public companies. Directors have fiduciary responsibility to the companies to ensure survival and long-term success to the extent possible. That sometimes involves cutting or suspending dividends. A recent Bing search on “corporate dividend cuts” produced 104,000 hits in the past month, throughout dozens of industries and companies.

Perhaps contrary to popular opinion, dividend stocks can be very volatile. This bodes poorly for narrowly concentrated dividend investors. Adding insult to injury is the return of ZIRP, the “zero interest rate policy” recently re-adopted by the Federal Reserve (FED). With vastly reduced dividends and nearly vanishing interest payments, investors must turn toward Total Return. Along with dividends and interest, Total Return investors also seek capital gains, both short-term and long-term, often supplemented by tax savings using judicious tax loss selling.

For the time being, attempting to live off dividends and income will stress a portfolio that is under-diversified and under-performing. If your portfolio is causing you concern, we can help. Until our office physically reopens, we are available via GoToMeeting, telephone, and several other platforms. Visit our website, strivuswealth.comfor more information.

Van Wie Financial is fee-only. For a reason.

Market downturns of the magnitude we have experienced lately elicit a wide range of emotions from investors; some are happy smiles (mostly from young investors), but others include fear and anxiety. Most long-term investors are aware that time heals bad markets, but it is difficult to fault anyone who is feeling distressed over swiftly falling account balances.

Fear of death has been shown to be less scary to most people than fear of outliving their money. Occasional market routs illustrate to us that only a handful of Americans are so financially well-off that they have virtually no risk of going broke. Reacting to downturns in a positive manner may be difficult without good advisors. Seeking excessive safety often results in making poor financial decisions.

The term annuity refers to any financial asset that provides lifetime income to the owner. Lifetime income is among the goals set forth in any comprehensive financial plan. Very few lifetime income vehicles exist, and all have some drawbacks. Many, such as work-provided pensions, both public and private, are simply unavailable to most people. Social Security is widely available, but inadequate for complete retirement funding. Further, most lifetime income streams lose purchasing power over time, due to inflationary influences on our daily cost of living. In many cases, Social Security and pensions need to be individually supplemented.

Social Security is the most common lifetime annuity in the U.S. Most people do not think of Social Security as an annuity, but it is. Other lifetime income streams are provided by private and public pensions. Social Security is not to be confused with a public pension, which is earned over years of employment by the government.

Throughout our years in the financial planning business, we have come to describe Social Security as “the world’s greatest annuity.” Imagine a financial product that can tax citizens to fund the Plan, rather than to depend solely on the individual annuity owner!

Unfortunately, Social Security was never designed to be the sole source of retirement income for any participant. Making matters worse is the loss of purchasing power experienced by recipients due to insufficient Social Security Cost of Living Adjustments, or COLAs. In the past ten years alone, Social Security benefits have lost 18% of their purchasing power. Many private pensions have no COLA whatsoever, and lose purchasing power even faster than Social Security.

Obviously, depending only on Social Security for retirement income is a losing strategy, and most of us will have no pensions. That leaves private annuities as the only fallback products to supplement needed lifetime income.

Annuities are misunderstood (and often maligned) by most people, a situation exacerbated by unscrupulous insurance salespeople using misleading sales pitches. Unfortunately, the result is that too many inappropriate annuities are sold to unsuspecting customers, leaving gaps in their lifetime needs and/or nest egg values. Most often this situation arises from an unscrupulous quest for large commissions by the salespeople.

Solving for lifetime income is a central concept of Comprehensive Financial Panning. Annuities play a role in the process, and good advisors (preferably fee-only fiduciaries who have earned the CFP® designation) understand how annuities fit into a lifetime income plan. We understand the specific and limited role annuities play when assisting clients to not outlive their money. Annuities occupy an important role in financial planning, but their judicious use is critical to success.

Van Wie Financial does not sell insurance products, and we never receive compensation from people who do sell annuities and other insurance products.

Van Wie Financial is a fee-only fiduciary firm. For a reason.