Wealth management

Something out of the Stanford Graduate School of Business (courtesy of Marguerite Rigoglioso) tickled my interest when she said that two Stanford researchers claimed that what investors fear the most is not the risk of a loss but rather the risk that they may do poorly relative to their peers. This especially comes to the surface in light of the current economic plight and sub-prime mortgage debacle. Apparently, these Stanford researchers, Peter DeMarzo and Ilan Kremer, said that individual investors care deeply about how their level of wealth compares with others in their peer group and community. “Investors fear being poor when everyone around them is rich,” pointed out DeMarzo, the Mizuho Financial Group Professor of Finance at Stanford’s Graduate School of Business. Kremer, who is Associate Professor of Finance, added, “It’s worse to have a lower income in an area where everyone is wealthy than it is in an area where everyone has a similar income as you.” They explained that this concern centers around the fact that the cost of living in any community may very well depend on the wealth of its residents. In other words, the more money people have, the more expensive will be their homes, not to mention all sorts of amenities. Using economic models, the researchers noted that external concerns have great consequences on the manner in which people invest. I don’t find this unusual as people oft-times decide on portfolios based upon what others have. It’s kind of a “herd” mentality with the built-in fear that others will rake in the gold while you will not. DeMarzo and Kremer said that they found a traditional economic assumption whereby people are driven by the straightforward desire to maximize their wealth as simplistic but that as soon as actual consumption decisions are considered, peer pressure comes into play. “We might classify behavior based on relative wealth as ‘irrational,’ but in choosing similar, risky portfolios, investors are actually doing what makes sense to them,” emphasized Kremer. They also discovered that investors tend to congregate around high-tech investments (fiber optics, internet-related infrastructure) that have the potential to return big. “These are typically high-risk stocks that, in seven out of eight cases, are likely to go bust. But people are willing to invest in them in the hopes that they’ll hit that one-in-eight jackpot,” added DeMarzo. According to DeMarzo and Kremer, when people begin gravitating to specific investments, the price of the assets they hold may become over-inflated. However, they do find that even if people know a stock is overpriced, their fear of doing something different from their peers and potentially losing out makes them move in ever greater numbers to the swelling investment. For individuals, herding can also provide a kind of buffer when the bubble bursts. “If everyone loses his or her money together, it’s perceived as not as bad as if just you alone lose,” said DeMarzo. Thus the “keeping up with the Joneses” school of investing has benefits on the upside as well as the downside. I don’t know. I tend to march to my own drummer. It seems to work better than worrying about what others are or are not doing.

AccountantsWorld has teamed up with ExpertPlan to help accountants provide retirement-planning services to clients.

WebCPA presents a free online session discussing various facets of philanthropy and its potential benefits for accountants.

As college costs increase with no end in sight, more and more of your clients are struggling to find ways to lighten the tuition load. Luckily, there exist several beneficial tax deductions, credits and scholarships that can help.ABOVE-THE-LINE DEDUCTIONS

CALVERT GIVING FUND DIVESTS DARFUR INTERESTSIn a break with donor-advised funds sponsored by other national financial services firms, the Calvert Foundation said that its Calvert Giving Fund is now fully divested from companies affiliated with the Sudanese government. The Calvert Giving Fund is administered by the Calvert Foundation.

While the word is that defined-benefit plans are no longer in favor, they can still provide a tax savings for the right client.“A lot of the press would lead you to believe that defined-benefit plans are on the way out,” said Karen Shapiro, chief executive of Dedicated DB, a San Mateo, Calif.-based provider of such plans. “But for some small-business owners, it’s a terrific tax strategy.”

The Internal Revenue Service has issued a sample notice that 401(k) and 414(w) plan sponsors can use to tell plan participants about their rights and obligations under the Pension Protection Act’s eligible automatic contribution arrangements and qualified automatic contribution arrangements.

Unfortunately, since December 31 coincides with the tax-reporting period for 99 percent of U.S. individual taxpayers, the average taxpayer will only begin thinking about their 2007 taxes during the first quarter of 2008. Unfortunately, this delay is generally very costly, since almost every individual taxpayer reports taxable income on a cash basis, as opposed to an accrual basis.

The difference between a rhetorical question and a survey question is someone answers. Before we find out what type of question my title is, here’s why I posed it. Firms find about how other firms operate in a number of ways. It might be from contact with partners in other firms; via membership in groups, organizations, or societies; by hiring consultants; or possibly by reading about other firms in professional publications.

WebCPA presents a free online session discussing various facets of philanthropy and its potential benefits for accountants.

I just received the results of a new survey that was conducted by market research provider Vizu Corporation on behalf of RetireeWorkforce.com (courtesy of my friend, Nazli Ekim of SS/PR) in which it is noted that more than three-quarters of people working today say they plan to continue being employed into their retirement years. In fact, almost 40 percent of all respondents report that they anticipate doing so for monetary reasons, either to meet daily needs or to boost their quality of life. These are not surprising results given what’s been happening with the economy today and especially the housing world. Actually, to break this down even more, 34.1 percent of those surveyed claim they will work to “make ends meet,” while another 14.7 percent note they seek employment to “earn extra income to boost their quality of life.” Interestingly enough, 22 percent say that their motivation for working would be “the mental stimulation and challenge” while a scant 4.7 percent explain that it would be for “personal and human interaction.” I always thought that last one was the primary reason. Apparently not…at least, not according to this survey. Joe Salice, the president and CEO of RetireeWorkforce.com, points out that attitudes about work are definitely changing. “People are perceiving work as much more of a lifelong endeavor, rather than simply a lengthy phase.”

Microsoft has debuted a blog, Money Insider, focusing on the latest news about its Microsoft Money personal finance software and MSN Money site.

Mixing a fixed-income annuity into a retirement income account provides greater long-term wealth for investors than a portfolio of equity and bond investments alone, according to a study by MassMutual Financial Group.

California wealth management firms Kochis Fitz and Quintile Wealth Management said they plan to merge, effective Jan. 1, 2008, with the combined firm to be known initially as Kochis Fitz/Quintile until a new name can be found.

Did you know that women provide the lion's share, up to 70 percent, of the $350 billion AARP estimate of the total value of uncompensated caregiving last year in the U.S.? Yep, according to the National Center on Women and Aging, a majority of those female caregivers are employed, but are often forced to reduce their hours or retire early due to their caregiving responsibilities, which can end up costing them each a staggering average of $659,130 in lost wages, savings, benefits, and pension over a lifetime. To help the estimated 40 million women who will retire over the next two decades to achieve increased financial viability, retirement security, and avoid the negative consequences so often related to care giving, LifeSecure Insurance Company and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement (WISER) have partnered on a consumer awareness and education initiative. LifeSecure's marketing efforts will include special communications targeting female consumers and creating awareness of the issues. In addition, consumers will be directed to the comprehensive library of useful financial planning, caregiving, and related information at WISER's online data center (see www.wiser.heinz.org/portal). "At LifeSecure, we are committed to helping women overcome the extreme financial and other dangers so often associated with informal caregiving,” says Lisa Wendt, president and CEO. “Having a complete understanding and easy access to accurate and relevant information are probably some of the best weapons women can have in dealing with these issues.” Jeffrey Lewis, chairman of WISER, notes of the partnership, "Over the years, we've found that many people--and most women--simply don't have enough information about building a secure retirement or dealing with negative financial impacts of informal caregiving. The solutions they need begin with understanding and education.” WISER works to increase awareness of the structural barriers that prevent women's adequate participation in the nation's retirement systems. Created in 1996 by Teresa Heinz Kerry, chairman of the Heinz Family Philanthropies, its goal is to improve the long term economic security of millions of American women and men. It is an independent 501(C) 3 organization. LifeSecure Insurance Company (www.yourlifesecure.com) offers a new generation of long-term care insurance coverage. The company is focused on providing understandable, affordable coverage, and high levels of customer service and support. The intention behind all this is to help women feel financially secure and knowledgeable enough about a critical financial issue such as the informal caregiving environment.

Individuals managing their own assets receive no legal guidance on the standards for prudent investing.Fortunately, they can look to the Uniform Prudent Investor Act for guidelines. The act sets forth standards that govern the investment activities of trustees, and is currently the law in almost every state. While those standards do not apply to individuals managing their own assets, they do provide guidance on what the courts consider prudent investing.

SMHG BUYS 25% STAKE IN IPRO ONESanders Morris Harris Group, a financial services holding company, has acquired a 25 percent ownership interest in iPro One, a company that provides CPA practices with investment systems and products. Terms of the deal were not disclosed. IPro One has exclusive contracts with more than 1,000 CPA firms that provide investment products and services to clients. The company has signed letters of intent to purchase interests in CPA-affiliated advisory firms in several locations with a total of more than $1.5 billion in assets under management.

You’ve undoubtedly heard the term “rebalancing.” It has nothing to do with a highwire act although some in the financial community might say that’s exactly what it is. Rebalancing your portfolio is rather critical and it should be done at least annually so that your financial goals remain intact. I do know that many investors don’t even consider this. In fact, friends and family alike tell me that it’s just too time-consuming and besides, they know little about what it takes to do so. To counter this, I like to offer an example. Here’s one courtesy of my friends at First Investors: Take my friend Fred who has a portfolio of 60 percent domestic stocks and 40 percent bonds. He’s had this for the past five years and now it has an allocation of 69 percent domestic stocks and 31 percent bonds. So, over the five year period, stocks went up by 13.4 percent while bonds increased by 4.5 percent. What does this mean? It means that the portfolio wandered or as they call it in financial circles, “drifted.” So, Fred’s portfolio changed rather dramatically even though he did nothing about it for five years. What this also means is that even what appears to be positive developments can easily toss your entire asset allocation out of balance. This translates to a potential for risk coupled with the fact that your return may not be what you had already envisioned. Therefore, if you’ve had a portfolio just sitting there, you might want to reassess the investment priorities, review the securities, and rebalance if necessary. First of all, conducting an annual review requires you to identify whether any of the changes may require a financial response such as a new investment strategy. This may be true because you may have set up certain financial goals or lifestyle considerations which have now changed. Next, if you knew that every investment in your portfolio would throw off the same return year after year, then what would you need to rebalance? That’s not reality. A portfolio drift such as outlined above, can affect your asset allocation…and all to the negative. Finally, suppose your portfolio does need rebalancing. What can you do? The most cost-efficient way to do this is to change the allocation of future investment contributions. What does that entail? Well, you could continue investing the same amount on a regular basis in an overweighed asset while increasing contributions to underweighted investments until you feel that your target has been reached. Or, you can choose to make a lump-sum investment into the asset class that is underweighted. And, you can always sell existing investments that have become overweighted and use those proceeds to buy shares of assets that are then underweighted. Keep in mind that for the last option, mutual fund investors can usually shift money from one fund to another within a fund group without incurring a sales charge. Of course, you still have to consider any tax consequences. But the bottom line is portfolio maintenance. Don’t be inactive!

Nearly everyone can use lessons in financial literacy, and Dan Iannicola Jr., deputy assistant secretary for the U.S. Treasury Department's financial education office, provided suggestions on how women accountants can educate their clients.

I just reviewed the results of a couples retirement study conducted by TNS Canadian Facts for Scotiabank and was surprised to learn that when it comes to retirement, Canadian couples aged 50 and above simply don’t agree with each other on such important topics as finances and lifestyle. Apparently, according to the study, this lack of consensus comes from too little conversation. (So, what else is new?) The study looked at Canadian couples with at least one partner aged 50 or over and still working. It examined attitudes and planning for post retirement as well as financial and lifestyle priorities. Examples of such priorities include travel, spending time with family and friends, practicing healthy aging, and accommodations. (That last one refers to place of abode.) It also reflects the fact that less than one quarter of respondents claim to have had a thorough discussion with their spouse or partner about all aspects of retirement while 55 percent say they have a rather rough idea of how each other feels. Some 23 percent haven’t discussed it all, or haven’t discussed it as much as they should. (I love that “rough” idea.) In short, the results found that Canadian couples are most out of touch with each other in the areas of financial planning, financial concerns, and their outlook toward retirement. In fact, some 60 percent disagree on the basic question of whether or not they are even looking forward to retirement. (Oh, my, that’s not what I hear from my train buddies who are much younger than me and would retire at the drop of a dime.) Moreover, couples apparently also disagree when it comes to the role that family and friends will play in retirement, with only half agreeing. Surprisingly, in only eight percent of couples are both people primarily interested in spending time with their partner rather than with other family/friends or by themselves. (Ouch!) This Couples Retirement Study was conducted for Scotiabank using TSN Canadian Facts online panel. Respondents for the survey were couples who are married or in a common-law relationship, with at least one partner aged 50 or over, and working full-time. Household investable assets were at least $50,000. Of course, couples do share the same level of concern in their ability to retire comfortably with 65 percent saying that they are very or fairly confident they can do so. A full 44 percent of respondents, however, still do not have a formal financial plan. (Hmmmmm!)