TL;DR
Get your next haul delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A Kiplinger advice column examined whether a retired couple with about $10 million in net worth should keep an aggressive investment portfolio as they invest with heirs in mind. Financial professionals quoted in the report said the answer depends on spending needs, risk capacity, portfolio design and tax planning; the couple’s actual spending and allocation details were not provided.
Kiplinger’s retirement advice column examined whether a 72-year-old retiree and his wife, with a reported net worth of about $10 million, should maintain an aggressive investment strategy aimed partly at leaving money to heirs. The financial professionals quoted in the report said the decision cannot be made from net worth alone: spending needs, reliance on investments, ability to withstand market losses and tax consequences all matter.
The reader described about $3 million in real estate, including a rental property producing $1,500 a month in net income and carrying an $180,000 mortgage. The couple owns its primary and vacation homes outright. The reader also reported $3.8 million in traditional IRAs, $850,000 in Roth accounts, $900,000 in a Generation-Skipping Trust for which he is trustee, and $800,000 in non-tax-deferred accounts, including $150,000 in cash. The couple receives about $9,600 a month from Social Security, a pension and annuities.
The reader said the household’s income and assets were sufficient to avoid worrying about money, and that the couple invests in mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, some of them fairly aggressive, because they are thinking about their heirs. Phillip E. Battin, president and CEO of Ambassador Wealth Management, said the reported income suggests the couple’s needs may be covered, making stock exposure less concerning than it might be for retirees who depend on portfolio withdrawals for basic expenses. He also noted that the rental income could be disrupted if tenants leave, although the reader did not describe it as essential income.
Robert Jeter, a certified financial planner at Back Bay Financial Planning & Investments, cautioned that an aggressive asset allocation is different from speculative investing. He said a simpler strategy may reduce tracking error and tax drag. The experts also raised tax-location choices and Roth conversions as subjects for professional review. The source does not give the couple’s complete holdings, spending plan or tax profile, so the column does not establish a specific allocation or conversion amount.
Balancing Legacy Goals Against Market Risk
The advice matters because a high net worth does not, by itself, establish how much investment risk a household can absorb. A portfolio loss may be manageable when guaranteed income covers spending, but more damaging if the couple must sell investments to fund regular expenses during a downturn. As Chris Berkel, president and founder of AXIS Financial, put it, risk tolerance includes both the ability and willingness to accept risk.
The couple’s goal of leaving assets to heirs also makes taxes relevant alongside investment returns. Traditional IRA withdrawals may create taxable income for the account holder, a surviving spouse or beneficiaries. The professionals cited by Kiplinger discussed Roth conversions and asset placement as possible planning considerations, not automatic recommendations. Any strategy would depend on the couple’s spending, tax brackets, time horizon, estate plans and tolerance for market declines.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Couple’s Reported Financial Picture
The question comes from a reader letter reproduced in a Kiplinger retirement-planning report. The couple’s reported resources combine portfolio investments, property and recurring income; those categories carry different risks and tax treatment. The source gives a monthly rental net-income figure and a mortgage balance, but not the property’s value, vacancy history or future maintenance needs.
The column describes a common distinction in retirement planning: investment risk is not judged solely by whether a portfolio is stock-heavy. It also depends on how much income the household needs from that portfolio and whether it can remain invested during a market decline. The experts’ comments are responses to the information in the letter, rather than a published review of the couple’s accounts or a formal financial plan.
“I would absolutely be looking at whether it makes sense to start converting some of that IRA money to Roth.”
— Brandon M. Cox, CFP and founder of Coastline Complete Wealth
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Spending and Portfolio Details Are Missing
The source does not state the couple’s annual spending, detailed asset allocation, investment costs, tax brackets or estate objectives. Berkel gave spending of $150,000 and $400,000 a year as contrasting examples to illustrate why the budget changes the risk assessment; neither figure is identified as the couple’s actual spending. The report also does not say how much of their monthly income is needed for essentials or whether they have other liabilities.
It is also unclear how much of the portfolio is in stocks, bonds, concentrated funds or speculative investments, and what tax rules and personal circumstances would apply to a Roth conversion. No adviser-client relationship, portfolio review, conversion decision or change to the couple’s investments is reported. The column presents expert observations based on a reader’s summary, not an independently verified financial assessment.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A Spending-Based Plan Comes First
The next step suggested by the professionals is to assess the couple’s spending goals and determine whether reliable income covers their needs through both ordinary conditions and market downturns. A financial plan could then test how different allocations might affect withdrawals, taxes and the amount available to heirs. The report does not say whether the couple plans to seek advice or change its investments.
Tax questions would also need individual review, including whether Roth conversions make sense over time and how investments are held across taxable, Roth and tax-deferred accounts. Any decision would require current tax information, account details and estate-planning goals; the source names no implementation date or confirmed follow-up.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Does the report conclude that the couple should invest aggressively?
No. The professionals said the available information does not settle the question. Their views turn on the couple’s spending, income needs, ability to tolerate losses and whether “aggressive” means a diversified allocation or speculative bets.
How much monthly income did the couple report?
The reader reported about $9,600 a month from Social Security, a pension and annuities. The report does not provide a full household budget or say how much of that income is available after expenses.
What did the advisers say about the rental property?
Battin noted that tenants might not renew or that renting the home could become difficult. He also said the couple did not appear especially dependent on the rental income based on the information supplied, and could consider selling the property if needed. No sale is reported.
Why did the experts mention Roth conversions?
Cox said converting some traditional IRA assets to Roth accounts could be worth evaluating because future withdrawals by a surviving spouse or heirs may face different tax circumstances. The column does not establish whether a conversion would reduce this couple’s taxes or how much they should convert.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
