Showing posts with label estate planning. Show all posts

death tax - what are the worst states (Kiplinger)

10 States With the Scariest Death Taxes, 2016

Thinkstock

Federal estate taxes are no longer a problem for all but the extremely wealthy. In 2016, as much as $5.45 million in assets is exempt from federal estate taxes—double that for a married couple; in 2017, it will rise to $5.49 million.

However, state estate taxes, which kick in for estates valued at only $1.5 million or less in several states, could take a big bite out of your legacy. Your home and retirement accounts will be counted when your estate is valued for tax purposes, and proceeds from your life insurance could be counted, too, depending on how the policy is owned and who gets the money.

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia impose an estate tax, and six states impose an inheritance tax, which can force certain heirs to give up a portion of their inheritance. The good news is that a growing number of states are increasing their estate-tax exemptions in an effort to dissuade well-off retirees from moving to more tax-friendly jurisdictions.

Tennessee’s inheritance tax was eliminated in 2016, so it's no longer on our list. New Jersey will increase its estate tax exemption to $2 million in 2017; no longer the worst state for your estate, it now ranks fifth on our list here. The new least-friendly place to die? Take a look.

By SANDRA BLOCK, Senior Associate Editor | October 2016

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

10. New York

istockphoto

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $4,187,500 for fiscal year 2016-2017

Estate tax rates: 5.6% - 16% (on estates valued at more than about $10 million)

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses only

Inheritance tax: No

The Empire State is gradually increasing its estate-tax exemption, and, as of January 1, 2019, it will match the federal threshold. But beware, because New York’s estate tax contains a very scary feature: if If your estate exceeds the threshold by 105%, the entire estate will be taxed.

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

9. Vermont

Thinkstock

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $2,750,000

Estate tax rates: 9%-16%

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses only

Inheritance tax: No

Vermont's estate tax, along with steep income-tax rates, makes it particularly terrifying for wealthy people. The state is also number one on our list of least tax-friendly states for retirees.

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

8. Maryland

Thinkstock

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $2 million in 2016; $3 million in 2017

Estate tax rates: 5.6% - 16% (on estates valued at about $10 million or more)

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses only

Inheritance tax: Yes

The Free State is gradually becoming a more tax-friendly place to die. Its estate-tax exemption will increase every year until 2019, when it will match the federal exemption.

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

7. Washington

istockphoto

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $2 million

Estate tax rates: 15% - 19% (on estates valued at more than $9 million)

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses

Inheritance tax: No

The Evergreen State's estate tax rates are unusually high. But Washington offers an additional $2.5 million deduction for family-owned businesses valued at less than $6 million. Its estate tax exemption is indexed to inflation.

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

6. Connecticut

istockphoto

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $2 million

State estate tax rates: 7.2% - 12% (on estates valued at about $10 million or more)

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses, civil-union partners

Inheritance tax: No

The Constitution State is the only state with a state gift tax on assets you give away while alive. You'll have to file Connecticut gift tax returns every year to identify any such gifts, but taxes are due (at rates ranging from 7.2% to 12%) only when the aggregate value of gifts made to any individual since 2005 exceeds $2 million.

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

5. New Jersey

istockphoto

Exemption level before state estate tax kicks in: $675,000 (but rising to $2 million on Jan. 1, 2017)

State estate tax rates: 4.8% - 16% (on estates valued at about $10 million or more)

Exempt from estate tax: Spouses, civil-union partners

Inheritance tax: Yes

Don't make these retirement account mistakes (Forbes)

Retirement Account Mistakes--Not For Dummies
Janet Novack

a guide to some of the traps created by the insanely complicated rules surrounding IRAs, 401(k)s and other retirement accounts

No, this is not another story lecturing you to save more, diversify, control your investment costs, or ignore the hot stock tip from your brother in law who did time for securities fraud. You’re no dummy.

What this is, instead, is a guide to some of the traps created by the insanely complicated rules surrounding IRAs, 401(k)s and other retirement accounts —traps that can snare not only smart investors, but also financial advisors, lawyers, accountants, and yes, even the Internal Revenue Service itself.

Lest you think that’s hyperbole, consider this: a U.S. Tax Court judge ruled last year that a tax lawyer couldn’t use an IRS publication in his defense, because the IRS itself had misinterpreted a provision of the law relating to IRA rollovers. “Even the IRS is confused,’’ marvels CPA Ed Slott, who makes a nice living training other financial pros about IRA rules and fixing the mistakes they and their clients make.

The sad fact is a normal human being not in Slott’s business can’t know all the rules. But taking a few minutes to acquaint yourself with the more common mistakes can help keep you safe and out of the IRS’ penalty zone. At the least, you’ll have a sense of when you need to consult IRS publications (which, despite that court ruling, you can usually rely on) or speak to a retirement account specialist at the financial institution where your IRA or 401(k) is held, or maybe even pay an expert for help. Two key IRS Publications are 590a on IRA contributions and 590b on IRA distributions. (There used to be just one publication 590, but it was so long, what with all the rules, that the IRS split it into two.) Note that part of what makes this all so complicated is that there are more than a dozen different types of retirement accounts, each with its own sometimes differing rules. So to be fair, Congress, not the IRS, deserves most of the blame for this mess.

To assemble my list of 25 Retirement Account Mistakes Smart People Make, I consulted Slott and Robert Keebler, another CPA/IRA expert, and reviewed court cases, private letter rulings and government reports. Most of the mistakes relate to early withdrawals, inherited IRAs, required minimum distributions and account rollovers. But you can also get yourself in trouble putting the wrong thing in an IRA. (Tempted to hold gold in your IRA? The gold must be of a certain type and must be kept with your IRA custodian, not under your bed.) Of course, this list of 25 mistakes is by no means exhaustive. Here’s a bonus tip that’s not on it: never ever, ever put a master limited partnership in a retirement account.

The discussion below offers some extra background on two areas where mistakes are particularly common.

Early withdrawals woes

Withdrawals taken from a traditional IRA or 401(k) before age 59 ½ are generally subject to not only ordinary income taxes, but also a 10% penalty on the taxable amount. Fortunately, there are 11 separate exceptions, detailed here, that can get you out of the 10% extra hit. On their 2013 tax returns, 1.7 million taxpayers reported that they took early distributions, but only 1.2 million indicated they were subject to the additional 10% tax penalty, the IRS estimates.

The problem is that some of those 500,000 folks who reported themselves exempt from the penalty will get audited by the IRS and then hit with the 10% early withdrawal penalty and possibly an additional penalty for negligence. That’s because they got the exceptions wrong. One common mistake: thinking you can take an early penalty free withdrawal from a 401(k) to pay college or graduate school bills, or to buy a first home, when in fact these penalty exceptions only apply to IRA withdrawals.

In one classic case, an accountant who had left Deloitte to earn his PhD got hit with the 10% penalty for using $30,000 from his 401(k) to finance his graduate studies and buy a first home. The tax court rejected his argument that since he could have transferred the 401(k) money to an IRA first, and then used it penalty free for those very purposes, he shouldn’t have to take the extra 10% hit. The judge said he sympathized with the accountant’s confusion, and agreed that the law is “highly technical,’’ but concluded that, well, the law is the law.

Another common misconception Slott flags: that you can get out of the 10% penalty because you took the money out to deal with a general financial hardship. The widespread confusion may stem from the fact that some employers allow early “hardship” withdrawals from 401(k)s. But that doesn’t get the employee out of paying either tax or the 10% early withdrawal penalty.

If you have a financial hardship, there may be other ways to tap retirement early penalty free. For example, if you’re 55 or older and lose (or leave) your job, you can tap money from your 401(k) penalty free– so long as you don’t roll it into an IRA first. (Yet another trap.)

Death traps

With a growing share of families’ assets in retirement accounts, mistakes made while passing them on are a big deal. One easy to understand and fix mistake: failing to keep your beneficiary forms up to date. The form on file with your IRA custodian, not any other estate document, and not an unfiled form you’ve stuck in your desk drawer, determines who gets your IRA. If you want to make sure your ex-spouse (or an ungrateful child) doesn’t get your IRA, take him or her off that form as well as out your will.

Another batch of inheritance mistakes has to do with “stretch” IRAs. You can roll over an inherited IRA into your own name only if you inherit it from a spouse. (Although you should usually wait until you’re older than 59 ½ to roll over your late spouse’s IRA because withdrawals from an inherited IRA can be taken at any age without paying the 10% early withdrawal penalty. Once you roll an account over into your own name, you lose that early withdrawal flexibility.) But any individual beneficiary can retitle an IRA as an “inherited IRA” and stretch out withdrawals over his or her own life expectancy, thus gaining decades of tax deferred, or (in the case of a Roth IRA tax free) growth.

Although some in Washington, including the Obama Administration, would like to eliminate the stretch IRA, this valuable tax break is available for now. Available, that is, so long as you (the IRA owner) or your heirs don’t make any mistakes. One huge no-no is rolling an IRA inherited from someone other than a spouse into your own name. If you do that, the whole amount is immediately taxable. Instead, as a nonspousal heir, you must retitle the IRA, including the original owner’s name and that it is inherited, e.g., “John X. Smith II, deceased, inherited IRA for the benefit of John X Smith III.” Similarly, if a trust is named as an IRA beneficiary, you can’t actually transfer the IRA into the trust. Instead, you retitle the IRA and deposit the yearly payouts in the trust. (Note that if you want to change the financial service company holding an inherited IRA, you must do it in a trustee to trustee transfer.)

What about the mistakes IRA owners make that limit their heirs’ ability to stretch out the account’s life? A common one is naming your estate as your beneficiary on an IRA form. In many cases, that will force the IRA to be distributed within five years, cutting short the potential tax deferral or tax free growth. (The exact rule is this: funds in a Roth IRA left to an estate must be withdrawn within five years. Period. For a traditional IRA left to an estate, if the deceased turned 70 1/2—the age at which a traditional IRA owner must start taking required minimum distributions–before his death, payments can be stretched out for what would have been his remaining life expectancy, according to IRS tables. That is usually more than five years, but it is probably less than the life expectancy of individual heirs, had they been named as individual beneficiaries.)

A related mistake is neglecting to name a contingent beneficiary. The problem? Should your primary beneficiary die before you, the IRA will likely go to your estate, again cutting short tax deferral. Moreover, if you name a primary beneficiary (say your child) and a contingent beneficiary (say your grandchild), then your child has the option of ”disclaiming” the IRA in favor of your grandchild.

Still other mistakes have to do with not taking the proper required minimum distributions from inherited IRAs. If you’ve just inherited an account, read William Baldwin’s 11 Step Instruction Guide To Inherited IRAs, Inherited Roth Accounts And RMDs. And for in-depth advice on the best way to pass on a retirement account, spring for a copy of Estate Planning Smarts by lawyer and former Forbes Senior Editor Deborah L. Jacobs.

Estate Planning Mistakes of the Rich and Famous (cheatsheet.com)

7 Tips On Planning Your Estate, From The Mistakes of Celebrities

Cheat Sheet article by Megan Elliott

Drafting a will might seem like an activity for a wizened billionaire, but putting together an estate plan is actually a critical part of almost everyone’s financial plan, even those who aren’t super-rich. Yet estate planning is also a task that many people, especially young people, ignore, since death or incapacity seems like such a distant possibility. That’s a mistake, say experts.

“No one is invincible, and accidents can happen. It’s important to prepare for these situations, no matter how remote the possibility may be,” Kirsten Waldrop, associate professor of estate planning and taxation at the College for Financial Planning told Financial Planning. “Many people believe that, if they’re young and do not have a lot of money, they don’t need an estate plan. That is simply not true.”

Perhaps there’s no better way to get an idea of the importance of having a will and other estate planning documents in place than looking at what happens after celebrities pass away. All too often, the news of a famous person’s death is quickly followed by reports of squabbling among family members, money lost to taxes, and worse.

The rich and famous usually have more complicated financial situations than the average person. Most of us aren’t going to have to worry about who inherits our personality rights after we’re gone (an issue the family of Jimi Hendrix has argued about) or who should receive our residuals. But we can still learn lessons from how deceased celebs handled their estates. Here are seven of the most important.

1. Heath Ledger

Heath Ledger had a will when he died in 2008, which left everything to his parents and sisters. Ledger also had a young daughter, but he had not updated his will to include her. His family ultimately decided that she would receive the entire inheritance, but if they had not, she may have been left with nothing from her father’s estate.

Lesson: Updating your estate plan after major life events like the birth of a child is essential.

2. Paul Walker

Paul Walker died far too soon, leaving behind a teenage daughter, his parents, and many stunned fans. But the 40-year-old actor had taken steps to prepare for the worst. He had a will and had set up a trust for his child, who inherited all of his $25 million in assets. Though Walker was relatively young, he had smartly taken steps to protect those closest to him.

Lesson: “[L]ife does not always work out the way we expect,” wrote Stephen C. Hartnett, the associate director of education for the American Academy of Estate Planning Attorneys. “Walker was wise in that he had thought ahead and had done an estate plan.”

3. Warren Burger

You’d think a Supreme Court Justice would know better than to take a do-it-yourself approach to estate planning, but apparently not. Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote his own will, but the brief document contained misspellings and oversights that may have cost his heirs hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Lesson: Do-it-yourself estate planning can backfire. Burger’s self-written will was valid, but other people may not be so lucky. Handwritten or videotaped wills or those that aren’t properly witnessed may not be recognized, and if you make a mistake, the entire will may be useless.

“Many people think an invalid will still influence(s) where your assets go, but it doesn’t,” estate planning attorney Kristi Mathisen told Bankrate. “If you have an invalid will because of a failure in the execution of the document, your state’s law of intestate succession steps in.” Protect your heirs and hire a lawyer.

4. Lou Reed

Former Velvet Underground frontman Lou Reed died in 2013, leaving his $30 million fortune to his wife and his sister. He had no children and a small family, which meant that he was able to keep his estate plan simple and straightforward. But because he had a will and not a trust, the details of estate became public, including how much money he had and who received it, when the will was filed in probate court.

Lesson: If you want to keep family business and finances private, don’t rely on a will alone.

5. Philip Seymour Hoffman

Oscar-winner Philip Seymour Hoffman didn’t want his three children to be “trust-fund kids.” To avoid that possibility – and against the advice of his lawyers — he left his entire estate to his long-time girlfriend Mimi O’Donnell, with the idea that she would provide financially for their kids. But because O’Donnell and Hoffman weren’t married, she was hit with an estate tax on the inheritance. And while Hoffman obviously trusted his partner to do right by their children, there’s no guarantee that she’ll make the same decisions he would have, as estate planning attorney Melissa Montgomery-Fitzsimmons explained in an article for MarketWatch.

Lesson: Estate tax is only an issue for people with more than $5.43 million in assets, but anyone with kids should think about how they would want them provided for. Setting up trusts with restrictions (such as that the funds be used only for education) can be a way to provide for kids without spoiling them.

6. Tom Clancy

Best-selling author Tom Clancy left behind $86 million when he died in 2013 at age 66, as well as a complex family situation. Some of his wealth went to his current wife and their minor daughter, while the rest went to four adult kids from a previous marriage. But unclear planning documents lead to a dispute over who should have to pay taxes on the estate.

Lesson: Clancy’s estate was uncommonly large, but his family situation wasn’t unusual. When relationships between heirs are complicated, crystal-clear instructions can help avoid conflict. “It’s critically important … that planning documents, regardless of if the family is blended, be drafted with as much clarity and attention to detail as possible in anticipation of such squabbling,” says WealthManagement.com.

7. James Gandolfini

After he died in 2013, some who saw James Gandolfini’s will wondered whether the Sopranos star had ignored estate taxes and disinherited his eldest son. Neither was true, his lawyer told the New York Times. Yet other experts pointed out that sloppy and incomplete planning might lead to confusion or problems for his heirs, especially when it came to his home in Italy, which he left to his children, but without any specific provisions for its upkeep.

Lesson: A half-finished approach to estate planning could cause problems for your heirs and may mean that your wishes aren’t carried out exactly as you intend. Also, if you have property you want to keep in the family (like a beloved cabin), making provisions for maintenance can reduce conflict and make life easier for your survivors

Which is better, lump sum or pension (Fidelity)

Faced with mounting pension costs and greater volatility, companies are increasingly offering their current and former employees a critical choice: Take a lump sum now or hold on to their pension.

“Companies are offering these buyouts as a way to shrink the size of their pension plans, which ultimately reduces the impact of that pension plan on the company’s financials,” says John Beck, senior vice president for benefits consulting at Fidelity Investments. “From an employee’s perspective, the decision comes down to a trade-off between an income stream and a pile of money that’s made available to him or her today.”

Pension buyouts can be offered to any current or former employee of a firm. You may be already receiving benefits as a retiree with an accrued (vested) benefit, or you may have a vested benefit from a former employer, or your current company may be offering you a pension lump sum buyout long before you retire.

Whatever the case, here’s how a pension lump sum offer typically works: Your employer issues a notice that by a certain date, eligible employees must decide whether to exchange a monthly benefit payment in the future for a one-time lump sum. If you opt for the lump sum, you’ll receive a check from the company’s pension fund for that amount, and the company’s pension (or defined benefit) obligation to you will end. Alternatively, if you opt to keep your monthly benefits, nothing will change, except the option to take a lump sum will be removed.

Some employers are also considering buying annuities for those who do not opt for the lump sum offer. In this case, your benefits will not change, except that the insurance company’s name will be on the checks you receive in retirement, and the guaranteed income will be provided by the insurance company.1 (As with offering lump sums, companies that switch to an annuity provided by an insurance company can remove the pension liability from their books.)

The process is relatively simple, but the decision about which option to take can be complex. Here are the pros and cons of each option:

Keeping the monthly payment

Pension plans typically provide a payment of a set amount every month from your retirement date through the rest of your life. You may also choose to receive lifetime payments that continue to your spouse after you die.

These monthly payments do have drawbacks, however:

If you’re not working for the company making the offer, your benefit amount typically will not increase between now and your retirement date. During retirement, your life annuity payments typically do not come with inflation protection, so your monthly benefits are likely to lose purchasing power over time. An annual inflation rate of 3%, the average since 1926, will cut the value of your benefit in half in 24 years.
Taking your pension benefit as a life annuity means you may not have access to enough money to fund a large, unexpected expense.
Your ability to collect your payments depends in part on your company’s ability to make them. If your company retains the pension and can’t make the payments, a federal agency called the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) will pay a portion of them up to a legally defined limit. The maximum benefit guaranteed by the PBGC in 2014 is $4,943 per month for most people retiring at age 65. The monthly guarantee is lower for retirees before age 65 and larger for retirees age 65 or older. If responsibility for your payments shifts to an insurance company, it will be the insurance company and not the pension plan that is responsible for your guarantees.2

Taking the lump sum

A lump sum may seem attractive: You give up the right to receive future monthly benefit payments in exchange for a large cash payment now—typically, the actuarial net present value of your age-65 benefit, discounted to today. Taking the money up front gives you flexibility: You can invest it yourself, and if you have assets remaining at your death, you can leave them to your heirs.

However, keep in mind the following cautionary factors:

You are responsible for making the funds last throughout your retirement.
Your investments may be subject to market fluctuation, which could increase or reduce the value of your assets and the income you can generate from them.
If you don’t roll the proceeds directly into an IRA or an employer qualified plan like a 401(k) or an 403(b), the distribution will be taxed as ordinary income and may push you into a higher tax bracket. If you take the distribution before age 59½, you may also owe a 10% early withdrawal tax penalty.
You can use some or all of the lump sum to purchase annuity—typically, an immediate
annuity—which could provide a monthly income stream as well as inflation protection or other features. But as an individual buyer, you may not be able to negotiate as good a deal with the insurance provider as the benefit you would have received by taking the pension plan annuity, so the annuity may or may not replicate the monthly pension payment you would have received from your employer. You also need to select your annuity provider carefully, paying special attention to a company's credit ratings, and make sure you read and understand the terms and conditions of the annuity.

Making your choice

Whether it’s best to take a lump sum or keep your pension depends on your personal circumstances. You’ll need to assess a number of factors, including those mentioned above and the following:

Your retirement income and essential expenses. Guaranteed income, like Social Security, a pension, and fixed annuities, simply means something you can count on every month or year and that doesn’t vary with market and investment returns. If your guaranteed retirement income (including your income from the pension plan) and your essential expenses, such as food, housing, and health insurance, are roughly equivalent, the best choice may be to keep the monthly payments, because they play a critical role in meeting your essential retirement income needs. If your guaranteed income exceeds your essential expenses, you might consider taking the lump sum: You can use a portion of it to cover your monthly expenses, and invest the rest for growth.

These comparisons may be relatively easy if you’re already retired, but developing an accurate picture of your retirement income and expenses can be difficult if you’re still working. Beware of the temptation to use the lump sum to pay down credit card debt or handle other current expenses—and not just because of the large tax bill you’re likely to face. “Lump sum distributions come from a pool of money that is developed specifically for retirement,” explains Beck. “To access those funds for another reason puts the quality of your retirement at risk.”
Longevity. Both your monthly benefits payment and the lump sum amount were calculated using actuarial calculations that take into account your current age, mortality tables, and interest rates set forth by the IRS. But these estimates don’t take into account your personal health history or the longevity of your parents, grandparents, or siblings. If you expect to have an above-average life span, you may want the predictability of regular payments. Having a payment stream that is guaranteed to last throughout your lifetime can be comforting. However, if you expect to have a shorter-than-average life span because of personal reasons or your family medical history, the lump sum could be more beneficial.
Wealth transfer plans. After you’ve considered retirement income and expenses, and have planned an adequate cushion for inflation, longevity, and investment risk, it’s appropriate to take wealth transfer plans into consideration. With pension plans, you often don’t have the ability to transfer the benefit to children or grandchildren. If wealth transfer is an important factor, a lump sum may be a better option.

Moving forward

A pension buyout should be evaluated within the context of your overal retirement picture. If you are presented with this option, consult an expert who can give you unbiased advice about your choices. Finally, be aware that more corporations continue to consider discharging their pension obligations, so it’s a good idea to stay in touch with old employers. “If you’ve left a pension behind at a former employer, sometime in the coming years you’re very likely to be offered a lump sum,” says Beck. “Keep your former employer’s administrator up to date on your current address, because you can miss this opportunity if your employer can’t find you.”

Next steps

First and foremost, make sure you know whether you have any pension benefit at your current or former employers, and keep your contact information with those companies up to date. You cannot even consider an offer if you don’t know it exists.
Second, make sure you have a plan for retirement. If you understand your needs, you will be better prepared to understand which option is right for you if you do receive a lump sum offer. Because these offers usually have a limited window for election, it will be more difficult to make an educated and informed decision without knowing, in advance, your total retirement financial picture. Using Fidelity Income Strategy Evaluator® (login required) and Retirement Income Planner can get you started.
If you decide to take a lump sum in lieu of monthly pension payments, you may want to consider rolling it over to an IRA. A direct rollover from your employer's plan to your IRA provider (trustee to trustee) will not be subject to immediate taxation and may be the best way to preserve the tax-deferred status of this money. You should consult your tax adviser.

If you do receive an offer, review it with a trusted financial adviser. Everyone’s circumstances are different. What is right for your friend, neighbor, coworker, or relative may not be right for you.

OJOS11

What You Will Find Here

READING LIST

Blog List

death tax - what are the worst states (Kiplinger)

10 States With the Scariest Death Taxes, 2016

By SANDRA BLOCK, Senior Associate Editor | October 2016

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

10. New York

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

9. Vermont

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

8. Maryland

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

7. Washington

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

6. Connecticut

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

5. New Jersey

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

4. Rhode Island

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

3. Minnesota

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

2. Massachusetts

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

1. Oregon

States With the Scariest Death Taxes

2015 Rankings: States With the Scariest Death Taxes

Don't make these retirement account mistakes (Forbes)

Estate Planning Mistakes of the Rich and Famous (cheatsheet.com)

7 Tips On Planning Your Estate, From The Mistakes of Celebrities

1. Heath Ledger

2. Paul Walker

3. Warren Burger

4. Lou Reed

5. Philip Seymour Hoffman

6. Tom Clancy

7. James Gandolfini

Which is better, lump sum or pension (Fidelity)

Keeping the monthly payment

Taking the lump sum

Making your choice

Moving forward

Next steps

Investor Help Resources

Subscribe To (RSS FEED)

Check Out Your Insurance Company - Ratings By A.M. Best

Dividend News

Popular Posts

Search This Blog

subscribe by email

What You Will Not Find Here

Search Amazon

Don't See What You Need? Ask A Question

Labels

Feedjit