Dinner Seminars for retirement

[Kenneth Busch]

The workshop approach is better in my opinion. You conduct it at a local community college or library. This eliminates anyone looking to just get fed.

 

[LostDollar]

The workshop approach is better in my opinion. You conduct it at a local community college or library. This eliminates anyone looking to just get fed.

Caveat, not an agent.
It also seems to me that his topic is far too specific for a workshop process of attempting to start a relationship between prospects needing tax or financial advice, and the potential advisor.

 

[Kenneth Busch]

Caveat, not an agent.
It also seems to me that his topic is far too specific for a workshop process of attempting to start a relationship between prospects needing tax or financial advice, and the potential advisor.

You for sure would have to expand the topics. You would probably cover social security, market risk, and fees or longevity risk to go along with the SECURE Act. I think the Act would just be the hook.

The width of the current married filing joint now probably does make sense for many to do Roth conversions. Tax rates are historically low and would most certainly skyrocket if the other party were to take over. Even if Republicans hold, taxes will likely go up given the current deficit spending.

 

[DayTimer]

If you have something to offer, why do you think the secure act would make any difference?

I think the Secure Act can be used as a reason to start a conversation to to prompt someone to take a fresh look at their finances and the status of their QRP's. Its marketing, and there is nothing wrong with it in my opinion as most Americans really do not pay enough attention to these matters and then they're surprised when they find themselves out of money at 72 and forced to rely on Social Security alone (not that the Secure Act itself will be the cause of running out of money by the retiree).

That way they avoid taking money out after they retire in a likely lower tax brackets then they are currently in while working?

There is an adviser in Philly who has done some shady things unfortunately and so I'm not going to mention his name here. However, I agree with him when he says that if you retire to a lower tax bracket than you were in while working, you have failed financially.

My goal, at any rate, is to retire to a six figure annual income. I don't care if my home is paid off and my kids are off on their own. I can just about guarantee that within 10 years of retirement my property taxes alone will have increased by an amount greater than my mortgage payment. There is a good chance all three of my kids end up living somewhere other than their childhood hometown: I want to be able to travel to see them as often as they'll be willing to put up with me.

 

[KRobby]

So far no one has indicated they have either success or failure doing dinner Seminars for retirement. My intention is to give people who are within 3-5 years from retiring or ones that have retired in that last few years with funds still in a qualified plan an option to convert to a Roth Plan.

They already have that option. A lot of people have success with providing social security benefits education, especially if you're well versed in taxation. It's a great way to get the fact finding consultation in the books. Are you securities licensed as well?

 

[Tahoe Ray]

I agree with him when he says that if you retire to a lower tax bracket than you were in while working, you have failed financially.

You, personally, should be in a much lower bracket because all of your withdrawals will be coming out of your Roth 401k and your over-funded whole life...

 

[DayTimer]

You, personally, should be in a much lower bracket because all of your withdrawals will be coming out of your Roth 401k and your over-funded whole life...

Right. But most folks aren't doing that, are they? As a matter of fact, it is showing them that what they want and what they are infact doing don't line up that gets them looking at max-funded whole life as an alternative.

But still, if you're living on $100K+, what happens on your 65th birthday that suddenly makes $60K "a good living?" And if you are going to have just $60K, would you rather have it as $60K taxable, or $60K tax-exempt.

Too many financial advisors justify their fees by simply saying "well you'll be in a lower tax bracket" and the sheeple nod and follow.

 

[somarco]

An estate planning attorney I know participated in seminars before he retired. Joint work with a CPA, a couple of life insurance agents, a Trust Officer and maybe one other person. I also knew the agents and the Trust Officer.

He allowed me to sit in on one of their meetings a few years ago as long as I did not solicit (which of course I would not). Criteria for attendee's was $10M net worth with $3M liquid. About a 3 hour meeting with lunch served. Probably 30 attendees, maybe more.

A third of them would become clients within a month or so and another third within a year. The insurance agents (father & son) generally wrote at least $500k in premium from the new clients. They did these seminars 3 - 4x per year.

 

[Allen Trent]

Right. But most folks aren't doing that, are they? As a matter of fact, it is showing them that what they want and what they are infact doing don't line up that gets them looking at max-funded whole life as an alternative.

But still, if you're living on $100K+, what happens on your 65th birthday that suddenly makes $60K "a good living?" And if you are going to have just $60K, would you rather have it as $60K taxable, or $60K tax-exempt.

Too many financial advisors justify their fees by simply saying "well you'll be in a lower tax bracket" and the sheeple nod and follow.

while I know we can all tend to feel like that is factual, it is likely just not true for most average citizens. Yes, those with pensions & those above average earners that both saved a lot in Qualified plans and take the money out are in the same or higher tax bracket in retirement. but government stats clearly show on the attached that the average senior is in much lower tax brackets than those in their 40s & 50s.

I believe in Roth IRA & conversions, but I have had to help more people reverse conversions than process conversions. Take the bulk of the conversions that were done in 1998-2000 when it was allowed. those individuals converted at the height of the stock market at the time, thus paying tax on the value at the top. now, in 2020 the tax brackets are actually lower than then. most of those that converted in 1998 were 50 and are now 70. Many, not all, would likely have been much better off to wait & process conversions in retirement. especially, if they were able to live off cash, tax free life withdrawals in those years so the conversions are done in low income years.

best clients to for sure convert are those that are suddenly out of work or take a few years off for mission work etc.

 

[somarco]

Good stuff @Allen Trent

Do you have graphs showing tax paid as a percent of income by age? It's not so much WHAT you pay as it is how much you have LEFT OVER after tax.