How does the President want to modify tax rates?

Presented by Jeffrey Bush

The wealthiest taxpayers could be hit hard if the tax hikes in President Obama’s 2013 federal budget proposal become law. The good news is that the tax changes outlined by the President in mid-February may be softened by eventual bipartisan compromise. As currently proposed, they would impact the wealthiest Americans on several fronts.

The Bush-era tax cuts could expire for the rich. As envisioned, the top tax rate would reset to 39.6% for individuals earning more than $200,000 a year and couples earning more than $250,000 a year. The EGTRRA/JGTRRA cuts would be extended for the vast majority of taxpayers.¹

A new kind of AMT could emerge. President Obama would like to see a “Buffett rule”, basically a simplified take on the Alternative Minimum Tax. This new rule (inspired by Warren Buffett’s now-famous New York Times editorial) would impose a 30% income tax floor for anyone earning more than $1 million a year. Yet while President Obama has mentioned this idea in speeches, the proposed 2013 budget contains no details of it. The White House says that the President would prefer to get to the details after broader revisions to the tax code. Even then, a “Buffett rule” might be hard to implement in practice.^1,2

Tax rates on capital gains & dividends would rise. Long-term capital gains would be taxed at 20% instead of 15%. Dividends amassed by businesses and taxpayers in the highest income tax bracket would be taxed as ordinary income, at 39.6%.¹

Investment income could be reduced by a healthcare surtax. As a condition of the Health Care & Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, the highest-earning U.S. households would be hit with a new 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income in 2013.¹

This levy would only affect taxpayers who realize huge amounts of investment income; gains exceeding $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for a married couple. (The Tax Foundation estimates it would affect 2% of U.S. households.) For these taxpayers, dividends would effectively be taxed at 43.4%. The tax would also apply to income derived from real estate investment.¹

Deductions would be decreased. The President’s 2013 budget would cap deductions of qualified expenses at 28% for those in the top two income brackets. Right now, these taxpayers can deduct 33% and 35% of qualified expenses. Non-profits, the real estate industry and state and local governments seem likely to disfavor the cap.¹

Estate taxes would rise. In 2012, we have a 35% federal estate tax with a $5.12 million individual exemption. The proposed 2013 federal budget would put the estate tax at 45% with a $3.5 million individual exemption.¹

Other tax proposals. The envisioned 2013 federal budget would also:

• Make the $2,500 American Opportunity Tax Credit permanent
• Make the R&E credit for businesses permanent
• Authorize gradual increases in estate and gift taxes and revise rules for taxing different forms of trusts
• Offer a tax credit to employers expanding payrolls in 2012 (of up to 10% of the increase in wages subject to payroll taxes)
• Carry the bonus depreciation extension (on new equipment) for businesses through 2012
• Hike taxes on global corporations headquartered in the U.S. across the next ten years through less lenient foreign tax credits and restrictions on opportunities to defer taxes on foreign profits
• Recoup costs from the 2008 Wall Street bailout through fees charged to financial institutions holding more than $50 billion in assets
• Cut assorted tax breaks for energy companies³

How much of this budget draft will make it through Congress? Good question. Much of what the President is proposing may not be realized, but with the federal government badly needing to reduce its deficit, many of these changes could end up taking effect. Taxpayers and their advisors will want to keep their eyes on Washington.

This material was prepared by MarketingLibrary.Net Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. Marketing Library.Net Inc. is not affiliated with any broker or brokerage firm that may be providing this information to you. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is not a solicitation or a recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 - money.msn.com/tax-tips/post.aspx?post=4bb02697-fe82-4c9a-ad0f-a164f50ce7c8 [2/17/12]

2 - www.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/us/politics/white-house-sees-buffett-tax-rule-more-as-a-guide.html [2/17/12]

3 - www.kansascity.com/2012/02/13/3426281/obamas-proposed-tax-hikes-at-odds.html [2/13/12]

The two words signify a far-reaching kind of financial care.

Provided by Jeffrey Bush

There’s financial planning, and then there’s wealth management. Think of wealth management as a step up from garden-variety financial planning.

The difference is really big-picture. Financial planning usually means creating a strategy for accumulating wealth for retirement and personal goals. Investment management focuses on managing financial assets with a performance level in mind. Wealth management, in comparison, considers the total net worth of a family, a couple or an individual. It weighs financial decisions in light of an investment portfolio and additional components of the financial picture such as real estate, insurance, a business, charitable gifting and more.

Yet it is also about paying attention to detail. Every successful professional or business owner reaches a point of delegation - there comes a point at which you can’t do it all yourself. Indeed, it can be hazardous to try and keep track of every detail without help. The same goes for your finances - your taxes, your investments, your various accounts.

Good wealth management helps you stay on top of things. A skilled wealth management firm pays attention to many of the financial details in your life for you. You can free up your mind. You feel confident because the wealth management firm has an ongoing relationship with you, with regular reviews and communication.

The wealth management firm looks at your goals, needs and priorities to determine an individualized strategy for guiding your invested assets, with the goal of enhancing your net worth.

When is it time for wealth management? If you have too many financial concerns, issues or priorities to address by yourself, then it is certainly time for this kind of financial care. And even if your financial life is less complex, significant wealth calls for a vigilant, ongoing management approach.

This material was prepared by Peter Montoya Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting Representative or the Representative’s Broker/Dealer. This information should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.. www.petermontoya.co

FIDUCIARY STANDARDS vs. SUITABILITY STANDARDS

Explaining the difference, and what it means to be a Registered Investment Advisor.

Presented by Jeffrey Bush

If you meet with a financial professional, be sure to ask a critical question. If you make an appointment with a financial consultant on behalf of yourself, your family or your company, make the following inquiry before the meeting ends:

“Are you held to a suitability standard or a fiduciary standard?”

This distinction is very important. You should be aware of the difference.

What is a suitability standard? Investment brokers are frequently asked to abide by suitability standards: when they recommend a financial product to a client, they are ethically bound to recommend a product which is “suitable” for that client.

As laid out in the manual of FINRA (the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, formerly known as the NASD or National Association of Securities Dealers), the suitability standard has long demanded that a broker make “reasonable efforts to obtain information” on four aspects of a client’s financial life:

• Financial status
• Tax status
• Investment objectives
• Other information used or considered to be reasonable

These factors (and others) have a hand in determining whether a financial product or securities transaction is deemed “suitable” for a client.¹

Suitability standards emerged in response to an age-old Wall Street problem. Decades ago, stock brokers garnered all sorts of bad publicity for calling their clients up and recommending “hot” stocks or funds that were utterly inappropriate for them. The investors may have gotten burned, but the brokers got their sales commissions.

Suitability standards are good, make no mistake. The problem is that they could be even better.

Even with a suitability standard, a broker has no specified duty to act in a client’s best interest. So while that broker may recommend a “suitable” fund, stock or other financial product to you, he is not prohibited from recommending an investment that will result in a bigger commission for him or higher costs for you.

If a broker has a proprietary security that seems “suitable” for you, the broker may technically could promote it ardently to you even though better-performing securities might be available, all while remaining within the suitability requirements.

In 2005, the SEC determined that “broker-dealers will not be deemed to be investment advisers” and therefore are not subject to the same fiduciary standards as Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs) when recommending investments to clients.²

In 2011, FINRA Rules 2090 and 2111 expanded the existing suitability obligations while creating new ones. Any recommendations of “investment strategies” and any recommendations to hold securities within an investment strategy must now be “suitable” for the particular client, and the investor profile compiled by the broker to judge suitability must consider additional factors.³

What is a fiduciary standard? This is the standard that Registered Investment Advisors must uphold. An RIA may be an individual or a financial firm. The “Registered” adjective refers to being registered with either the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) or a state securities agency.

RIAs have a fiduciary duty (a legal requirement) to act in the client’s best interest regardless of the level of compensation the advisor may receive as a result of recommendations or actions. Fundamentally, this comes down to two points as stated by the SEC:

• The advisor must avoid conflicts of interest.
• The advisor is prohibited from overreaching or taking unfair advantage of a client’s trust.

A Registered Investment Advisor is not supposed to pitch products, strategies or securities transactions with the idea that “this will be a win-win for both of us.” The client’s best interest comes first and it is the only interest that matters.⁴

Retirement plan sponsors must also meet fiduciary standards. If you sponsor a retirement plan for your workers, then you are by definition a fiduciary. So says the Department of Labor. If you violate fiduciary standards, you may be found personally liable and responsible for restoring any losses to the plan or profits from improper use of plan assets.⁵

If you have hired a third-party administrator (TPA) to help you with your plan, you need to understand whether or not that TPA will assume any share of fiduciary responsibilities. Most TPAs will not.^6,7

How can you tell if a TPA will assume any of this responsibility? Look at the contract you sign. Look for language (in the fine print) stating that the individual or firm recognizes that it will act as a fiduciary under ERISA and the Advisers Act when offering advice to plan participants. If the TPA exercises discretion and control over the retirement plan or some aspect of it, then it could be defined as a fiduciary.⁶

Seek strong standards. When you enter an advisory arrangement with a financial professional or financial consulting firm, the agreement you sign should tell you whether the advisor is held to a suitability standard or a fiduciary standard. In the opinion of many investors and financial professionals, a fiduciary standard clearly amounts to a higher standard.

Jeffrey Bush may be reached at (610) 630-4495 or jbush@informedfamily.com.

This material was preoared by MarketingLibrary.Net Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. Marketing Library.Net Inc. is not affiliated with any broker or brokerage firm that may be providing this information to you. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is not a solicitation or a recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 - finra.complinet.com/en/display/display_main.html?rbid=2403&element_id=3638 [1/10/12]

2 - www.sec.gov/rules/final/34-51523.pdf [4/15/05]

3 - www.wnj.com/Publications/New-FINRA-Rules-on-Knowing-Your-Customer-and- [2/1/11]

4 - www.sec.gov/about/offices/oia/oia_investman/rplaze-042006.pdf [4/06]

5 - www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/fiduciaryresponsibility.html [1/10/12]

6 - www.seethebenefits.com/showbenefit.aspx?Show=740 [1/10/12]

7 - montoyaregistry.com/Financial-Market.aspx?financial-market=why-choose-an-independent-financial-advisor&category=5 [1/10/12]

A noted economist disputes that generalization.

Presented by Jeffrey Bush

True or false? You may have heard this claim before (or something like it): “Many Americans are being forced to retire later because their savings and investments took a hit in the Great Recession.”

Recently, a big-name economist disputed that belief. In a commentary for Bloomberg, former White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote that some of the statistics don’t seem to back up this conventional wisdom, but perhaps it all depends on which statistics you cite.

A fact that can’t be ignored. In mid-January, a widely reprinted Washington Post article mentioned that since the start of the recession, the population of U.S. workers older than 55 has increased by 12% to 3.1million.¹

Examining this Labor Department finding, the Post feature referenced longevity and the loss of traditional pension plans as contributing factors. It presented stories of older workers who didn’t think they could easily retire, and quoted respected commentators such as Alicia Munell, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, who remarked that “some of these people are just clinging by their fingernails to jobs.”¹

But is there more to the story? It turns out that Americans were trending toward staying in the workforce longer even before the recession. In 1994, Orszag notes, 43% of Americans aged 60-64 were working; in 2006, it was 51%. Nearly half of 62-year-olds went and claimed Social Security benefits in 1994, but 12 years later, less than 40% of 62-year-olds followed suit.²

Orszag mentions another factor that may have kept older employees working during the recession: declining home equity. Put that alongside diminished IRA and 401(k) balances, and there was every reason to stay on the job these last few years.

However, just because older Americans wanted to keep working didn’t mean that they could.

In the 2011 edition of its respected Retirement Confidence Survey, the Employee Benefit Research Institute found that 45% of retirees ended their careers earlier than they wanted to, in many cases due to layoffs and health issues.³

The Post article noted that the jobless rate for workers older than 55 was just 3.2% in December 2007 when the downturn began. In December 2011, it was up to 6.2%.¹

The percentage of employed Americans aged 60-64, which had steadily risen during the 1990s and early 2000s, has remained at roughly 51% for the past five years.²

That brings us to Orszag’s central point: “The bottom line is that people’s retirement decisions aren’t always entirely voluntary.”²

How about your retirement decision? Do you think you will retire when you want to retire? Are you prepared for retirement financially? A new year is a good time for a new look at the state of your finances and your retirement readiness. With astute planning, you might be able to retire sooner than you think.

Jeffrey Bush may be reached at (610) 630-4495 or jbush@informedfamily.com.

This material was prepared by MarketingLibrary.Net Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. Marketing Library.Net Inc. is not affiliated with any broker or brokerage firm that may be providing this information to you. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is not a solicitation or a recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 - www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/NEWS/2012-01-17-PNI0117biz-older-workersART_ST_U.htm [1/11/12]

2 - mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-18/look-at-jobs-before-leap-on-older-retirement-commentary-by-peter-orszag [1/18/12]

3 - www.ebri.org/pdf/briefspdf/EBRI_03-2011_No355_RCS-2011.pdf [3/15/11]

Variable universal life insurance shouldn’t be overlooked or dismissed.

Provided by Jeffrey Bush

Why are there such conflicting opinions over VUL? Some syndicated financial columnists and “talking heads” (such as Suze Orman) often dismiss variable universal life insurance as a poor choice. Yet many financial advisors disagree and will tell you VUL is a great option. What gives?

Like any financial product, VUL has potential advantages and disadvantages. In addition to the opportunity for permanent life insurance coverage, the big appeal of VUL is the chance for considerable cash value accumulation. Because of that potential, VUL can be a hugely useful retirement planning tool. (It can also prove attractive to business owners, parents planning to meet college costs, and high net worth families planning estates.) The fees and premiums may be higher than on some other types of life insurance policies.

VUL is like universal life insurance taken a step further. A universal life policy commonly gives you some flexibility with regards to the premiums and the death benefit. A variable universal life policy offers you that plus a chance to invest in a tax-advantaged way.

VUL gives you a chance to control how your premiums are invested. VUL policies give you the option of placing some of your insurance savings in investment sub-accounts, often among a range of mutual funds (sometimes choices are broader). The investment returns come tax-free. (You can also arrange income tax-free withdrawals and loans from the policy’s accumulation account as long as the policy is adequately funded.)¹

When stocks do well, VUL policyholders have every reason to smile. There is no ceiling, so to speak, limiting the maximum cash value of the policy. Over time, the tax-advantaged accumulation of the investment portion of the policy may be quite impressive.

In a bear market, things are different: poor investment returns on the sub-accounts may mean the policyholder has to pay higher premiums to keep the policy adequately funded. If the policyholder can’t do that, he or she runs the risk of the policy lapsing.

VUL is a long-term commitment. VUL is not for everybody; no single financial or insurance product is. It is a securities product, not a fixed insurance product. It is usually characterized as a poor choice for the risk-averse, and for people well into retirement who may not have decades to recover from the possibility of a bear market. But again, it can be a very useful club to have in the bag when it comes to retirement and estate planning, notably for those in mid-life who are in a high tax bracket. (This is why it is sometimes offered as a perk for corporate executives.)

So as this or that “personal finance expert” speaks about VUL on TV, remember that he or she is just issuing their opinion, not financial advice everyone should live by. That pundit doesn’t know you personally or your specific financial situation. In your particular situation and given your particular financial objectives and insurance needs, VUL could be a great option.

Maybe it’s time for a second look. A qualified financial services professional can help you explore VUL choices - all VUL contracts are not the same, and some may be more appropriate for you than others. Ask around - you may find that a VUL policy will fit nicely into your overall financial and insurance strategy.

These are the views of Peter Montoya Inc., not the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer, and should not be construed as investment advice. Neither the named Representative nor Broker/Dealer gives tax or legal advice. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. Please consult your Financial Advisor for further information.

Citations.

¹ advisortoday.com/resources/retirementvul.html [2009]

Meeting your obligations and finding some opportunities.

Presented by Jeffrey Bush

After you turn 70½, the IRS requires you to withdraw some of the money in your retirement savings accounts each year. These withdrawals are officially called Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs).¹

While you never have to make withdrawals from a Roth IRA, you must take annual RMDs from traditional, SEP and SIMPLE IRAs, pension and profit-sharing plans and 401(k), 403(b) and 457 retirement plans annually past a certain age. If you don’t, severe financial penalties await.¹

If you are still working as an employee at age 70½, you don’t have to take RMDs from a profit-sharing plan, a pension plan, or a 401(k), 403(b) or 457 plan. Your initial RMDs from these accounts will only be required after you retire. However, you must take RMDs from these types of accounts if you own 5% or more of a business sponsoring such a retirement plan.²

You must take RMDs from IRAs after you turn 70½ regardless of whether you are still working or not.²

The annual deadline is December 31, right? Yes, with one notable exception. The IRS gives you 15 months instead of 12 to take your first RMD. Your first one must be taken in the calendar year after you turn 70½. So if you turned 70½ in 2011, you can take your initial RMD any time before April 1, 2013. However, if you put off your first RMD until next year you will still need to take your second RMD by December 31, 2013.¹

Calculating RMDs can be complicated. You probably have more than one retirement savings account. You may have several. So this gets rather intricate.

• Multiple IRAs. Should you have more than one traditional, SEP or SIMPLE IRA, the annual RMDs for these accounts must be calculated separately. However, the IRS gives you some leeway about how to withdraw the money. You can withdraw 100% of your total yearly RMD amounts from just one IRA, or you can withdraw equal or unequal portions from each of the IRAs you own.
• 401(k)s and other qualified retirement plans. A separate RMD must be calculated for each qualified retirement plan to which you have contributed. These RMD amounts must be paid out separately from the RMD(s) for your IRA(s).
• Inherited IRAs. The same applies; a separate RMD must be calculated for each inherited IRA you have, and these RMD amounts must be paid out separately from RMD(s) for your other IRA(s).¹

This is why you should talk to your financial or tax advisor about your RMDs. It is really important to have your advisor review all of your retirement accounts to make sure you fulfill your RMD obligation. If you skip an RMD or withdraw less than what you should have, the IRS will find out and hit you with a stiff penalty: you will have to pay 50% of the amount not withdrawn.²

Are RMDs taxable? Yes, the withdrawn amounts are characterized as taxable income under the Internal Revenue Code. Should you be wondering, RMD amounts can’t be rolled over into other tax-deferred accounts and excess RMD amounts can’t be forwarded to apply toward next year’s RMDs. ²

What if you don’t need the money? If you are wealthy, you may come to see RMDs as an annual financial nuisance, but the withdrawal amounts may be redirected toward opportunities. While putting the money into a savings account or a CD is the usual route, there are other options with potentially better yields or objectives. That RMD amount could be used to:

• Start a grandchild’s education fund.
• Fund a long term care insurance policy.
• Leverage your estate using life insurance.
• Diversify your portfolio through investment into stock market alternatives.

There are all kinds of things you could do with the money. The withdrawn funds could be linked to a new purpose.

So to recap, be vigilant and timely when it comes to calculating and making your RMD. Have a tax or financial professional help you, and have a conversation about the destiny of that money.

This material was prepared by MarketingLibrary.Net Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. Marketing Library.Net Inc. is not affiliated with any broker or brokerage firm that may be providing this information to you. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is not a solicitation or a recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 - www.hartfordinvestor.com/servlet/Satellite?c=Page&cid=1284290138050&pagename=Investor%2FPage%2FCommon [9/23/11]

2 - www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=96989,00.html#8 [1/5/12]

It only makes sense - yet many retirees live without one.

Presented by Jeffrey Bush

You won’t be able to withdraw an unlimited amount of money in retirement. So a retirement budget is a necessity. Some retirees forego one, only to regret it later.

Run the numbers before you retire. Often people need about 70-80% of their end salaries in retirement, but this can vary. So years before you leave work, sit down for an hour or so (perhaps with the financial professional you know and trust) and take a look at your probable monthly expenses. Online calculators can help.¹

The closer you get to your retirement date, the more exact you will need to be about your income needs. You first want to look for changing expenses: housing costs that might decrease or increase, health care costs, certain taxes, travel expenses and so on. Next, look at your probable income sources: Social Security (the longer you wait, the more income you can potentially receive), your assorted IRAs and 401(k)s, your portfolio, possibly a reverse mortgage or even a pension or buyout package.

There are ways to potentially increase your retirement funds. You could realize a little more money through tax savings and tax-efficient withdrawals from retirement savings accounts, through reducing your investment fees, and by getting your phone, internet and TV services from one provider.

If you have just retired or are about to, you will enter 2012 with some financial breaks. Social Security benefits will increase by 3.6% next year, Medicare Part B premiums will rise $3.50 (instead of the $10 that Medicare projected), and the Part B deductible will be $22 cheaper in 2012 ($140).²

Budget-wreckers to avoid. There are a few factors that can cause you to stray from a retirement budget. You can’t do much about some of them (sudden health crises, for example), but you can try to mitigate others.

• Supporting your kids, grandkids or relatives with gifts or loans.
• Withdrawing more than your portfolio can easily return.
• Dragging big debts into retirement that will nibble at your savings.

Budget well & live wisely. These are times of low interest rates and modest Wall Street gains. Given those factors, creating a retirement budget makes a lot of sense. A budget - and the discipline to stick with it - may make a financial difference.

This material was prepared by MarketingLibrary.Net Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. Marketing Library.Net Inc. is not affiliated with any broker or brokerage firm that may be providing this information to you. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is not a solicitation or a recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.

Citations.

1 - www.smartmoney.com/retirement/planning/how-to-set-a-retirement-budget-1304908718392/ [5/12/11]

2 - online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577015673565194532.html [11/6/11]