Eve Kaplan, CFP®
Eve Kaplan
Kaplan Financial Advisors
E
52 Plymouth Drive
Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922 USA
Work 908-898-0549

Can You Afford to be a Stay-At-Home Parent?

April 22nd, 2012

by Eve Kaplan, CFP(R) Practitioner

How do you decide if it makes sense to leave a job and become a stay-at-home parent? As a financial planner, I approach this topic strictly from the financial standpoint – I’m NOT saying it’s better be a stay-at-home Mom and I’m NOT saying it’s better to use child care and go to work.

For the record, I’ve been both a stay-at-home Mom and a working parent. Any parent will tell you being a stay-at-home IS a job – it’s just not a paid job.

What prompts me to look at this topic is a recent CNN Money article (4/18/12) titled “Moms: “I can’t afford to work.”
The article catalogues the rising cost of child care that eats into – or even exceeds – the take-home pay of working parents (in this case, a working mother). The Bureau of Statistics data underscore some of the underlying issues for stay-at-home Moms:

a) Although women exceed men in terms of educational attainment, their average income is $35,776/year.

b) $35,776/year is nearly 20% less than the average income earned by men.

Rising child care expenses present a heavy drag on family finances, but the CNN Money article overly simplifies the
decision one mother made (a Mrs. Hwang) because it merely compares the cost of child care for her children vs. the after-tax income she could otherwise earn. Clearly there are many ways to value of a job — and after-tax pay is only one of them.

Mrs. Hwang is a good stand-in for any stay-at-home parent. She related to CNN that her public school teacher salary
was $30,000/year after tax. She has 2 children and the cost of care for them is a relatively “modest” $18,000/year (the article notes she lives in Virginia, which has some of the lowest child care expenses in the nation). Mrs. Hwang felt it wasn’t worth it to continue work, although her husband can’t earn enough for them to live comfortably.

For the sake of argument, let’s say her child care expenses total $30,000 per year – the same as her after-tax take-home salary. And let’s assume Mrs. Hwang elects not to return to work, even after her children leave for college. On that basis, let’s compare ALL
components of her income to make a fair analysis of the “cost” of being a stay-at-home Mom – not just a flat comparison of a) child care costs vs b) after-tax salary:

1) As a public school teacher, each year of teaching accrues toward a retirement pension that pays Mrs. Hwang from retirement to the end of her life. Let’s assume her pension does not inflate once retirement commences (this is ine line with Gov Christie’s decision to freeze teacher and administrator pensions for decades to come). If Mrs. Hwang is 38 and chose to work to age 65+, she can accrue a lifetime pension that I calculate pays her at least $40,000/year (after tax) from 2039 (age 65) to the end of her life. This is a conservativeestimate based upon projected income levels and pension accrual. The value of this estimated
pension from age 65 to age 92 is $1,080,000 in 2039 dollars, or $554,000 in 2012 dollars.

2) Mrs. Hwang’s future social security payments would be higher if she continues to work since income generation drives projected social security benefits. After consulting with a number of specialists, potential “game changers” in social security render
calculations too tentative. However, one projection I ran indicated Mrs. Hwang could receive approx. $18,600 per year in retirement (agg 67 to the end of life) if she works, but only half that amount per year if she remains a stay-at-home parent (note: this does not include some build up in credits for work done from e.g. age 30-38). Since social security works like an inflating
fixed annuity, missed dollars obviously have an impact on Mrs. Hwang’s cash flow through her projected 25+ years of retirement.

3) Mrs. Hwang’s presumably has medical coverage through her husband’s job. It’s possible, however, that medical coverage through school would cost significantly less – possibly $6,000/year less (2012 dollars). Again, I use public schools teachers in NJ as an example since teachers here still benefit from generous subsidies for medical coverage.

4) Mrs. Hwang will miss access to a tax-deferred 403b savings plan through work. It’s not likely she has a match for her deferred savings, however, and it IS possible she could defer $5,000 per year in a spousal IRA, so the cost/benefit calculation here is a wash.

5) Mrs. Hwang will forego e.g. 1x salary life insurance available through work by staying at home. If she’s in good health, that benefit is worth at least $100/year.

6) Since Mrs. Hwang is a school teacher who presumably does not work in the summer, it’s possible her child care costs
may be less than a working parent who has the standard 2-3 weeks of vacation/year.

What is the effective value of work benefits Mrs. Hwang is giving up, apart from her income? In current 2012 dollars, it easily exceeds $700,000 over her lifetime. It’s possible the value Mrs. Hwang and her family assign to staying home with her children is “priceless,” but it’s also possible the Hwangs aren’t aware of the long-term cost of her decision to leave work. Either
way, the “cost”calculation of leaving work must include many benefits that aren’t immediately apparent when looking at take-home pay alone and comparing it with child care costs. Of course we haven’t discussed working parents who
work awhile, stop to raise children, and return to work thereafter. And we’re not addressing the benefits of staying “current” in a competitive work landscape. Like other decisions, there are both emotional and financial costs and benefits.

What’s the right answer for you and your family? I posit that a financial advisor provides meaningful input by running numbers to calculate the effective cost (or savings) if you decide to become a stay-at-home parent or if you’re thinking about returning to work.

At the very least, the cost/savings equation needs to include many more elements than just a flat comparison of “child care costs” vs. “take-home salary.” A good advisor can help you make a more informed decisions so you and your family avoid outliving your assets.

Copyright (C) 2012 by Eve Kaplan

Couples and Money

October 20th, 2011

What are some of your earliest memories about money? Did your parents agree about money when you were growing up? Do you and your spouse make financial decisions together? Or apart? Do you view money differently? Have you ever discussed these things with a financial planner or advisor??

We financial planners wear many hats – problem solver, prudent investment manager, enlightened advisor (helping our clients avoid the risk of outliving their assets), etc. In addition, another hat I wear in my financial planning practice is – for lack of a better word — “money therapist.”

I’m not a licensed therapist, but emotions and money often are tied to each other. If there is discord, misunderstanding or distrust in a relationship, this can show up in financial matters. In meetings with clients, I try to listen well (and talk less). And I’m attentive to both husbands and wives (regardless of who the financial decision-maker is in a relationship). Have you ever met a professional who only looked at you, but ignored your wife or husband through the entire meeting? It’s important to provide a non-judgmental space for both you and your spouse to speak – even if you don’t agree on some issues.

Here’s why this can matter to you:

• money problems/differences is one of the biggest triggers for divorce; money is power
• if you’re emotionally invested in your plan, you’re more motivated to implement it and achieve financial success
• in my experience, women and men often behave differently toward money/financial decisions – it’s helpful to you if your planner reaches out to both the “yin” and “yang.”
• at least half of financial planning clients are women, but only ¼ of Certified Financial Planners® are female

Studies show that women seek out financial advice more than men, while men often view financial planning in more dispassionate terms. Men tend to be more confident about making financial decisions on their own. Drawing on both of these typical gender-linked traits can be a positive for the experience.

How does all of this play out in an initial meeting with clients. In my case, I guide them through a discovery process that gives them time to speak (without interruption from the other spouse) about what’s important to them about money. Often a wife or husband will relay something that prompts the other to say something like “I never knew that about you” or “I’m surprised to hear that – I really had no idea you felt that way.”

When I grew up in the 1960s, financial planning didn’t exist. My family was under stress due to discord over lack of money and problems with a struggling business my father started. My parents eventually got divorced after a prolonged period of financial hell. It’s possible divorce could have been averted if my parents had access to objective financial advice…

A Money Magazine survey indicates that “71% of Americans admit that they keep secrets or lie to spouses and significant others about their money.” If you’re married, you know how intertwined money is in your relationship. Work with a financial planner who can help you sort through issues that help unite you and your spouse, instead of dividing you further.

Copyright © 2011 by Eve Kaplan

Women in the Planning Crosshairs: the Retirement Gender Gap

December 1st, 2010

Women in the Planning Crosshairs: the Retirement Gender Gap

By Eve Kaplan, CFP®

Ask any financial planner what the biggest financial problems Americans face and the answer is: lack of retirement preparedness. Americans still typically retire at age 65 but we are becoming more long-lived. Retirement, for some, can last 30+ years.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to women, where the problem is especially acute. Why?

Here are some reasons:

1. Less than half of wage-earning women in the US participate in retirement plans.
2. Women live longer than men.
3. Women, on average, work in jobs that earn less than men – causing an earnings gender gap.
4. Women (more often than men) interrupt their careers to care for children, aging parents and grandchildren.

As a result, women typically have about 1/3 less money set aside for retirement than men…yet the risk of outliving assets is greater for women than men. A whopping 2/3 of women (MassMutual 2009 study) know this is a problem since they say their current state of retirement preparedness is inadequate. Couples should care about these trends because they may not always be couples. Women outlive men and tend to marry older men. Any visit to a nursing home will confirm that most residents are women.

The good news is that studies show women absorb financial advice better than men because they are more receptive to the idea that they may not have all the answers on their own. When I meet women (whether as part of a couple, or as single clients) they tend to confide to me that they  have sleepless nights because they worry about having enough to cover their retirement. That’s not surprising…women often worry more about financial issues because they often are burdened with more concerns about the well-being of families.

Here’s where good planning – and the use of a trusted financial professional – come in. We financial planners have various tools in our kits to help create “water-tight” financial plans to address the retirement funding gap. Often it’s especially helpful for some women to work with women financial planners since women better understand the difficulty of trying to take care of themselves and also caring for their families.

A holistic view of financial planning is especially appropriate in this context. What does holistic financial planning involve? It has the same rigor of any good financial plan (objective analysis, alternative scenarios, a step-by-step plan of action) but a holistic approach also addresses a client’s emotional concerns to make sure the tailored plan resonates with the client.

In my practice, I give clients “space” to discuss issues that matter to them since feelings always have a bearing on a financial plan. Studies show – again and again – that clients who are emotionally invested in a financial plan always have a higher success rate in terms of implementing their plan and realizing their goals.

After all – there’s little point in going through the effort of a financial plan if it doesn’t mesh well with client priorities and ends up as an empty exercise.

Only approximately 25% of financial planners are women so there is a significant mismatch between the rising percentage of women seeking financial help, and the number of financial planners who personally understood the sometimes more intuitive approach women clients take.

Consider if you know a financial planner you can trust with all aspects of your financial and emotional life. Consider the benefits of a holistic approach to financial planning. Consider working with someone who has a transparent fee structure (charging by the hour or a percentage of assets managed) instead of someone who sells products on commission.

Copyright © 2010 by Eve Kaplan

 

Eve Kaplan is a Fee-Only (no products sold) Certified Financial Planner® in Berkeley Heights. Kaplan Financial Advisors is a Registered Investment Advisor in NJ and NY. Eve’s firm works with high net-worth individuals and small businesses (401k planning). Eve can be reached at 908-898-0549 or www.KaplanFinancialAdvisors.com

Women and Money – Why it’s Different from Men and Money

March 1st, 2009

Women and Money — Why It’s Different from Men and Money

by Eve Kaplan, CFP(R)

The subject of women and money is a hot button issue. Here are 2 things that emerged from a seminar I participated in at the NJ NOW Conference at Rutgers University: 1) the relativel paucity of female financial planners and 2) specific money issues that affect women more than men.
Let’s take a quick look at the first issue: female financial planners and female clients. Only 25% of Certified Financial Planners are female but experts say women will control more than 50% of the wealth in the US in coming decades.

Why is that? It’s more a function of women living long than men — and less a function of more women in the work force. Studies show that women typically assume they know less about financial matters than men (and seek more information from an advisor). Accordingly, there are potential mis-matches between the common needs of female clients and the approach taken by male financial planners.

What about the specific planning issues that affect women more than men? Here are 3:

1. Women in the US live 5 years longer than men and earn/save less. Women typically earn 23% less than men (5% less if it’s an identical job) so they have a higher risk of outliving their assets. To counteract this, women need to stay in the labor force longer (if possible), save more and keep their employable skill set up-to-date. Because women earn less than men, they tend to save less in retirement plans (e.g. 401k plans). Studies show women have lower 401k participation rates than men.

2. Women often are more underinsured than men.  Women who don’t officially work nonetheless have economic value (especially if they’re caring for children at home). These women need sufficient life insurance to replace their homemaking services if they die prematurely. Further, women need long-term care insurance (and home health care coverage) more than men since they live longer than men and frequently outlive their spouses. A trip to any assisted living facility or nursing home will confirm that the majority of residents are women.

3. Women often are poorly informed about financial matters. If married, women tend to delegate financial decision-making to their husbands (I’m not saying this happens all the time — but it’s common). When women absent themselves from financial decision-making, they suffer if their husbands die suddenly. Often women don’t know where key financial accounts are held or what kind of planning their husbands may have had in place for them. Newly widowed women are especially vulnerable to sales techniques in the financial industry that prey on “fear” and other emotions to get women to buy into products and services they don’t need. Unfortunately, most of the financial services industry still revolves around products sales (not Kaplan Financial Advisors – we’re Fee-Only!).

Transactional-based advice-giving works like this: advisors who sell products identify the need, instill the fear, locate a product to sell and “close on the deal.”

In sum, there are real financial planning issues that affect women more than men. If you’re a woman and you don’t work with a financial advisor, it’s a good idea to bone up on some of the specific planning issues affecting women that we’ve mentioned here.

Copyright © 2008 by Eve Kaplan

Eve Kaplan is a Fee-Only (no products sold) Certified Financial Planner in Berkeley Heights. Kaplan Financial Advisors, LLC is a Registered Investment Advisor in NJ and NY. Her website is www.KaplanFinancialAdvisors.com. She can be reached at 908-898-0549 or eve@kaplanfinancialadvisors.com

powered by  Advisor Designs - Web Designers for Financial Advisors