Apache is functioning normally
<!–
Home Lifestyle Sustainable fabrics that are taking over home décor
<!–
Home Lifestyle Sustainable fabrics that are taking over home décor
Source: luxebook.in
What is the true cost of home ownership? A closer look at which is best between a 30 year fixed mortgage rate or a 15 year fixed mortgage rate…
Have you ever been a situation where you wanted to buy something really bad? Maybe it was something that you wanted really bad, but you really didn’t quite need it.
Just for hypothetical sake, let’s say you really need (I’ll say want) the new Apple iPad and with its nice entry prices of $499. You have to buy it, but unfortunately, you don’t have the cash right now, so you buy it on credit.
Everyone else is doing it, why not you?
Needing a line of credit you head to the first lender and they strike you a deal that will allow you to pay it back over 3 months of $200 per month.
Over the 3 months you’ll pay a total of $600 of which $100 is interest. Not sure you if you’re getting the best deal you shop around and head to the 2nd lender.
The 2nd lender entices you with a sweet offer that only makes you pay $125 month but you do so for a 6 month period. The grand total you’ll pay is $750 of which $250 is interest.
Although with the second lender you pay less per month, it takes you longer to own your iPad and you end up paying one and a half times what it is actually worth! How bad do you really need it?
If a similar situation, would lender would you borrow from? As I’m sure you can tell, there is a lot of similarity in buying a home. When you’re deciding between a 15-year mortgage and a 30-year mortgage, be sure to consider and weigh all the pros and cons before making your decision.
In general, the reason most homebuyers take out a 30-year mortgage is because they cannot afford (or think they cannot afford) a higher monthly payment.
But if you can find a way to make a 15-year mortgage rate work within your budget, it could really pay off in the long run.
You would own your home sooner and pay less for it (ultimately), and you would probably also lock in your mortgage at a lower interest rate.
For example … Let’s say you want to buy a house for $300,000. If you took out a 30-year fixed rate mortgage at 6.5%, you’d pay around $1900 per month. In the end, you will have spent $300,000 on your house, and $382,633 on interest. That’s a total of $682,633 … over twice the price of your home.
If you bought the same house with a 15-year fixed rate mortgage at 6.0%, your monthly payment would be about $2,532.
However, at the end of 15 years, you will have spent only $455,682. That’s $300,000 on the house and only $155,682 on interest.
That’s $226,951 less than with the 30-year mortgage!
That “extra” money could be invested, used to fund your child’s education, used to renovate the house, etc.
It’s up to you to decide if the additional money paid each month is worth the long-term payoff.
But remember … the term is shorter, too. Imagine owning your home before your kids start college.
You’re only sacrificing monthly for 15 years, and then … no more payments. It’s all yours!
Being over zealous in paying down your home mortgage does have it risks. The first
What are the downsides? Well, the most obvious downside is that the monthly payment is higher.
This can mean significantly altering your spending habits.
Another downside: by paying less interest, you’ll get less of a tax deduction.
While the attraction of having your house paid off in 15 years sounds exciting, it’s a pipe dream for many. My wife and I had toyed with the idea of choosing a 15-year mortgage for our new house, but when we started to crunch the numbers we realized that we were dreaming and dreaming big.
Our solution was to make an extra payment per year.
For example, if you use the example above, a $300,000, 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at 6.5% and if we contribute just $200 extra each month (0r $2400 per year) toward the principle, we could potentially pay off our mortgage nearly 7 years sooner and save over $100,000 in interest.
For us, we get the benefit of paying off the mortgage sooner while not having to be tied down to a higher monthly payment in case we have any unexpected jolts to our income later on in life. Typically, this is the same method that I would suggest to most.
There’s a lot of value in flexibility and leaving your options open.
Source: goodfinancialcents.com
For a while now I’ve been meaning to put together a Cafepress.com store for biblemoneymatters.com, with t-shirts, sweatshirts, bags and other accessories for the frugally minded. I finally did it!
Now you can get your own t-shirt proclaiming your love of being frugal – hot off the press! With sayings like “I’m not cheap, I’m frugal!” and “Credit card? I don’t need no stinkin credit card!”, you’ll have fun telling everyone just how much you love to save!
Have an idea for your own t-shirt saying? Leave a comment here and maybe we’ll pick a few of the good ones and put them on a t-shirt for you to buy!
Source: biblemoneymatters.com
Last Updated on August 23, 2022 by Mark Ferguson
My wife and I just got back from Turks and Caicos, which is an incredibly beautiful island in the Caribbean. While there, we were tempted to buy a vacation rental. It seems like every time we go on vacation we think about buying a vacation house, but this time we gave it more thought. Turks and Caicos was the favorite place we have ever been too and the prices were relatively affordable.
We thought about buying a vacation house because we loved the island and plan to go back again and again. At first, buying a vacation rental appears to be a wise decision if you visit the same destination enough. The plan would be to buy a house or condo on the beach, stay there a few times a year and rent out the place when we are not staying there. But when you look at the pros and cons of vacation homes from an investing perspective, we were reminded why it is not always a wise financial decision. The expenses are extraordinarily high on vacation rentals and are you really saving money when you stay there on vacation?
Before I get started with an analysis of vacation houses, I want to discuss Turk’s and Caicos. TCI, as it is called locally, is a chain of islands in the Caribbean between the Bahamas and the Dominican Republic. We choose to vacation there, because the water looked crystal clear and had that amazing blue-green color my wife and I love. We have been to Mexico, St Martin, Dominican Republic, and taken a cruise to a few more destinations in the Caribbean. We enjoyed those destinations, but we heard TCI was better, had fewer people and was worth the extra money (it is expensive). We were not disappointed in Turks and Caicos as the water was gorgeous, the beaches were soft white sand and there was a reef right outside our resort that we snorkeled at every day. We saw a giant ray, sea turtles, many tropical fish, a large barracuda, corals and much more.
The island is not as busy as many other places we have visited and everyone was very friendly. My wife also has many food allergies including gluten, soy, dairy, eggs, and the grocery stores were extremely well stocked in allergy-friendly and organic food. There are 40 islands in the country, most of them uninhabited with the same perfect water and beaches. The main island, Providenciales was expensive as most are but was well worth it.
We enjoyed the island so much, that we looked at buying a vacation house or condo there. The prices actually seemed somewhat affordable for oceanfront property compared to other places we have been like Florida. We stayed at the Coral Gardens and although there is a rather ugly half-finished resort next to it, it was a lovely resort.
The resort next door (The Toscana) was supposed to be a high-end Italian style resort that was started in 2008. The island was hit very hard economically in 2008 thanks to two hurricanes and the global economic meltdown. The building of the Toscana stopped dead in 2008 and the site has been an eyesore ever since, although I found it fascinating. It turns out the original company that started construction ran out of money and went under after taking many deposits for the complex from future owners. The bank that took it over tried to auction the property off multiple times without success, but recently the owners of the penthouses got together and have agreed to finish the project themselves.
Staying on the island is very expensive and our one-bedroom condo goes for $400 to $500 a night. It had direct ocean views, a balcony, two baths, and a full kitchen. You can buy similar condos in the same building we were in for under $400,000. On the surface that looks like a great return on your money. Buy a place for $400,000 and rent it for $12,000 a month. That blows the 2 percent rule out of the water and is a lot higher rent to value ratio than I get on my 13 rental properties. The properties I buy in Colorado rent for $1,200 to $1,500 and I bought them from $80,000 to $135,000.
One reason I was intrigued by Turks and Caicos real estate is the rent to value ratios. We stayed in Florida on the gulf coast a couple of times in the last few years. On our last trip, we paid $2,400 for a week in a three-bedroom, oceanfront house. That house was recently for sale for 1.6 million dollars and I guessed it was worth $1.5 million. The rent was less on the beach house in Florida, but the value was over three times as much as the Turks and Caicos condo.
The problem with vacation rentals is the cost to manage and maintain them. I pay 8 percent of my rents to have my rental properties managed by a property manager. The cost for a property manager on vacation rentals is 30 to 50 percent of the rents! The management fees on the Coral Gardens units that we looked at were 40 percent.
There will also be many more vacancies on short-term rentals than on long-term rentals. There are also high and low seasons for vacation rentals and you can’t expect to see peak income year-round. The total income for 2014 on one unit in TCI was $72,000 and another $62,000. These units were identical and right next to each other, but these income differences show the volatility with vacation rentals. It also shows that you can’t count on $400 a night every night. Weekly rates will be lower, many nights will be vacant and rates will be much lower in the off-season.
The actual income is not $12,000 a month, but closer to $6,000 a month once you factor in the vacancies and off-season rates. Now we are getting closer to the returns we see on my rental properties in Colorado. However, we have not considered the management fees.
I pay 8 percent for someone on my team to manage my rental properties. I used to manage them myself, but once I got to seven rentals I started to run out of time to manage my properties, flip houses, run a real estate team and write this blog! With a property manager, my properties have become almost completely passive, except when I first buy them.
I own single-family rentals that take very little management. The tenants tend to stay for long periods of time, the houses are repaired after I buy them so little maintenance is needed. We occasionally have problems, but for the most part, our tenants pay on time and take good care of the properties. The tenants pay all the utilities and are on long-term leases.
When you manage a vacation rental, it is an entirely different situation. Vacation rentals take much more marketing, much more active management, have more inquiries from renters, need more cleaning and are more like a hotel. Managers need to be able to check people in at all times of the day and night and even be a concierge in some cases. More responsibilities and work means you have to pay much higher fees as sometimes the manager will need to hire from services like Tidy TN due to time restraints of their duties.
Just the property management fees on the Turks and Caicos condos are $20,000 to $30,000 per year! We have not even talked about the other expenses that come with a vacation house.
When you invest in condos you also have to consider HOA or maintenance fees. On beach front condos the HOA fees can be very expensive. There is a pool, maid service, parking lot, towels and properties close to the beach that have extra expenses. The beach has to be maintained and buildings weather faster due to salt and winds. The occasional hurricane can really cause problems. HOA fees on beachfront condos can easily run $1,000 a month or more.
Vacation rentals must be furnished, have plates, silverware, linens, televisions and everything someone would need while staying there. Over time these items would have to be replaced and upgraded to keep the rental unit desirable. If you are charging $400 a night, it better be very nice.
Vacation rental owners will have to pay for all the utilities as well. The electric, gas, cable, water, internet all are added expenses and will most likely cost more in exotic places like the Caribbean islands. Fresh water comes from rain and desalinization, not wells or rivers. Internet, cable, electric all cost more.
If you want an oceanfront property it is almost guaranteed to be in a flood zone. You will have to get flood insurance, which is much more expensive than regular insurance.
Here are the total costs per month of a vacation rental on the beach compared to a regular single-family rental (assuming they rent for the same amount, or you have multiple single-family rentals that rent for the same as one vacation rental):
Vacation House Single-family Rental
Rents received $5,833 $5,833
HOA fees $1,000 0
Management $2,333 $467
Utilities $60 0
Credit card fees $200 0
Travel agent fees $300 0
Maintenance $600 $600
Taxes $0 $416
Insurance $500 $400
Total Costs $4,993 $1,883
These are not all the costs but are meant to show the huge differences between a long-term rental and a short-term vacation rental. I did not include vacancies, because the rents I used for the vacation rental are actual returns. Keep in mind with a single-family rental property you will have much fewer vacancies than a vacation rental. There are also a few more costs I did not discuss yet on the vacation rental.
The utilities on the condos we looked at were not very high, because the HOA took care of the water, electric and cable. The HOA takes care of the exterior maintenance, but not the interior maintenance. You can see that almost all of the income is used up by the expenses on the vacation rental. If you consider the huge initial tax bill all the income is used up on the vacation rental and you don’t have any loan costs!
The reason most people consider a vacation rental is they think buying a vacation house will save them money. Even though you are actually losing money on this particular vacation condo, maybe it makes sense to buy it if you stay there enough. You will save thousands on every vacation, right? The problem is every time you stay at your vacation rental you are taking it off the rental market. You could be renting the property to someone else and you are losing rental income.
Is it really an advantage to own a vacation house if you are staying there a week or two every year? Will you also feel obligated to go on vacation every year to the same spot? What if you have a wedding, graduation, a family reunion, a funeral or another occasion you have to use your vacation time on? Most people do not use their vacation properties as much as they think. This is one reason timeshares are such a horrible investment, but that deserves another article.
All of the numbers I have used so far have assumed you are paying cash for a vacation rental and you are still losing money! If you get a loan it will lose even more money and do you want to tie up $400,000 plus in a vacation rental that you use a couple of times a year? That much money would make me over $7,000 a month in rental income because I can use that money with financing and still make money each month. That $7,000 a month would more than pay for a couple of vacations a year in some really nice places! Not to mention it is not easy to get financing in another country or even another state.
There are a few instances when it would make sense to buy a vacation rental, but they can still be very risky.
Even in these scenarios, there are other risks like beach erosion, natural disasters, political changes in other countries, insurance changes and giant half-finished resorts next to your condo!
On the surface, vacation house may seem like a great investment. They aren’t making any more ocean and there is only so much beachfront property. However, if you have to tie up huge sums of cash to buy the property and you still lose money every month is it worth it? For me, it is not worth the risk, the money it would take and I would lose flexibility with my vacation choices. I love Turks and Caicos, but that does not mean I want to spend every vacation for the rest of my life there.
Build a Rental Property Empire
Source: investfourmore.com
You can pay rent with any credit card and earn rewards on the entire payment. But even if your credit limit can accommodate the transaction, there’s a catch: You generally have to use a payment portal that tacks 2% to 4% onto the transaction. That’s more than enough to offset any rewards you’d earn.
Bilt Mastercard offers a way around that. It has a built-in rent payment portal that lets you pay your rent without the transaction fee. You earn a 1% return on those rent payments too.
Transaction-fee-free rent payments with rewards is Bilt Mastercard’s biggest selling point, but it’s not the card’s only notable feature. Bilt Mastercard has some additional upsides — and downsides — to consider before you apply.
Bilt Mastercard is a rewards credit card with no annual fee. It’s one of the few credit cards that waives transaction fees on rent payments, significantly reducing the cost of paying rent with a credit card.
Bilt Mastercard has an above-average rewards program that earns points on everything you buy — double and triple points on common purchases like travel and dining. Heavy spenders can move up the Bilt Rewards hierarchy, earning points toward travel, experiences, or even a down payment on a house.
Bilt Mastercard has a few unusual features that set it apart from most rewards credit cards.
Yes, Bilt Mastercard is legitimate. While Bilt itself isn’t very well known, this credit card is backed by Wells Fargo, one of the biggest banks in the United States (and world).
Funds held with Wells Fargo are FDIC-insured, and it’s one of the few banks qualifying as “too big to fail,” so it’s not going anywhere. If it does, we all have bigger problems than whether this one credit card is a scam.
Bilt Mastercard touts its transaction fee-free rent rewards. But that’s just one feature on a much bigger menu.
Bilt Mastercard has a tiered rewards program. The rewards you earn depend on what category your purchase falls into. But overall, it’s a generous rewards program.
You have to make at least five transactions in a statement period to earn rewards for that period. That rules out using Bilt Mastercard for rent payments only.
You can redeem Bilt rewards for:
Redemption minimums and values vary, but if you travel regularly, the most reliable value comes from transfers to airline and hotel partners. Otherwise, rent payments are your best bet.
Bilt’s rewards program has four tiers based on your annual point earnings. Each tier unlocks new benefits:
If you wish, you can allow Bilt to report your rent payments to the three major credit bureaus (Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion). That may help you build credit faster, especially if you don’t have many other credit accounts. But it can also hurt you if you stop paying rent for any reason or you’re late on rent payments.
Bilt Mastercard has some potentially valuable non-rewards travel benefits too.
Bilt Mastercard has some other complimentary benefits:
From day one, Bilt Mastercard’s APR is 20.99%, 23.99%, or 28.99%, based on your creditworthiness. There’s no introductory APR promotion for purchases or balance transfers.
Bilt Mastercard has no annual fee or foreign transaction fees. Other fees may apply, including balance transfer and cash advance fees.
Bilt Mastercard has relatively laid-back standards. It’s not for people with bad credit, but your application may be approved, even if your FICO credit score is below 700. For more information, see our article about good versus bad credit scores.
Bilt Mastercard has an above-average rewards program, multiple perks and benefits for renters, and some potentially valuable benefits for cardholders who use rideshare and restaurant delivery services.
Bilt Mastercard is missing some common rewards card features and falls flat on purchases outside the dining and travel categories, among other disadvantages.
Bilt Mastercard really leans into its rent payment benefits, but if you zoom out, it looks like a fairly typical travel and dining credit card. So before you apply, see how it stacks up against another popular credit card that rewards dining and travel: the Chase Sapphire Preferred Card.
Bilt Mastercard | Chase Sapphire Preferred | |
Dining Rewards | Unlimited 3x | Unlimited 3x |
Travel Rewards | Unlimited 2x | Unlimited 2x or 5x |
Base Rewards | 1x (limited only on rent) | Unlimited 1x |
Double Points Day | Yes | No |
Travel Credit | None | $50 on eligible hotels |
Sign-Up Bonus | None | Yes |
Rent Transaction Fee | None | Yes |
Annual Fee | $0 | $95 |
Bilt Mastercard is the best credit card to use for rent payments because it waives the customary transaction fee, which can add 2% to 4% to the cost, depending on which payment portal you use. It has some other benefits too, including unlimited 3x rewards on dining purchases and unlimited 2x rewards on travel purchases. And it has no annual fee.
But Bilt Mastercard has some meaningful drawbacks. It lacks a sign-up bonus or 0% APR introductory promotion, and its baseline rewards rate is low. Most important, you have to make at least five transactions in a statement period to earn rewards for that period, which rules out getting it just to use on rent payments or infrequent use in general.
Still, Bilt Mastercard is a contender if you’re a renter in the market for an entry-level rewards credit card.
Source: moneycrashers.com
The housing market has been red hot for the past few years, and home rises have been skyrocketing around the country.
Home buyers that have worried about affordability point to increasing home prices and mortgage rates as reasons to not buy a home. The total number of applications for mortgages has been decreasing each week with recent applications dropping 0.1% week over week, continuing a trend of home buyers stopping their search.
Surprisingly, VA home buyers have been leaving the market at an even quicker pace than that.
VA loans are often considered to be the top mortgage product available, thanks to their lower mortgage rates and 100% financing. In a housing market where affordability is one of the biggest issues facing buyers, being VA eligible is a huge advantage.
But what’s happening with VA loans, and are VA rates increasing?
Click to see current rates.
All mortgage rates tend to follow the same trend, although rates associated with different products can vary.
According to mortgage software company Ellie Mae, the average mortgage rate for a closed 30-year loan in July was 4.91%. By comparison, the same rate in July of 2017 was 4.25%. So, it’s no secret that rates have been rising.
The same is happening to VA rates, although VA rates have been lower. The average rate for a closed 30-year VA loan in July was 4.75%, as compared to 4.00% in July last year.
Even though VA rates have been trending upward, they’ve remained at a lower level, which helps keeps homes more affordable for veterans. While rates have been increasing, there are signs that this increase could be slowing.
There are a lot of factors that influence mortgage rates, but there are a few big factors at play.
It mostly starts with the Federal Reserve, which has been raising their federal funds rate. The federal funds rate is the rate that banks borrow money from the government. Essentially, it’s the lowest possible level that any type of interest rate can hit. As this rate increases, all other types of interest rate tend to increase.
In the past two years, the Fed has increased the federal funds rate six times by a total of 1.50%. That’s the largest upward change to the rate in over a decade.
The Fed increases their rate, in part, to keep the economy and inflation in check. As the economy grows, inflation tends to creep higher. Lately, the economy has been growing at a healthy pace, and more attention is being paid to inflation.
Investors also see this happening. When the economy is doing poorly, investors move their money to safer investments. Mortgage backed securities (MBS) are among the safest. MBS are collections of mortgages, and since mortgages are routinely paid off by homeowners, they’re safe for investors.
In a weak economy, investors have a high demand for MBS. This causes mortgage lenders to reduce mortgage rates so they can sell as many as possible. In a strong economy, investors move toward riskier investments. Mortgage lenders respond by increasing mortgage rates, including VA rates, to make MBS more valuable.
All of this combined leads to increasing mortgage rates for home buyers. So, in a roundabout way, a strong economy is actually tougher for home buyers.
Check today’s VA rates.
According to Ellie Mae, VA rates have been increasing, but that increase has been slowing down. July’s average rate was 4.75%, and June’s average rate was 4.74%.
The shortage of home buyers coupled with a slowing housing market could be causing this slowdown. While VA home buyers shouldn’t expect mortgage rates to decrease in the near future, they also might not be increasing by a large margin any time soon.
VA rates are already the lowest available, and they seem to have hit a ceiling – for now. VA eligible home buyers can take advantage of this lull in rates and demand. With less competition for homes and the lowest rates on the market, a VA loan could be the perfect tool for securing financing for a home.
Click to check today’s VA rates.
Source: militaryvaloan.com
Tap on the profile icon to edit
your financial details.
Wills are an essential part of estate planning, leaving instructions for how to distribute your assets and possessions after you die. Trusts are a common tool in estate planning as well, serving as a way to manage assets both before and after your death. If your will conflicts with a trust that you have set up, the trust will typically prevail. This is because, in most cases, the assets in a trust don’t technically belong to your estate any longer. They are legally owned by the trust itself, so the terms of your will don’t affect them. For help with estate planning, consider working with a financial advisor.
A last will and testament is a legal document that directs how to distribute your assets after your death. Among other issues, a will establishes:
Wills are an essential part of estate planning. When you die, everything that you own is collectively known as your estate, which then gets distributed among your heirs.
If you leave a will, your estate is distributed according to your wishes and that process is overseen by someone you select, known as the executor. If you die without a will, known as dying intestate, your estate is distributed according to the inheritance law of your jurisdiction. That process is overseen by someone appointed by the probate court, known as an administrator.
Under typical circumstances a will is managed through and by probate courts. Your executor will file your will with the court which in turn oversees the entire process of settling your affairs and distributing the estate’s assets. For most estates, the probate process is largely a formality. The court makes sure that your will is legal, that your estate pays its debts and that your executor has the access they need to distribute your assets.
The same process occurs if you die without a will. In that case, the probate court appoints an administrator and the court then ensures that the administrator distributes your assets according to the local inheritance laws.
A trust is a legal entity created to hold, manage and oversee property. Every trust has four main components:
When you create a trust, you put assets in its name. Once you do that the assets belong to the trust itself, not you. This is the same as with any other property transfer. The trust is a legal entity capable of owning assets, paying taxes and making distributions, so once you put something in its name that property legally belongs to the trust itself, not you.
In creating a trust, you also establish its terms. You name the trustees and the beneficiaries, and set out the terms for how the trustees should manage the trust and its assets. This includes instructions for what assets the beneficiaries will receive, along with how and when. For instance, you can leave instructions for your trustee to distribute your funds equally among your children after you die.
There are two main circumstances in which a will can conflict with a trust. First, a will might give instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust that already exists. For example, your will might include language that leaves the family home to your children, while earlier in life you placed that house in a trust for tax purposes. Second, a will might give instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust that doesn’t exist yet, or which hasn’t yet received its assets. For example, your will might include language that distributes your investments among your children, while another section of the will might include language that places your investments in a family trust.
In the first case, the terms of the will have no authority. A will cannot override a trust that already exists, nor can it distribute or manage property already held in an existing trust. If a trust exists and holds its assets, those assets belong to the trust itself. They are not part of your estate and, as a result, are not subject to the terms of your will.
If your will gives instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust, your will’s terms will apply to the assets in your estate and the trust’s instructions will apply to the assets in the trust. The designated beneficiaries will receive their assets according to the terms of the trust.
In the second case, your will is not actually conflicting with any existing trust. Instead, it is internally contradictory and will be resolved according to local inheritance law. You can leave instructions in your will to put assets in trust. This can apply to a trust that already exists, where your will puts assets into a trust that you created earlier. It can also apply to a testamentary trust, where your will instructs the executor to create a new trust and put assets into it.
In both cases, these assets belong to your estate when you die. This means that the terms of your will govern how those assets are distributed. If one section of your will conflicts with the section of your will which creates or contributes to the trust, then the issue is that your will is internally contradictory. The trust itself is not in question, just the will.
In that case the probate court and your executor will have to determine the exact nature of the internal conflict in your will. They will then resolve that conflict according to state and local inheritance law.
Your will still cannot supersede how an existing trust manages its assets. But conflicts in your will can prevent new assets from being added to the trust. This is why, if you plan on making or managing a trust, it’s wise to have a lawyer help you write these documents.
Wills and trusts are, generally, the two most significant vehicles for estate planning. Broadly speaking, if you are looking to leave assets to your heirs, you will likely use one or both of these. While a full exploration of the subject is beyond the scope of this article, there are some good rules for when you should use a will vs. a trust. Wills and trusts are not mutually exclusive; their control over specific property is. Any given asset can either be put in trust or distributed by a will – but not both. However, you can manage your estate in general by putting some assets into a trust and distributing others through a will.
In general, wills have the benefit of simplicity.
While wills do not have the tax and probate benefits of a trust, the truth is that these concerns are frequently overstated. The federal estate tax only applies to large estates, beginning at $12.92 million at time of writing. And the probate process can take some time, but it typically is only lengthy and complex for particularly large or contentious estates. If you have an ordinary scope of assets, the odds are good that neither taxes nor probate will be a burden for your heirs.
Yet, at the same time, wills are one-shot instruments. This makes good for making simple distributions and leaving direct instructions. But once the terms of the will have been carried out, the estate is closed.
The result is that wills are often a good choice when you want to leave someone an asset in its entirety, such as leaving an amount of cash or a home to one single heir. They are also good for small and mid-sized estates, as a trust would impose additional costs and complications in order to solve tax and probate issues that these estates likely will not have. Finally, wills are good for leaving instructions beyond the scope of assets, such as arranging for the care of minor children and pets.
In general, trusts have the benefit of third-party management.
When you put money into a trust you legally hand it over to a third party. This creates costs and complications that a will does not have. The trust will require instructions and terms, and you will need to pay for a trustee to oversee the trust’s assets.
This same process, however, means that your estate moves out of your name. You can do this before death, through a living trust, after death, through a testamentary trust, or in totality, through what is known as a pour-over will. This last is a will which bequeaths all of your property to a trust, so there is no risk of accidentally leaving any assets to the probate process.
Moving assets out of your name makes trusts good for estates that are large enough to trigger tax and probate concerns, such as if your estate is worth more than $13 million at time of writing. They are also good for people who want to leave ongoing instructions after they die, for example, if you would like to ensure that a piece of property remains in the family without being sold. Finally, trusts are good for people who anticipate contested issues, as the trust will avoid the probate process that opens the door for heirs and debtors to challenge the estate.
When you’re trying to decide whether to leave assets in a will or a trust, a good rule of thumb is this:
Wills are a good choice when you have a simple transfer to make. If you want to leave someone money or property to own outright, and you are not a multimillionaire, a will may be your best option. Trusts are a good choice when you have a large or complex issue of inheritance. If your estate is worth several million dollars, or you want to ensure that your assets are transferred and managed in a specific way, a trust may be your best option.
A will cannot override the terms of an existing trust. Once assets belong to a trust, they are not part of your estate and your will has no authority over them. However, if your will has terms to put assets into a trust, internal contradictions can prevent that transfer from taking place.
Photo credit: ©iStock.com/courtneyk, ©iStock.com/monkeybusinessimages, ©iStock.com/fizkes
An error occurred Please reload the page. |
Source: smartasset.com
Tap on the profile icon to edit
your financial details.
Wills are an essential part of estate planning, leaving instructions for how to distribute your assets and possessions after you die. Trusts are a common tool in estate planning as well, serving as a way to manage assets both before and after your death. If your will conflicts with a trust that you have set up, the trust will typically prevail. This is because, in most cases, the assets in a trust don’t technically belong to your estate any longer. They are legally owned by the trust itself, so the terms of your will don’t affect them. For help with estate planning, consider working with a financial advisor.
A last will and testament is a legal document that directs how to distribute your assets after your death. Among other issues, a will establishes:
Wills are an essential part of estate planning. When you die, everything that you own is collectively known as your estate, which then gets distributed among your heirs.
If you leave a will, your estate is distributed according to your wishes and that process is overseen by someone you select, known as the executor. If you die without a will, known as dying intestate, your estate is distributed according to the inheritance law of your jurisdiction. That process is overseen by someone appointed by the probate court, known as an administrator.
Under typical circumstances a will is managed through and by probate courts. Your executor will file your will with the court which in turn oversees the entire process of settling your affairs and distributing the estate’s assets. For most estates, the probate process is largely a formality. The court makes sure that your will is legal, that your estate pays its debts and that your executor has the access they need to distribute your assets.
The same process occurs if you die without a will. In that case, the probate court appoints an administrator and the court then ensures that the administrator distributes your assets according to the local inheritance laws.
A trust is a legal entity created to hold, manage and oversee property. Every trust has four main components:
When you create a trust, you put assets in its name. Once you do that the assets belong to the trust itself, not you. This is the same as with any other property transfer. The trust is a legal entity capable of owning assets, paying taxes and making distributions, so once you put something in its name that property legally belongs to the trust itself, not you.
In creating a trust, you also establish its terms. You name the trustees and the beneficiaries, and set out the terms for how the trustees should manage the trust and its assets. This includes instructions for what assets the beneficiaries will receive, along with how and when. For instance, you can leave instructions for your trustee to distribute your funds equally among your children after you die.
There are two main circumstances in which a will can conflict with a trust. First, a will might give instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust that already exists. For example, your will might include language that leaves the family home to your children, while earlier in life you placed that house in a trust for tax purposes. Second, a will might give instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust that doesn’t exist yet, or which hasn’t yet received its assets. For example, your will might include language that distributes your investments among your children, while another section of the will might include language that places your investments in a family trust.
In the first case, the terms of the will have no authority. A will cannot override a trust that already exists, nor can it distribute or manage property already held in an existing trust. If a trust exists and holds its assets, those assets belong to the trust itself. They are not part of your estate and, as a result, are not subject to the terms of your will.
If your will gives instructions that conflict with the terms of a trust, your will’s terms will apply to the assets in your estate and the trust’s instructions will apply to the assets in the trust. The designated beneficiaries will receive their assets according to the terms of the trust.
In the second case, your will is not actually conflicting with any existing trust. Instead, it is internally contradictory and will be resolved according to local inheritance law. You can leave instructions in your will to put assets in trust. This can apply to a trust that already exists, where your will puts assets into a trust that you created earlier. It can also apply to a testamentary trust, where your will instructs the executor to create a new trust and put assets into it.
In both cases, these assets belong to your estate when you die. This means that the terms of your will govern how those assets are distributed. If one section of your will conflicts with the section of your will which creates or contributes to the trust, then the issue is that your will is internally contradictory. The trust itself is not in question, just the will.
In that case the probate court and your executor will have to determine the exact nature of the internal conflict in your will. They will then resolve that conflict according to state and local inheritance law.
Your will still cannot supersede how an existing trust manages its assets. But conflicts in your will can prevent new assets from being added to the trust. This is why, if you plan on making or managing a trust, it’s wise to have a lawyer help you write these documents.
Wills and trusts are, generally, the two most significant vehicles for estate planning. Broadly speaking, if you are looking to leave assets to your heirs, you will likely use one or both of these. While a full exploration of the subject is beyond the scope of this article, there are some good rules for when you should use a will vs. a trust. Wills and trusts are not mutually exclusive; their control over specific property is. Any given asset can either be put in trust or distributed by a will – but not both. However, you can manage your estate in general by putting some assets into a trust and distributing others through a will.
In general, wills have the benefit of simplicity.
While wills do not have the tax and probate benefits of a trust, the truth is that these concerns are frequently overstated. The federal estate tax only applies to large estates, beginning at $12.92 million at time of writing. And the probate process can take some time, but it typically is only lengthy and complex for particularly large or contentious estates. If you have an ordinary scope of assets, the odds are good that neither taxes nor probate will be a burden for your heirs.
Yet, at the same time, wills are one-shot instruments. This makes good for making simple distributions and leaving direct instructions. But once the terms of the will have been carried out, the estate is closed.
The result is that wills are often a good choice when you want to leave someone an asset in its entirety, such as leaving an amount of cash or a home to one single heir. They are also good for small and mid-sized estates, as a trust would impose additional costs and complications in order to solve tax and probate issues that these estates likely will not have. Finally, wills are good for leaving instructions beyond the scope of assets, such as arranging for the care of minor children and pets.
In general, trusts have the benefit of third-party management.
When you put money into a trust you legally hand it over to a third party. This creates costs and complications that a will does not have. The trust will require instructions and terms, and you will need to pay for a trustee to oversee the trust’s assets.
This same process, however, means that your estate moves out of your name. You can do this before death, through a living trust, after death, through a testamentary trust, or in totality, through what is known as a pour-over will. This last is a will which bequeaths all of your property to a trust, so there is no risk of accidentally leaving any assets to the probate process.
Moving assets out of your name makes trusts good for estates that are large enough to trigger tax and probate concerns, such as if your estate is worth more than $13 million at time of writing. They are also good for people who want to leave ongoing instructions after they die, for example, if you would like to ensure that a piece of property remains in the family without being sold. Finally, trusts are good for people who anticipate contested issues, as the trust will avoid the probate process that opens the door for heirs and debtors to challenge the estate.
When you’re trying to decide whether to leave assets in a will or a trust, a good rule of thumb is this:
Wills are a good choice when you have a simple transfer to make. If you want to leave someone money or property to own outright, and you are not a multimillionaire, a will may be your best option. Trusts are a good choice when you have a large or complex issue of inheritance. If your estate is worth several million dollars, or you want to ensure that your assets are transferred and managed in a specific way, a trust may be your best option.
A will cannot override the terms of an existing trust. Once assets belong to a trust, they are not part of your estate and your will has no authority over them. However, if your will has terms to put assets into a trust, internal contradictions can prevent that transfer from taking place.
Photo credit: ©iStock.com/courtneyk, ©iStock.com/monkeybusinessimages, ©iStock.com/fizkes
An error occurred Please reload the page. |
Source: smartasset.com
Yesterday I hosted a guest article about the mortagage-interest tax deduction. As part of his argument that this tax break should not be used to justify buying a house, CJ from Wise Money Matters looked at the savings by tax brackets. What CJ did not consider (and what escaped my notice, and even that of my accountant) was the concept of marginal tax rates.
Although I was mortified to have let such a blatant error pass through editing, I decided to turn this mistake into a positive experience. I spent some time reading about marginal tax rates, and today I’m going to share what I learned.
Let’s start by looking at the 2009 U.S. federal income tax brackets for ordinary income. (These are the rates we’ll use when filing our tax returns in 2010.) For the sake of simplicity, we’ll only examine the rates for single filers and for those who are married filing jointly. The same principle applies to all filers.
You can also view the 2010 federal income tax brackets and a discussion on 2011 federal income tax rates.Based on this table, if Gillian is single and has taxable income of $100,000 in 2009, her marginal tax rate will be 28%. This does not mean that all of her income is taxed at 28%. She will not owe $28,000 in taxes. Only the top portion of her income is taxed at the highest level.
Gillian’s income is actually taxed progressively, at each bracket up to her marginal rate. Does that sound like gibberish? It’s actually not so bad. Using the example above:
Because Gillian earns $100,000 of taxable income, she is said to be in the 28% tax bracket. That’s the percentage she’s taxed on the last dollar she earns. But most of her dollars are taxed at a lower rate. In fact, as a single filer earning $100,000 in taxable income, she’ll owe $21,720 in taxes for 2009, which means her effective tax rate will be 21.72% — not 28%.
CJ’s article yesterday originally contained a mistaken analysis of the mortgage interest tax deduction. He was applying marginal rates as if they were effective rates. I did not catch it, and neither did my accountant. I’m well aware of marginal rates (and so, obviously, is my accountant), which demonstrates just how confusing this can be — if you don’t pay attention.
Even large media outlets make mistakes with marginal rates. President Obama’s tax proposal would increase taxes on families earning more than $250,000 per year. ABC News ran a story profiling upper-income taxpayers who are looking for ways to sidestep this tax hike. One of them, a 63-year-old attorney from Louisiana, is quoted in the article:
“We are going to try to figure out how to make our income $249,999.00,” she said.
“We have to find a way out there we can make just what we need to just under the line so we can benefit from Obama’s tax plan,” she added. “Why kill yourself working if you’re going to give it all way to people who aren’t working so hard?”
Before ABC News revised the article (just as I revised the error out of yesterday’s story at Get Rich Slowly), its main thrust was grounded firmly on a misunderstanding of marginal and effective tax rates. But this attorney is working from a false premise. If she makes $250,000 per year, she’s only going to pay a few cents more in taxes than if she earns $249,999 per year.
My point here isn’t that the attorney is dumb or that the reporter is dumb or that CJ is dumb or that my accountant is dumb or that I am dumb. My point is that marginal tax rates can be confusing, even for those who know better. When you speak about tax rates and tax brackets, always take a moment to be clear whether you’re speaking about marginal tax rates or effective tax rates.
Then you can avoid posting blog articles (or news stories) that contain embarrassing errors!
Source: getrichslowly.org
A sun-drenched loft with double-height ceilings and great views of the Queensboro Bridge recently hit the market, and we’re dying to talk about it.
The 1,340-square-foot apartment is part of 205 East 59th Street, a 27-story condo building with a killer location in the Upper East Side and only three apartments on each floor, something you’re not likely to see often in Manhattan.
Priced at $2,290,000, the loft has a large, gorgeous living room with double-height ceilings, a fireplace, and an open gourmet kitchen. Two spacious split bedrooms and two full baths complete the picture, along with two balconies that open up to picture-perfect views of the Queensboro Bridge.
Last listed for sale in 2017 with a $2,525,000 price tag, the condo at 205 East 59th street is now back on a market with fresh representation and a more affordable asking price.
Cecilia Serrano and Hala Lawrence of Warburg Realty are tasked with finding a buyer for the 1,340-square-foot loft.
When it comes to the building itself, amenities at 205 East 59th Street are downright impressive, as residents have access to Sky’s the Limit Concierge Service, a full-time doorman, central air conditioning, a roof deck and a garden.
Not to mention that the building has its own private puppy park, making it especially appealing to dog owners.
The building is close to Central Park and the restaurants and retail stores along Third Avenue, with the Yankee Stadium being just a short ride away on the 4 train.
That last detail may have peaked the interest of soccer legend Andrea Pirlo, who at one point was considering renting in the building. And while Pirlo hasn’t moved in (as far as we now), 205 East 59th St has all the chops to attract celebrity tenants, which only adds to the appeal of this sun-drenched loft.
Very Vogue: Greta Garbo’s Longtime Apartment in New York Lists for $7.25 MillionLoft Inside a Former Theatre in Hell’s Kitchen Wants $2.4 Million
The Many Famous Residents of the San Remo, NYC’s First Twin-Towered BuildingThe Conjuring House Sells for Over $1.5 Million Despite its Sordid History
Source: fancypantshomes.com