Retirement planning blog
The videos introduce the topic. These articles go further—with practical examples, questions to ask, tradeoffs to compare, and links to primary sources so you can better understand the decision before taking action.
Building a retirement account is only the first phase. Once withdrawals begin, the same money must support spending, taxes, liquidity, inflation, market volatility, and potentially decades of retirement.
Read the full articleEach article is designed to answer the questions that usually come after someone watches the short video.
Compare plan costs, investment choices, withdrawal rules, age-55 access, creditor protections, employer stock, and the tradeoffs of an IRA rollover.
Read the deep dive →Delayed credits are only one piece. Work income, survivor needs, taxes, Medicare, cash flow, longevity, and portfolio withdrawals also matter.
Read the deep dive →Learn how contract value, surrender value, income-base value, death benefit, and available withdrawal amount can differ—and why it matters before making a change.
Read the deep dive →The decedent's RMD status, beneficiary category, annual distribution requirements, taxes, and transfer method can materially change the plan.
Read the deep dive →The average return can hide a major retirement risk. Withdrawals during early losses can permanently change the outcome even when long-term returns later recover.
Read the deep dive →Instead of starting with a product, start by separating essential expenses from flexible spending and measuring the gap between reliable income and monthly needs.
Read the deep dive →During the working years, the question is often, “How much can I accumulate?” Retirement adds a different question: “How will these assets reliably support the life I want while still handling taxes, inflation, market declines, emergencies, and an uncertain lifespan?” That is why a retirement account and a retirement income plan are not the same thing.
It explains the five jobs retirement savings may need to perform, shows how to measure the monthly income gap, and gives a practical checklist for coordinating withdrawals rather than treating each account separately.
A portfolio may still need long-term growth because retirement can last 20, 30, or more years. But the portfolio is now being asked to do something it did not have to do during accumulation: send money out while markets move up and down. That changes the planning problem.
Retirement assets may need to perform five jobs at the same time: fund current spending, maintain liquidity for unexpected expenses, preserve enough long-term growth to help offset inflation, support income for as long as retirement lasts, and coordinate withdrawals so taxes and market conditions are considered rather than ignored.
A useful first calculation is surprisingly simple. Estimate monthly spending, subtract reliable income such as Social Security and pensions, and identify what the portfolio must provide.
A household expects to spend $6,200 per month. Social Security and pension income total $4,100. The portfolio therefore needs to provide about $2,100 per month, or $25,200 per year, before considering taxes and irregular expenses. The planning question is no longer “Is $700,000 enough?” It becomes “How should $700,000 support a $25,200 annual gap while still maintaining reserves and long-term flexibility?”
This approach also makes it easier to see which expenses are essential and which can be adjusted. Housing, basic food, utilities, insurance, and core health care generally behave differently from travel, gifts, hobbies, and other discretionary spending. A plan can be more resilient when it recognizes that difference.
A retiree may own a traditional IRA, Roth IRA, taxable brokerage account, bank savings, annuity, and an old 401(k). Taking $30,000 from one account may have a very different tax or investment effect than taking the same $30,000 from another. Required minimum distributions, capital gains, Social Security taxation, Medicare-related income thresholds, and the need to rebalance investments can all influence the order of withdrawals.
The point is not that there is one universal withdrawal order. There is not. The point is that the accounts should be viewed as parts of one income system.
Retirement rarely follows a perfectly smooth monthly budget. Roof repairs, vehicle replacement, dental work, family needs, deductibles, and travel can require larger one-time withdrawals. If every dollar is positioned for long-term growth or locked into a contract with withdrawal restrictions, an unexpected need can force a poor decision.
That is why a retirement-income discussion should identify near-term cash needs separately from long-term investments. The appropriate amount depends on the household, but the purpose is clear: avoid being forced to sell long-term assets at an inconvenient time simply because a bill arrived.
One of the most useful questions is: “If the market falls 20% shortly after I retire, where does next month’s income come from?” If the only answer is “sell investments,” the plan may be relying heavily on market timing. A more complete plan identifies which expenses are fixed, which are flexible, what reserves are available, and how withdrawals might be adjusted during a downturn.
A rollover can be useful, but it should not be automatic. When you leave an employer, the old 401(k) may have features worth keeping—and an IRA may offer flexibility the plan does not. The right comparison starts with what you already own.
It lays out the four common choices, highlights less obvious differences such as age-55 access and employer stock, and gives you a side-by-side checklist to use before authorizing a rollover.
Depending on the plan, you may be able to leave the money where it is, move it to a new employer's plan, roll it to an IRA, or take a taxable distribution. A direct rollover can generally preserve the tax-deferred status of eligible retirement money, while taking cash may trigger income tax and, when applicable, an additional tax on early distributions.
Some employer plans have access to institutional investment pricing or low-cost funds that may be difficult to duplicate in an IRA. Other plans have limited menus, limited service, or administrative fees that become less attractive after employment ends. Ask for the plan's fee disclosure and investment menu, then compare them with the proposed IRA—not just the headline advisory fee.
Also consider whether the plan provides a stable-value option, company stock, brokerage window, managed-account service, or other features that may disappear after a rollover.
One important difference involves access before age 59½. Under current federal tax rules, distributions from a qualified employer plan may qualify for an exception to the 10% additional tax if you separated from that employer in or after the year you reached age 55. That specific exception generally does not apply to IRA distributions. If you are between 55 and 59½ and may need the money, rolling everything to an IRA without considering this rule could reduce flexibility.
Plans and IRAs can also differ in installment options, withholding procedures, beneficiary administration, and how quickly distributions can be processed.
If the 401(k) contains highly appreciated employer stock, ask about net unrealized appreciation (NUA) before rolling it into an IRA. Under specific circumstances, the tax treatment of employer securities distributed from a qualified plan may differ from ordinary IRA treatment. Rolling the stock to an IRA can eliminate the opportunity to use the special NUA treatment later. This is a tax issue that should be reviewed with a qualified tax professional before the transfer.
Employer retirement plans generally receive broad federal protection under ERISA. IRAs also have significant protections, including federal bankruptcy protection, but protection outside bankruptcy can depend on state law and account type. For someone with meaningful liability concerns, this difference belongs on the comparison sheet.
Leaving employment can trigger special rules if a plan loan is outstanding. In some cases the balance may be offset against the account and treated as a distribution, with a limited period to replace the amount through a rollover. Before initiating a transfer, confirm the exact loan payoff or offset procedure with the plan administrator.
Instead of asking, “Can I roll this over?” ask, “What benefits or protections do I give up, what do I gain, and what will the total cost be after the move?”
Delaying benefits can increase the monthly check, but “wait until 70” is not a complete Social Security strategy. The claiming decision interacts with work income, taxes, survivor protection, Medicare, cash flow, and the investments you may need to spend while waiting.
It explains delayed retirement credits, the 2026 earnings test, taxation of benefits, survivor considerations, and why a break-even age should be only one part of the decision.
For people born in 1943 or later, Social Security retirement benefits generally earn delayed retirement credits at an annual rate of 8% for months benefits are delayed after full retirement age, up to age 70. The increase stops at 70. For someone born in 1960 or later, full retirement age is 67; starting at age 70 produces a monthly benefit equal to 124% of the full-retirement-age amount, before future cost-of-living adjustments.
That increase is valuable, but it is not an investment return on money sitting in an account. It is an increase in the monthly benefit formula in exchange for not receiving checks during the delay period.
If you claim before full retirement age and continue working, the retirement earnings test may temporarily withhold some benefits. For 2026, Social Security lists a $24,480 annual exempt amount for people who remain below full retirement age for the entire year, and a higher $65,160 limit for earnings in the months before reaching full retirement age during 2026. Different withholding formulas apply above those amounts. Once full retirement age is reached, the earnings test no longer applies, and Social Security later adjusts benefits to account for months in which benefits were withheld.
For couples, the larger retirement benefit can influence the survivor benefit after the first spouse dies. That means the claiming decision may be partly about protecting the surviving spouse's future income, not simply maximizing what the higher earner receives while both spouses are alive.
Age differences, health, other guaranteed income, life insurance, pension elections, and the surviving spouse's expected expenses can all affect the analysis.
Depending on filing status and combined income, up to 85% of Social Security benefits may be included in federal taxable income. This does not mean an 85% tax rate. It means that up to 85% of the benefit can become part of taxable income. IRA withdrawals, pensions, interest, and other income can therefore affect the after-tax value of a claiming strategy.
A person who delays Social Security may need to take larger withdrawals from a 401(k), IRA, or taxable account during the waiting years. That may be entirely reasonable, but it should be modeled. The higher future Social Security benefit should be compared with the tax and investment consequences of funding the gap while benefits are delayed.
Delaying Social Security does not automatically mean you should delay Medicare. Social Security specifically cautions people who delay retirement benefits to review Medicare enrollment around age 65 because late enrollment can cause coverage delays or higher costs in some situations.
An annuity statement can show several dollar amounts that look similar but serve very different purposes. Before surrendering, exchanging, or replacing a contract, identify which numbers are actually available in cash and which exist only to calculate a contractual benefit.
It explains the five values in context, then adds the surrender schedule, rider costs, crediting terms, market-value adjustments, 1035 exchanges, and the questions that should be answered before replacing an existing contract.
This is generally the current value of the contract before applying surrender charges or certain adjustments. In a fixed or fixed indexed annuity, it reflects premiums plus credited interest, less withdrawals and applicable charges. It may not equal the amount you would receive if you closed the contract today.
Surrender value is closer to the amount available if the contract is terminated, after applicable surrender charges and other contractual adjustments. If the contract is still in its surrender period, this number may be materially lower than the accumulation value.
Many income riders maintain a separate value used to calculate future rider withdrawals. That value may grow according to a contractual formula, but it is often not a cash value and generally cannot be withdrawn as a lump sum. Confusing an income base with cash value is one of the most common sources of misunderstanding.
The amount payable at death can follow rules that differ from both accumulation and surrender value. Certain contracts or riders may preserve a higher death-benefit base, while withdrawals can reduce the amount. If legacy planning matters, the current death-benefit value and the beneficiary provisions should be reviewed before making a change.
Many deferred annuities permit a specified amount to be withdrawn each year without a surrender charge. The formula varies by contract and may be based on premium, account value, interest, or another measure. The “free” amount does not necessarily mean the withdrawal is tax-free, and taking it may affect rider benefits.
The statement is only part of the review. Ask for the current surrender-charge schedule, rider charges, guaranteed minimum terms, and current crediting options. For an indexed annuity, review participation rates, caps, spreads, crediting periods, and how the index calculation works. The contract is not a direct investment in the index, and indexed interest may be limited by the contract's formula.
Some contracts may also include a market value adjustment or similar feature that can increase or decrease surrender proceeds under specified circumstances. The exact contract language controls.
An exchange may create a new surrender-charge period, change income or death benefits, alter crediting terms, and replace guarantees that may no longer be available. FINRA advises investors considering an annuity exchange to compare the old and new contracts closely and consider whether the change is better for the investor rather than merely creating a new sale.
A properly structured Section 1035 exchange can allow certain annuity-to-annuity transfers without current taxation, but tax deferral does not make the new contract automatically better. Product suitability, surrender charges, rider benefits, liquidity, and the reason for the change still need to be evaluated.
“You have 10 years” is often repeated as if it were the entire inherited-IRA rule. It is not. The beneficiary's relationship and status, the original owner's required-minimum-distribution status, and the way the account is transferred can all change what must happen and when.
It explains who may qualify for exceptions, when annual RMDs can apply during the 10-year period, why nonspouse beneficiaries should be careful with distributions, and how tax planning can influence the timing of withdrawals.
Under current federal rules, many nonspouse individual beneficiaries are subject to the 10-year rule. Certain “eligible designated beneficiaries” can have different options. These generally include a surviving spouse, a minor child of the account owner while the child remains a minor for these rules, a disabled or chronically ill individual, and an individual who is not more than 10 years younger than the deceased owner.
Trusts, estates, charities, and other non-individual beneficiaries can fall under different rules. Beneficiary designation and trust language therefore matter.
If a non-eligible designated beneficiary is subject to the 10-year rule, the inherited account generally must be fully distributed by December 31 of the year containing the 10th anniversary of the owner's death. But the pattern of withdrawals during those years can differ.
IRS Publication 590-B explains that if the owner died before the required beginning date and the 10-year rule applies, no distribution is required before the 10th year. By contrast, when the owner died on or after the required beginning date, beneficiary RMD rules can require annual distributions while the account is also being emptied within the 10-year period.
If the original owner died on or after the required beginning date and had not yet taken the full RMD for that year, the beneficiary generally becomes responsible for completing it. This is separate from the beneficiary's distribution requirements for later years.
A nonspouse beneficiary generally cannot treat an inherited IRA as his or her own IRA and cannot use a normal 60-day IRA rollover after receiving the money personally. The IRS permits trustee-to-trustee transfers when the receiving inherited IRA is properly established for the benefit of the beneficiary. Taking possession of the funds first can create a taxable distribution that cannot simply be “put back” under the normal 60-day rule.
Traditional inherited IRA distributions are generally taxable as ordinary income to the extent the account consists of pre-tax money. That means the timing of withdrawals can interact with wages, retirement income, Roth conversions, capital gains, deductions, Medicare premiums, and other tax items.
A beneficiary inherits a $400,000 traditional IRA and expects to retire in four years. Emptying the account evenly over 10 years is one possible approach, but it may not be the most tax-efficient. Depending on the RMD rules that apply, the beneficiary might compare distributions during high-income working years with larger withdrawals after retirement when taxable income may be lower. The correct strategy depends on the beneficiary's tax situation and the applicable RMD rules.
A surviving spouse often has choices that a nonspouse beneficiary does not, including keeping the account as inherited or, when eligible, treating or rolling the account into the spouse's own IRA. The better choice can depend on age, whether the spouse needs access before age 59½, the deceased spouse's age, RMD timing, and beneficiary goals.
Two investors can experience the same average investment return and still finish retirement with dramatically different outcomes. The difference is the order in which gains and losses occur while withdrawals are being taken.
It explains why sequence risk appears only when money is flowing out, walks through a simplified example, and describes practical planning levers that can reduce the need to sell long-term assets during a downturn.
If an investor starts with a lump sum, makes no withdrawals, and experiences a given series of annual returns, reversing the order of those returns produces the same ending value mathematically. Once withdrawals begin, that symmetry disappears.
A negative return early in retirement reduces the portfolio. Taking a withdrawal from the reduced balance means fewer dollars remain to participate in a later recovery. If several poor years arrive early, the combination of losses and withdrawals can create damage that strong later returns may not fully repair.
Imagine two retirees who start with the same portfolio and withdraw the same dollar amount each year. Both experience the same set of annual returns over time. Retiree A encounters the worst returns in the first few years. Retiree B gets those same poor returns much later. Even though their long-term average return is identical, Retiree A can end with substantially less because withdrawals forced more assets out of the portfolio when values were depressed. This is a hypothetical illustration, not a forecast.
Sequence-of-returns risk tends to matter most in the years around retirement because the portfolio may still be large, withdrawals have begun, and the assets may need to last for decades. A major decline at age 66 can therefore have a different effect than the same decline at age 86.
Managing the risk usually involves several levers. A retiree might maintain a liquid reserve for near-term spending, diversify the portfolio, reduce discretionary withdrawals after a major decline, rebalance from assets that have held up better, delay a large optional purchase, or use reliable income sources to cover a portion of essential expenses. Each approach has tradeoffs.
Holding too much cash or becoming excessively conservative also carries risk because long retirements still face inflation. The goal is not to eliminate market exposure. It is to avoid making the household unnecessarily dependent on selling growth assets at exactly the wrong time.
A useful retirement plan can state in advance what happens if the portfolio falls by a specified amount. Which spending gets reduced first? How much cash is available? Which accounts are used? When is the portfolio rebalanced? Having a policy before volatility arrives can make it easier to avoid emotional decisions.
The answer usually starts with expenses, not products. A household that knows its essential monthly spending can compare those needs with Social Security, pensions, and other reliable income, then decide how much uncertainty it is comfortable placing on the investment portfolio.
It shows how to separate needs, wants, and wishes; measure an income-floor gap; and evaluate the tradeoff between predictability, liquidity, growth, and legacy flexibility.
A useful framework is to distinguish needs, wants, and wishes. Needs are expenses that are difficult to reduce—housing, utilities, basic food, insurance, transportation, and core health care. Wants include travel, dining, hobbies, and other lifestyle spending. Wishes may include gifts, charitable goals, or legacy spending.
The categories do not have to be perfect. Their purpose is to identify which expenses would create the most stress if market income were temporarily reduced.
Add the reliable income expected each month, such as Social Security and pensions, and compare it with essential expenses. If essential expenses are $5,000 per month and reliable income is $3,800, the dependable-income gap is $1,200 per month.
That gap can be funded in different ways. Some households are comfortable relying on systematic portfolio withdrawals. Others prefer more predictable income for a greater portion of necessities. The appropriate mix depends on risk tolerance, health, liquidity needs, other assets, legacy priorities, and the strength of the household's overall balance sheet.
Reliable income can reduce dependence on market withdrawals, but greater certainty often requires giving up something else—liquidity, upside potential, control of principal, or flexibility. For example, certain annuity structures can provide contractual income guarantees, but they can also involve surrender periods, costs, restrictions, and reliance on the issuing insurer's claims-paying ability.
That is why the question should not be “Are annuities good or bad?” It should be “What problem is this income source solving, what does it cost, and what flexibility am I giving up?”
Some retirement expenses are irregular and unpredictable. Major home repairs, vehicles, family assistance, travel, and health expenses can require access to larger sums. A plan that devotes too much capital to illiquid income arrangements may create a different problem even if the monthly check looks attractive.
Social Security includes cost-of-living adjustments, but many pensions and fixed income streams do not. A plan should consider whether essential expenses are likely to rise faster than predictable income. Long-term growth assets can remain important even for a retiree who values income certainty.
Instead of asking, “How much should I put in guaranteed income?” start with: “Which expenses do I never want to depend on selling stocks to pay?” Then compare the existing Social Security and pension income with that number. The remaining gap becomes a planning choice rather than a product pitch.
Bring your statements and questions to a review, or suggest a topic you would like to see covered in a future article or video.