Earlier in the week, this blog posed a number of questions to the CFP Board in response to the Fact Sheet that the organization had issued, seeking to address a number of issues the planning community has raised that still appeared to be unanswered. Yesterday, I had the opportunity to speak with several staff members at the CFP Board, and wanted to share the information that I received.
Annuity owners sometimes wish to make a change to a portion of their annuity holdings without facing adverse tax consequences – and under current law, this can be accomplished by exchanging part of the existing annuity for a new contract on a tax-free basis.
However, the recent private letter ruling 201038012 from the IRS may have unintentionally expanded the flexibility of partial annuity exchanges to the point that they might not just be used, but could be abused as well.
As debate – and some confusion – continues regarding the CFP Board’s proposed fee increase, the organization has made a new fact sheet available to help address many of the questions and concerns that have been raised. However, it seems that a few of the pressing questions from the planning community are not entirely answered.
In recent years, a little-known strategy of withdrawing from and reapplying for Social Security retirement benefits has been receiving increasing attention. So much, in fact, that it looks like the Federal government’s Office of Management and Budget may soon be shutting the strategy down for good. However, the impact may not actually be very significant after all!
The news this week has been abuzz with Monday’s Federal government auction of Treasury Inflation-protected Securities (TIPS) that resulted in a yield of -0.55%. Surely, an investor willingness to accept a negative return in exchange for inflation-protection means investors are panicked about an impending surge of inflation, right? Actually, no, in this case, it doesn’t.
Many planners report that the primary reason their clients choose to work with them is a foundation of trust built with that individual client, which subsequently blossoms forth into a bona fide planner-client relationship. Accordingly, many planners have recently begun to ask: why the CFP Board fee increase to support public awareness of the CFP marks, if that’s not how clients select their planners anyway?