Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Advice needed for taxable portfolio over 2 million
Old 04-11-2014, 06:47 PM   #1
Confused about dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2
Advice needed for taxable portfolio over 2 million

Thank you kindly in advance for reading.

Emergency funds: 6 months expenses in checking account
Debt: no debt house and car paid off
Tax Filing Status: Married Filing Jointly
Tax Rate: 28% Federal, no state income tax
State of Residence: Florida
Property taxes: $9000/year ($450k house)
Age: His 34 and Her 31
Kids: two (10 & 4), no more planned
Income: $210k W-2 employee
Health: Both healthy today - parents still alive and healthy on both sides (average age 65) - grandparents on both sides have passed away (average age 90)
Marriage: Happily married for 10 year
Wife: Stay at home mother
Social Security: His should be $12k/year in 2050
Current Asset allocation: 87% stocks / 13% bonds
Desired Asset allocation: 70% stocks / 30% bonds
Desired International allocation: 65% of stocks
Portfolio size: 2.2 million
Portfolio taxable: 89%
Portfolio tax-deferred: 4%
Portfolio tax-free: 7%
Capital loss carry-over: $450k (exchanged from sp500 to total stock during 2008-2009 downturn)

Plan on leaving W2 employment when youngest child graduates high school in 13 years and start consulting with self-employed income estimate of 30k/year. Income would be variable and would start at $0/year (i.e early retirement from employer).

Planned expenditures from year 2027 to 2077 (as long as spouse and I are still alive), is approx. $140k/year including taxes.

Portfolio / Market estimated nominal/gross returns: 8% equity [5.5% + 2.5% div] / 3.5% fixed income
Estimated inflation 2.5%

Stock % break down today:
47% vanguard total stock market
25% vanguard total international
16% vanguard small cap value
12% vanguard FTSE small international

Portfolio % break down today:

41% vanguard total stock
22% vanguard total international
14% vanguard small cap value
13% intermediate bonds (20% tax-exempt muni in taxable/ 80% vanguard intermediate bond index)
10% vanguard FTSE small international

Contributions
Annual savings today: 40k/year (17.5k Employee Roth 401k / 11k backdoor roth / 12k Employer 401k contribution)
100% of equity mutual fund dividends purchase vanguard tax-exempt intermediate fund

Questions:

My original plan was to continue on the path we are on which has fixed income reinvesting monthly, and all my contributions are into fixed income as well. The dividends from equity go straight to fixed income funds too.

This has us on a glide-path of being 65% stocks / 35% bonds in approximately 13 years.

At the beginning of this year when we were looking at our 2013 year-end statement, portfolio returns were north of 30% and we surpassed 2.0 million in savings. This had me thinking about preservation of capital.

The thought I have now is this:

Sell $382k of equity to purchase vanguard tax-exempt intermediate bond fund. This will consume approximately 150k of the 450k in capital loss carry-overs. No taxes due.

I would sell portions of vanguard total stock and vanguard total international. I would continue my contributions in the same manner as original plan. (All going into fixed income).

The new breakdown would look as follows:

Equity breakdown:
45% vanguard total stock market
20% vanguard total international
20% vanguard small cap value
15% vanguard FTSE small international


Portfolio breakdown:
30% intermediate bonds (65% tax-exempt muni in taxable/ 35% vanguard intermediate bond index)
30% vanguard total stock market
13% vanguard small cap value
13% vanguard total international
13% vanguard FTSE small international
1% cash

This has us change to 70% stocks / 30% bonds today, and a glide-path of being 55% stocks / 45% bonds in approximately 13 years.

My concern is when I look at my spreadsheets at age 47:

Original plan age 47 portfolio: 6.2million nominal / 4.5million real (65% stocks / 35% bonds) AND portfolio after 45% bear market decline = 3.3 million real

Proposed plan age 47 portfolio: 5.9 million nominal / 4.3million real (55% stocks/ 45% bonds) AND portfolio after 45% bear market decline = 3.2 million real

Both plans have a portfolio value after a bear market decline equal 3.2 or 3.3 million, (3% difference) and the pre-bear market value is about the same, 4.5 or 4.3 million (4.5% difference) so I am questioning if I should just stay the course.

We plan on traveling while I consult and hope to bring our adult kids with us on some of the better locations we are assuming a perpetual 3.3% withdrawal rate from Age 47 onwards.

Much appreciated from a longtime lurker,
Sky
__________________

__________________
Floridasky is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-11-2014, 07:04 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,625
In your tax bracket with your future plans, I would not contribute to a Roth 401(k). Just do the traditional 401(k), save on taxes now. You are paying taxes now at a higher rate than you will be paying in the future. This is called shooting yourself in the foot.


If the outcome is the same, I would de-risk.
__________________

__________________
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2014, 10:18 AM   #3
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 728
Overall a great plan......a couple of small ideas.
1. Put some of your muni money in Vanguard limited or short term interest for the next year or so until interest rates go up......you'll get a little less and lose a little less than intermediate term....then when interest rates go up I'd put 1/2 into long term.....over most 10 year periods it does better than intermediate term.
2think about some Vanguard mid cap index fund. It has done as well or better than total stock......you could use some of the cash from total stock or small cap. Over the years mid cap has done better than S&P 500 or total stock.......that's it, good plan. good luck.
__________________
jerome len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2014, 01:04 PM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,446
Seems solid overall. Perhaps a bit too much international and too much of a small cap tilt, but you probably already know that.

Have you had Vanguard do a financial plan for you? Do you use Financial Engines available through the Vanguard site? Have you run your situation through Quicken Lifetime Planner or FireCalc?
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2014, 11:10 PM   #5
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 522
Personally I would stress test your projections by lowering your projected returns to only 4% real stocks! and 0% real bonds. That's the worst projection I've seen out there so far. Just see how you fare.
__________________
bmcgonig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 03:35 AM   #6
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floridasky View Post
Thank you kindly in advance for reading.

Emergency funds: 6 months expenses in checking account
Debt: no debt – house and car paid off
Tax Filing Status: Married Filing Jointly
Tax Rate: 28% Federal, no state income tax
State of Residence: Florida
Property taxes: $9000/year ($450k house)
Age: His 34 and Her 31
Kids: two (10 & 4), no more planned
Income: $210k W-2 employee
Health: Both healthy today - parents still alive and healthy on both sides (average age 65) - grandparents on both sides have passed away (average age 90)
Marriage: Happily married for 10 year
Wife: Stay at home mother
Social Security: His should be $12k/year in 2050
Current Asset allocation: 87% stocks / 13% bonds
Desired Asset allocation: 70% stocks / 30% bonds
Desired International allocation: 65% of stocks
Portfolio size: 2.2 million
Portfolio taxable: 89%
Portfolio tax-deferred: 4%
Portfolio tax-free: 7%
Capital loss carry-over: $450k (exchanged from sp500 to total stock during 2008-2009 downturn)

Plan on leaving W2 employment when youngest child graduates high school in 13 years and start consulting with self-employed income estimate of 30k/year. Income would be variable and would start at $0/year (i.e early retirement from employer).

Planned expenditures from year 2027 to 2077 (as long as spouse and I are still alive), is approx. $140k/year including taxes.

Portfolio / Market estimated nominal/gross returns: 8% equity [5.5% + 2.5% div] / 3.5% fixed income
Estimated inflation 2.5%

Stock % break down today:
47% vanguard total stock market
25% vanguard total international
16% vanguard small cap value
12% vanguard FTSE small international

Portfolio % break down today:

41% vanguard total stock
22% vanguard total international
14% vanguard small cap value
13% intermediate bonds (20% tax-exempt muni in taxable/ 80% vanguard intermediate bond index)
10% vanguard FTSE small international

Contributions
Annual savings today: 40k/year (17.5k Employee Roth 401k / 11k backdoor roth / 12k Employer 401k contribution)
100% of equity mutual fund dividends purchase vanguard tax-exempt intermediate fund

Questions:

My original plan was to continue on the path we are on which has fixed income reinvesting monthly, and all my contributions are into fixed income as well. The dividends from equity go straight to fixed income funds too.

This has us on a glide-path of being 65% stocks / 35% bonds in approximately 13 years.

At the beginning of this year when we were looking at our 2013 year-end statement, portfolio returns were north of 30% and we surpassed 2.0 million in savings. This had me thinking about preservation of capital.

The thought I have now is this:

Sell $382k of equity to purchase vanguard tax-exempt intermediate bond fund. This will consume approximately 150k of the 450k in capital loss carry-overs. No taxes due.

I would sell portions of vanguard total stock and vanguard total international. I would continue my contributions in the same manner as original plan. (All going into fixed income).

The new breakdown would look as follows:

Equity breakdown:
45% vanguard total stock market
20% vanguard total international
20% vanguard small cap value
15% vanguard FTSE small international


Portfolio breakdown:
30% intermediate bonds (65% tax-exempt muni in taxable/ 35% vanguard intermediate bond index)
30% vanguard total stock market
13% vanguard small cap value
13% vanguard total international
13% vanguard FTSE small international
1% cash

This has us change to 70% stocks / 30% bonds today, and a glide-path of being 55% stocks / 45% bonds in approximately 13 years.

My concern is when I look at my spreadsheets at age 47:

Original plan age 47 portfolio: 6.2million nominal / 4.5million real (65% stocks / 35% bonds) AND portfolio after 45% bear market decline = 3.3 million real

Proposed plan age 47 portfolio: 5.9 million nominal / 4.3million real (55% stocks/ 45% bonds) AND portfolio after 45% bear market decline = 3.2 million real

Both plans have a portfolio value after a bear market decline equal 3.2 or 3.3 million, (3% difference) and the pre-bear market value is about the same, 4.5 or 4.3 million (4.5% difference) – so I am questioning if I should just stay the course.

We plan on traveling while I consult and hope to bring our adult kids with us on some of the better locations – we are assuming a perpetual 3.3% withdrawal rate from Age 47 onwards.

Much appreciated from a longtime lurker,
Sky

what is interesting is todays reasearch is showing the glide path is backawards.

best results and safest method seem to be lowering equities to 35-40% at the start of retirement and increasing by 1% a year dollar cost averaging back in to a max of 70% if you live long enough.

the reason being ,the first 5 years are the most criticial times .

a string of bad markets early on while spending down could ruin you for an entire retirement time frame.

by lowering the risk of that the first few years and replenishing savings with higher and higher equities down the road success rate is boosted greatly.
__________________
mathjak107 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 10:19 AM   #7
Recycles dryer sheets
bamsphd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 337
I like the index funds, and certainly understand the small and value tilts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floridasky View Post
Desired International allocation: 65% of stocks
Based on your other portfolio details I presume this was a typo, and that you meant Desired International equity allocation. My own equity allocation is split 50/50 domestic/international which most people consider a high international allocation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floridasky View Post
Plan on leaving W2 employment when youngest child graduates high school in 13 years and start consulting with self-employed income estimate of 30k/year. Income would be variable and would start at $0/year (i.e early retirement from employer).
Interesting timing. Leaving the working world AFTER the kids complete college is much more typical. However, regardless of what planning you do now, I suspect you will adjust your projections many times over the next decade. By then you will probably have put the eldest through college, so you will have a much better idea of how expensive older children tend to be compared to toddlers. You will also know how well your investments have actually done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
I would not contribute to a Roth 401(k). Just do the traditional 401(k), save on taxes now.
Personally, I would keep using the back-door Roth in your situation. Primarily because I would not assume the Roth conversion door will remain open for millionaires indefinitely. Secondarily because it effectively raises your annual contribution limit. The other reality is that paying a little tax bill every year while you have wages may be far more emotionally tolerable than paying a larger tax bill later when you do not have wages. There are lots of millionaires out there who should be converting their traditional IRA holdings to Roth but are unwilling to write that big a check. So while LOL could probably build you a spreadsheet that shows going traditional would beat Roth if all tax laws stay the same, I tend to assume the tax pendulum to swing back to Regan or even pre-Regan era tax rates, and I put more weight on the psychology of paying taxes. Though there is the possibility that you will be in a much lower tax bracket later, and might have the will to perform Roth conversions then, I doubt you will regret having larger Roth balances instead.
__________________
bamsphd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 10:47 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,625
I would use the back-door Roth, too. But that is NOT the same as contributing to a Roth 401(k).

The OP clearly stated that they would early semi-retire and have their family income drop drastically in just a dozen years or so. During ages 47 to 70, there will be plenty of years to convert the 401(k) to a Roth IRA while paying no taxes on it. One doesn't need a spreadsheet to see how their TAXABLE income will be so low during those years that they will really save on taxes … now and in the future.
__________________
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 02:56 PM   #9
Recycles dryer sheets
bamsphd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
I would use the back-door Roth, too. But that is NOT the same as contributing to a Roth 401(k).
I retired last June a bit earlier than I had projected (thank you Mister Market), but I always expected to retire early. Before I retired I was putting my money where my mouth is. I was maxing out back-door Roth and Roth 401(k) every year they were available to me. I don't regret it.

While working I had expected to start gradually converting my Traditional 401(k) holdings to Roth holdings beginning my first full year of retirement. I'll probably still convert before I can no longer defer Social Security. However, thanks to the option of collecting PPACA subsidies, I'm not sure I'm going to convert anything this year. My initial calculations seem to indicate that conversions would face at least a 15% marginal tax rate, plus roughly a 15% loss of PPACA subsidies for an effective marginal tax rate of about 30%. That is as high or higher than I generally worried about when employed.

Like me, the OP may face similar or even higher marginal tax rates in 13 years than the OP is currently paying. If the market cooperates, the OP could certainly have a larger portfolio in 13 years than I have now. Assuming the fed has finished their war on savers by then yields may have returned, perhaps with a vengeance. I also expect the tax pendulum to swing back towards Regan era rates, if not higher. I certainly would not assume the OP will be able to have a multiple million dollar portfolio and still be able to perform traditional to Roth conversions till they turn 70 at negligible tax rates, if such conversions are permitted at all.

I frankly think Roth now or Roth later could go either way. My crystal ball is broken again today.
__________________
bamsphd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 03:04 PM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamsphd View Post
I frankly think Roth now or Roth later could go either way. My crystal ball is broken again today.
I miss the meaning of this statement. Could you please clarify for me?

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 03:31 PM   #11
Recycles dryer sheets
bamsphd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamsphd View Post
I frankly think Roth now or Roth later could go either way. My crystal ball is broken again today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
I miss the meaning of this statement. Could you please clarify for me?
Roth now: Contribute to a Roth 401(k) and back-door Roth while employed.

Roth later: Contribute to "traditional" now, and plan to convert to Roth after early/partial retirement.

My crystal ball is broken: I don't know if in 13 years the OP will think they should have waited to convert. In my opinion, the ability to predict unpredictable aspects of the future is required to answer that question. I think a case can be made for either option and that the OP should do whichever option makes them more comfortable. When I made the choice for myself, I chose Roth now, and I do not regret the choice.
__________________
bamsphd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2014, 07:42 PM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,625
The endowment effect is in action here:

From an article at M*:
"It's been well-documented that people value an object they own more than an object they're considering buying, a difference called the endowment effect, coined by Nobel-prize winning behavioral scientist Daniel Kahneman and his coauthors Jack Knetsch and Richard Thaler"

A Roth 401(k) that one owns appears to be more valuable that a future conversion to a Roth.
__________________
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2014, 11:33 AM   #13
Recycles dryer sheets
bamsphd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
A Roth 401(k) that one owns appears to be more valuable that a future conversion to a Roth.
I would certainly agree that a Roth 401(k) that one owns appears to be more valuable than an uncertain future conversion of a Traditional 401(k) to a Roth.

When I try to project my own financial future I consider myself vulnerable to dementia, a prolonged world-wide market decline, significant changes to the PPACA and Medicare, or significant changes in federal tax laws. Roth accounts are a partial hedge against tax law changes.

The fundamental basis of our different preferences seems to be differences in what tax rates and rules we experienced and what tax rates and rules we fear in the future. TurboTax just told me that my worst marginal rate over the past five years was 28%, and that sometimes it was lower. I currently project that my marginal rate should be around 30% this coming year once loss of PPACA credits are factored in. So why would I regret contributing to a Roth 401(k) while working at marginal rates of 28% and below?

Perhaps if I assumed that the PPACA will be repealed and tax rules will otherwise be left totally unchanged, then I would regret my Roth contributions. Under that scenario I would have an opportunity to convert more than just my current Traditional 401(k) holdings at marginal rates lower than 28%. However, I actually think we are currently under taxed by historical standards. So I think it is quite possible that marginal rates will go up, that the special treatment of long-term capital gains might be repealed, and/or that asset tests will be imposed on Roth conversions. If any of those things happen I would prefer to own my Roth accounts than to own Traditional accounts. Of course the federal government could instead abolish income taxes and replace them with consumption taxes and/or property-intangible taxes, in which case I'm going to be hurting. While I was renting in college my landlord went bankrupt and lost his apartment buildings because the government changed the tax code. I would hate for something like that to happen to me during retirement.

I am not willing to make many predictions about what the government or the market will do over the short term. However, I am willing to pay some opportunity costs to hedge against undesirable possibilities.
__________________
bamsphd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2014, 05:34 PM   #14
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
In your tax bracket with your future plans, I would not contribute to a Roth 401(k). Just do the traditional 401(k), save on taxes now. You are paying taxes now at a higher rate than you will be paying in the future. This is called shooting yourself in the foot.


If the outcome is the same, I would de-risk.
+1. My megacorp also offers Roth 401K but I chose pre-tax 401K..similar W2 Income as yours. I'm then using backdoor Roth IRA of 6500/yr.
__________________
retire2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2014, 08:52 PM   #15
Confused about dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2
Thank you everyone for your replies.

In summary:
1) I will consider and pursue doing 50/50 Roth 401k and 401k. (8.75k and 8.75k) to hedge unknown tax consequences
2) I will continue backdoor Roth IRA (11k)
3) I will continue to receive 12k PSP (employer deferred trad 401k)
4) I will continue to divert the 50k/year I receive in taxable equity dividends to the Intermediate Tax-Exempt Admiral fund with Vanguard
5) All of the above will be purchasing bonds.

BUT **** I am getting cold feet de-risking.

The reason - I keep telling myself that the only reason I was able to surpass 2.0M was due to high % in equites (i.e. 36% return in 2013)...that I should "never sell" the equities and instead just purchase bonds with the 40k/year contributions and all dividends from the 1.9M equity portion (approx 50k/year), be sent to intermediate tax-exempt, so approx 90k/year bond purchases for the next 13 years.


I have 290k in bonds today, so pretending they have 0% real return... that is 290k + (13 years * 90k) = 1.5M in bonds upon age 47 early retirement.

the stocks are 1.9M today, so pretending they have 3% real return (8% nominal - 2.5% inflation - 2.5% dividend being moved to bonds = 3% actual growth)... that is 1.9M * 1.03^13 = 2.8M

so 1.5M bonds + 2.8M stocks = 4.3M total ... 65% stocks & 35% bonds.

2.8M stocks with 2.5% dividend = 70k/year dividends
1.5M bonds with 3.5% dividend = 52k/year dividends

122k/dividends without sale of shares...need 140k...so there will be some moving around, likely sale of equity shares to reduce risk in 50's so more 60/40 or 55/45...

Am I being insane keeping allocation as-is with above plan? 87/13 today..(year end estimate 84/16).

When I get to my sell screen in Vanguard, I just hate the idea of selling ownership of company shares (equity funds). I feel owning less capital in global businesses is a bad idea. So I close the screen and ponder more.

Sincerely,
Sky
__________________
Floridasky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2014, 09:00 PM   #16
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,446
Chill......

There is no need to sell stock to transition from 87/13 to 70/30 or 65/35. Just put your new money in bonds and it will eventually catch up. It just depends on how long a period of time you want to get from A to B or C.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 08:12 AM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,862
If you are not set in concrete about your retirement date, you have the chance to keep working a little longer if your equities have not done well in 13 years. Or you could retire earlier if they do well. Essentially you take that equity risk and convert it to a timing risk. You don't need the bonds until you have a firm date where you would like your portfolio to be a certain size on a certain date. Just before you retire you can buy a bunch of bonds to set your desired retirement AA.
__________________

__________________
Animorph is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Am I Over Reacting? Advice Needed Co2012 Life after FIRE 80 02-26-2014 10:35 AM
Portfolio Advice Needed Please Letj FIRE and Money 13 03-27-2012 07:54 PM
From 100 million to 4 million rec7 FIRE and Money 19 08-22-2009 12:15 PM
Advice Needed - Taxable Invest vs Pre-Pay mortgage Trace Young Dreamers 5 09-14-2004 07:16 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.