Acclaro Blog

Archive for March, 2012

Got Tax Deductions?

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

Here are some real life attempts at tax deductions that we do not recommend:

Not Internet – Interbird?
Two business partners in Arizona did not trust modern technology for communicating with each other. The two thought it made sense to communicate using carrier pigeons. So they attempted to write off the pigeons, as well as their care, food and housing as a business expense.

Flatter is Better?
Writing off breast enlargements has actually been approved as a business expense for exotic dancers. But one public personality added a new twist: she wanted to write off her tummy tuck as well. She argued that both larger breasts and a smaller stomach would translate into bigger tips on the job.

Fake Eyelashes?
Speaking of exotic dancers, they need to maintain their looks in order to rake in tips — and that means shelling out some serious cash for costumes and cosmetics. For years, one dancer in New York has been able to deduct the money she spends on looking good, including outfits, photos and makeup — even false eyelashes, tanning, teeth whitening and skin and hair care. The amounts vary from year to year, but typically it all adds up to a few thousand dollars.

Smile?
One job hunter tried to write off his dental implants as a job-hunting expense, arguing that he had a better chance of getting a job with a full set of pearly whites.

Dependent?
No matter how much you love your pet, be it a dog, cat, fish or pig, you can’t count them as a dependent on your tax forms and you can’t deduct their expenses. One individual wanted to write off the cost of the pig’s food and medical costs, which added up to more than $7,000. The tax preparer explained that it says in the tax code that it must be a person. The individual was disappointed and argued that he didn’t know what he was talking about.

Would You Rather?

Wednesday, March 7th, 2012

Many aspects of life require careful consideration and balancing of the tradeoffs that arise from competing demands. For example, a common lifestyle tradeoff is working longer hours versus spending more time with your family. The competing demands within this decision are the income necessary to provide a suitable quality of life for your family versus the immeasurable benefits of quality time with your family. There is no right answer, but most people understand the tradeoff and attempt to find the balance that is right for them.

Successful investing and financial planning also require balancing tradeoffs. For example, a common investment tradeoff is that of risk and return. One of the competing demands is preservation of capital versus preservation of purchasing power. The former may allow for a better night’s sleep during periods of heightened uncertainty and corresponding volatility, but the latter helps ensure you’ll have a comfortable bed in the future when accounting for rising prices from inflation. Once again, there is no right answer, no “optimal” solution. Understanding the tradeoffs between preserving capital and preserving purchasing power will help investors find the balance that is right for them. This balance will depend on their definition of risk and attitude towards it.

Some investors may consider risk to be volatility. They have difficulty stomaching the daily ups and downs associated with investing in asset classes that experience significant price fluctuations, such as equities, because declining prices are often accompanied by predominantly negative headlines. Although information will be reflected in prices before one can react to it, this is little solace to investors who extrapolate the recent past into the future and see the bad news as an indicator of what’s to come rather than a commentary on what has already happened. These investors yearn for short-term preservation of capital.

Other investors may define risk as a diminishing standard of living. They have long-term financial obligations, such as spending during their retirement years, and their primary goal is building wealth to meet those future expenses. They recognize that, while the cumulative effects of inflation are sometimes glacially slow or even undetectable in real time, inflation can be the silent killer of a financial plan. These investors desire long-term preservation of purchasing power.

Investing is relatively straightforward when the definition of risk and attitude toward it are so black and white. For example, you can virtually guarantee the preservation of capital by investing in the equivalent of Treasury bills as long as you accept the corresponding potential for the loss of purchasing power. On the other hand, you can preserve purchasing power by investing in asset classes with expected returns exceeding inflation, providing you accept price fluctuations that can temporarily impair your capital.

Unfortunately, in practice, investing isn’t that simple. Individual investors rarely have black and white objectives or well-defined definitions of and attitudes towards risk. Some expect long-term preservation of purchasing power and short-term preservation of capital. Making matters worse is the tendency for the priority and relative importance of their competing demands to change through time, often in response to what’s happened in the recent past.

Investors who succumb to the cycle of fear and greed end up chasing a moving target. Advisors can try to mitigate this destructive behavior by focusing investors on the tradeoffs that were made at the outset when determining their balance between assets that are expected to grow faster than inflation and those that stabilize the portfolio and reduce its fluctuations. So if an investor is now fearful and therefore more focused on capital preservation, it is time to reframe the tradeoffs by emphasizing why growth assets were in the portfolio to begin with and how the so-called “riskless” asset (i.e., bills) can actually be extremely risky in the long run.

More than ever, comparisons like these are needed when discussing the tradeoff of preserving capital versus preserving purchasing power. Investors feel the risk of equities in real time. Volatility is immediate and apparent as their portfolio value shows up in the mail every month or on their computer screen every day. Conversely, the risk of investing in bills and other low-volatility assets is less discernible and may take time to detect as it shows up when investors open their wallet at the grocery store or gas station many years later.

Investors may still want to revisit the tradeoffs they made and alter course if appropriate. However, changes to a long-term plan should reflect an informed decision rather than an emotional one. Fear and greed are powerful forces, but we should resist letting them dictate the tradeoffs we make in our lives or in our portfolios.

As the Most Interesting Man in the World would say, “stay invested, my friends!”