Legislative Developments

July 23rd, 2010

The big news in June was the passage of highly anticipated pension funding relief, although several provisions related to defined contribution plans, such as enhanced fee disclosure, were not included. Also in June, the Department of Labor (DOL) released regulations clarifying issues related to qualified domestic relations orders (QDROs). The DOL, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Treasury Department issued regulations related to, among other things, the prohibition of annual benefit limits and preexisting condition exclusions under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Also, plan sponsors wishing to take advantage of tax relief for spinning off a plan covering participants in Puerto Rico must act by the end of the year. In the courts, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case related to a plan sponsor’s failure to disclose information about a plan change to participants. In addition, a district court dismissed another pre-Pension Protection Act (pre-PPA) cash balance case.

Pension Funding Relief Passed

President Obama signed the Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act, which makes pension funding relief available for defined benefit plan sponsors. As noted in the April 2010 BAC Bulletin discussion of pension funding relief:

Plan sponsors may elect either a 2+7 amortization (with the first two years being interest only) or a 15-year amortization for up to two of the 2008 through 2011 plan years.
Plan sponsors that take advantage of this funding relief must increase plan contributions during a restricted period under the so-called cash-flow rule if the sponsor pays excess compensation, declares extraordinary dividends or engages in certain stock redemptions. The contribution increase under the cash-flow rule is limited to the reduction in contribution requirements otherwise created by the election of funding relief.
The act provides a lookback to help plan sponsors avoid the restriction on benefit accruals for plans that are less than 60% funded and avoid restrictions on Social Security leveling options for plans that are less than 80% funded. This relief provision is only for 2010.
Insight: The higher contributions resulting from the cash-flow rule can limit the relief provided and can also have a profound impact on executive compensation programs. The act does not include enhanced disclosure requirements for defined contribution arrangements or additional 4010 reporting requirements. Plan sponsors should contact their Towers Watson actuary to determine how the new relief affects their defined benefit plans.

The Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act can be found here. Towers Watson’s Client Advisory on the act can be found here.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | No Comments »

Simple and effective estate planning strategies

March 12th, 2010

By Jim Grant – Parksville Qualicum Beach News

Why do people do estate planning? There are lots of reasons: maximize the value; minimize the taxes; include or exclude a specific person; support a charity, etc.

There are many complex and expensive ways to achieve these and other objectives. But for most people, objectives are simple, and so should be the solutions.

My estate planning goals, for example, can be easily summarized: to be fair — so that hopefully when all is said and done, my children will still speak to each other; and to do what I can to ensure that whatever is left is put to good use, and has some lasting benefit.

When working on an estate plan recently, I came across a little-known strategy that can be executed through an insurance company.

It starts with investments available from insurance companies. This could include vehicles such as annuities, insurance policies, segregated funds, and GICs. In many ways these investment products are similar to their non-insurance counterparts: GIC rates, for example, are competitive with bank GICs, and are covered by insurance up to $100,000. Segregated funds as well, like mutual funds, come in a variety of shapes and forms. But there are some key advantages to both of these.

To begin with, there is the ability to name beneficiaries. Rather than the proceeds of these investments going through the estate, you can elect to have the funds pass directly to those who you name as your beneficiaries — without delay. Right out of the gate there is a savings that could easily exceed two per cent, when you consider the probate fees as well as the legal fees typically associated with settling an estate.

But there is more. Some insurance companies will also allow you to stipulate in their contract how the beneficiaries will receive the funds.

For example, an annuity might be an option. So rather than receiving a lump sum (that some parents fear might be squandered), the beneficiary would instead receive a monthly income for a specified period of time, or for life. The amount of income can be fixed, or can be indexed. Or, in the case of at least one company, the level of income can be tied to the performance of the stock and/or bond market.

As far as I know, the only other way to ensure such an outcome would be through a trust — a document that is complex and expensive to set up and maintain. Instead, by completing a simple form through an insurance company, your wishes could be met, and it wouldn’t cost you anything.

For more information please feel free to call or e-mail.

Jim Grant, CFP (Certified Financial Planner) is a Financial Advisor with Raymond James Ltd (RJL). This article is for information only. Securities are offered through Raymond James Ltd., member CIPF.Insurance and estate planning offered through Raymond James Financial Planning Ltd., not member CIPF. For more information feel free to call Jim at 250-594-1100, or e-mail at jim.grant@raymondjames.ca. and/or visit www.jimgrant.ca.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 3 Comments »

No Estate Tax for 365 Days

January 21st, 2010

As of Jan. 1, there is no federal estate tax and a reduction in the number of taxable estates in the US.

Unfortunately, the clock is ticking on this federal tax hiatus, and the alarm may sound before the year is over.

In 2001, when any estate more than $675,000 was taxed, Congress passed tax cuts that gradually decreased the amount of estate tax payable by the estates of those dying over the following eight years.

These tax cuts increased the federal exemption to $3.5 million in 2009, eventually culminating in the temporary elimination of federal estate taxes for estates of those dying in 2010.

The bill passed in 2001 had a sunset provision, whereby the law ends at the end of this year.

In 2011, the estate tax comes back for estates of $1 million or greater, at a maximum rate of 55 percent, if Congress does not act before the end of this year.

In December of 2009, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would have halted this year’s temporary removal of the federal estate tax, reinstating last year’s levels for another year.

The Senate, however, didn’t yet vote on it.

The House has introduced a new bill which would make last year’s $3.5 million exemption permanent and cap the top rate at 45 percent. This new bill is waiting for the Senate’s approval.

If this bill were to be passed, it would be retroactive to Jan. 1, 2010. The one thing that never changes, however, is that a bequest to a spouse or to a charity would not be taxed.

Bookmark and Share

Tags:
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 1 Comment »

The best-kept tax secret for small businesses

January 13th, 2010

By Nancy Mann Jackson, contributing writerJanuary 13, 2010: 11:42 AM ET

(CNNMoney.com) — For two years, Dr. James Smouse of Atlanta Oral and Facial Surgery tried to convince his younger partners to participate in a cash balance pension plan, a unique defined-benefit plan that offers business owners the opportunity to make hefty, tax-deferred contributions toward their retirement savings. But until the recession hit, they weren’t interested.

“They thought they’d be better off investing their money in stocks and other vehicles,” Smouse says. “But what happened over the past 18 months showed there’s a risk, and after working a few years, they’ve seen how much money they have to pay in taxes.”

With their cash balance plan — which guarantees an annual return of 4%, compounded over 30 years for the youngest participants — Smouse’s partners realized they could enjoy significant retirement benefits with tax savings now and little risk later. So in 2009, the group worked with actuaries at Jacksonville, Fla.-based Dorsa Consulting to establish their plan.

The cash balance pension plan — little-known and even less understood — is growing in popularity. “It’s the best-kept secret in retirement planning. Even CPAs don’t know about it,” says Stephen Dobrow, president of Burlingame, Calif.-based Primark Benefits.

The plans, which involve mandatory annual contributions, work best for small business owners with fewer than 20 employees and excess profits of more than $50,000 per year that they can afford to sink into funding a pension , says Richard Jensen, president of BRS Consulting in Little Rock, Ark. If your company fits the bill, you can enjoy these benefits:

Accelerated Retirement Savings. Most business owners don’t begin saving aggressively for retirement until they’re five or 10 years away from it, Dobrow says. They tend to plow any extra profits back into the business.

For those owners, a cash balance plan offers an opportunity to catch up quickly. At Smouse’s office, owners who are less than five years from retirement can sock away an extra $60,000 each year pre-tax, beyond their investments in the firm’s profit-sharing plan. Younger owners only have to put in $10,000 per year.

Security. A cash balance plan is a defined-benefit plan, as opposed to a defined contribution plan like a 401(k). That means that it guarantees a targeted annual benefit beginning when the owner reaches a certain age. Working with an actuary, participants set annual contributions that will yield the set benefit.

And upon retirement, those benefits are guaranteed: “When the market fell, people’s cash balance plans didn’t drop; their 401(k)s did,” says John McCrary of Dorsa Consulting. “People with a cash balance plan didn’t lose anything.”

Those benefits are guaranteed by the business. As the plan’s sponsor, it’s responsible for the funding. But most companies shift the responsibility to a financial services firm.

For example, say a plan wants to guarantee a post-retirement benefit of $1,000 per month for life. The plan sponsor can then go buy an annuity from a company like ING (ING).

“ING promises to pay that participant the $1,000 per month as long as they live,” McCrary says “The only investment risk that the participant now has is that ING stays in business during his lifetime. No matter what the market does, the risk now has shifted from the plan to ING. But they have a pool of money to pay from, so they really have maybe 15 to 20 years for the market to rebound and start growing again.”

McCrary compares a defined benefit plan to a loan. “We know how much we want at retirement, we know how many years we have until we reach age 65, and we can estimate a rate of return,” he says. “It’s not really quite that easy, but that is the big picture.”

However, if the investment returns are poor, the plans can be underfunded. Because most cash balance plans for small employers will terminate when the owner retires, the final contribution due is the amount needed to cover any underfunding. In that case, the owner can either contribute the full amount or waive any shortfall, which means they will take a smaller benefit, McCrary says.

But cash balance plans are conservative, aiming for slow, steady growth with a return of 5% to 6% percent, which helps limit losses in a bad market.

Extreme tax relief. A cash balance plan offers business owners a legal vehicle to defer paying taxes on large sums of income. “It’s a great way to lower your taxes,” McCrary says. “Would you rather save money for yourself or pay off all this [government] spending that’s going on?”

For most businesses, the highest expense after salaries “is tax liability,” Smouse says. “To legally not pay as much in taxes, there aren’t many avenues. [With a cash balance plan], the money you’re not giving to the federal government will be put into your own pocket when you retire. It will be taxed then, but hopefully we’ll be in a lower tax bracket then.”

More at: Money.com

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 1 Comment »

Who’s planning for retirement?

November 27th, 2009

Over 38% of adults are making no financial plans for their retirement and, of those, 28% have no intention of doing so. Those who do plan to in the future are starting much too late, according to Home & Capital Advisers’ retirement planning survey.

Not surprisingly, younger age groups are least likely to have started their retirement preparations already – with over 54% of under 30s saying they have done nothing or may be relying on their partners. But even among people in their forties, a worrying 35% have made no financial preparations for their twilight years.

Retirement preparations include paying into an employer’s pension scheme (27%), a personal pension plan (14%), savings (9%) and property (6%).

Of those who are not currently making financial provision for retirement, a shocking 28% have no intention of doing so, with the majority of them (54%) saying this is because they cannot afford it. 14% said they were living for today or hadn’t even thought about retirement, while a further 13% felt they are comfortably enough off not to need to worry. 11% are relying on the value in their own home.

Of those who intend to start preparing, 55% said they would do so by age 40 – but that leaves 45% who will leave it even later. For 14% of them, preparation won’t start until they are over 50. Those who intend to start a pension or other retirement plan said they would begin, on average, at age 39.

The survey reveals an alarming shortfall in many individuals’ personal provision for retirement, but also shows that many people are placing undue reliance on the government. 46% believe it’s the government’s job to provide for them in retirement.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | No Comments »

Long-Term Care Insurance/ Retirement Planning

November 18th, 2009

Ask most 50-plus men and women about retirement, and they’ll admit that they have not saved as much money as they’d like. Mention long-term care and they may confess that they’re not ready to think about it — yet.

Thinking about issues such as failing health isn’t as much fun as considering retirement travel plans. Unfortunately, the possibility of needing long-term care is as real as the fun aspects of being a senior. In fact, people who are now 65 face at least a 70-percent chance of needing long-term care during their lifetime, according to the 2006 Guide to Long-Term Care Insurance published by the America’s Health Insurance Plans association.
That care can be expensive. Nationally, the average cost of a year in a nursing home is $60,000, and just three weekly visits by a home health aide can add up to $18,000 a year, with skilled help being much more expensive. In 2008, North Florida’s average annual cost of a nursing home was $78,000, and three weekly visits by a home health aide topped $20,000 per year. (Based on local research and information provided by The National Clearinghouse for Long-Term Care Information.)
Between the probability of requiring care and the potential cost of that support, planning for long-term care is an important factor in retirement planning. Many people mistakenly believe that the government provides the answer. However, the disclaimer “Medicare does not pay for long-term care, so you may want to consider options for private insurance” is now printed on all Social Security Administration benefits statements.
Furthermore, Medicaid pays benefits only for people meeting federal poverty guidelines. Relying on Medicaid to fund long-term care is not an attractive option for most people who wish to maintain control of their own assets.
Long-term care insurance is an increasingly popular strategy. According to a 2009 report by the Life Insurance Marketing and Research Association, there were 4.8 million long-term care insurance policies in force at the end of 2008. As the United States population ages, this trend is expected to strengthen.

Karen Cooley, co-owner of Chez Pierre restaurant, has recently started a new career with North Florida Financial Corp. and has become passionate about sharing a holistic approach to financial planning. Contact her at karen_cooley@glic.com.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 3 Comments »

Is China headed toward collapse?

November 11th, 2009

By EAMON JAVERS
The conventional wisdom in Washington and in most of the rest of the world is that the roaring Chinese economy is going to pull the global economy out of recession and back into growth. It’s China’s turn, the theory goes, as American consumers — who propelled the last global boom with their borrowing and spending ways — have begun to tighten their belts and increase savings rates.

The Chinese, with their unbridled capitalistic expansion propelled by a system they still refer to as “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” are still thriving, though, with annual gross domestic product growth of 8.9 percent in the third quarter and a domestic consumer market just starting to flex its enormous muscles.

That’s prompted some cheerleading from U.S. officials, who want to see those Chinese consumers begin to pick up the slack in the global economy — a theme President Barack Obama and his delegation are certain to bring up during next week’s visit to China.

“Purchases of U.S. consumers cannot be as dominant a driver of growth as they have been in the past,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said during a trip to Beijing this spring. “In China, … growth that is sustainable will require a very substantial shift from external to domestic demand, from an investment and export-intensive growth to growth led by consumption.”

That’s one vision of the future.

But there’s a growing group of market professionals who see a different picture altogether. These self-styled China bears take the less popular view: that the much-vaunted Chinese economic miracle is nothing but a paper dragon. In fact, they argue that the Chinese have dangerously overheated their economy, building malls, luxury stores and infrastructure for which there is almost no demand, and that the entire system is teetering toward collapse.

A Chinese collapse, of course, would have profound effects on the United States, limiting China’s ability to buy U.S. debt and provoking unknown political changes inside the Chinese regime.

The China bears could be dismissed as a bunch of cranks and grumps except for one member of the group: hedge fund investor Jim Chanos.

Chanos, a billionaire, is the founder of the investment firm Kynikos Associates and a famous short seller — an investor who scrutinizes companies looking for hidden flaws and then bets against those firms in the market.

His most famous call came in 2001, when Chanos was one of the first to figure out that the accounting numbers presented to the public by Enron were pure fiction. Chanos began contacting Wall Street investment houses that were touting Enron’s stock. “We were struck by how many of them conceded that there was no way to analyze Enron but that investing in Enron was, instead, a ‘trust me’ story,” Chanos told a congressional committee in 2002.

Is China headed for collapse?

Bookmark and Share

Tags: ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | No Comments »

Lower the pain of estate taxes

November 8th, 2009

The federal estate tax is a tax on your right to transfer property at your death. The tax is imposed on the value of everything you own, less any exemption that is in force at the time of death. In 2009, the federal exemption is $3.5 million per person. If the value of a decedent’s property exceeds the exemption, the excess amount is subject to a tax of up to 45 percent.

For many years, the first $1 million in assets of a decedent were exempt from taxation. Although $1 million is a very large amount of money, a $1 million exemption limit created massive problems for families that owned land, farms or small businesses. If the majority of a decedent’s wealth consisted of real estate or a business instead of more liquid investments, families were often forced to sell assets that had been in the family for generations, just to raise cash to pay the estate tax.

In 2001, to accommodate growing property values, Congress enacted legislation that gradually increased the exemption, lowered the maximum estate rate from 55 percent to 45 percent, and, at least temporarily, eliminated the estate tax altogether. By 2009, the federal exemption grew to $3.5 million, and unless Congress amends the law before the end of this year, there will be no federal estate tax due on the estate of a person who dies in 2010. If the law remains unchanged, the exemption is due to return to $1 million in 2011, and the top estate tax bracket will return to 55 percent.

Before the government’s massive bailout of the financial markets, it was widely expected that Congress would make the $3.5 million exemption permanent. Now, that expectation is unrealistic. With only a few weeks left until Jan. 1, it’s likely Congress will enact a “patch” to extend the 2009 limits for one more year, until a more permanent plan can be developed. Whatever the eventual exemption limits will be, most analysts expect that some form of estate taxation will remain.

Individual estates may also impose their own estate taxes, with exemptions that may or may not be based on the federal limits.

Life insurance has long been used as an estate planning tool. In addition to providing a death benefit to replace the loss of a wage-earner’s income, life insurance is frequently used to help pay estate taxes. In order to avoid subjecting the life insurance proceeds themselves from estate taxation, estate planners often use irrevocable life insurance trusts (ILITs).

Following is a very simplified explanation of the typical way an ILIT works: Generally, the first step is to create the trust, and name a trustee. The trust purchases a life insurance policy on the life of the person who creates the trust (the grantor). The trust becomes the owner and the beneficiary of the policy. Each year, the grantor makes a gift of cash to the trust, which the trustee may use to pay the life insurance premium. At the death of the grantor, the life insurance proceeds are paid to the trust. The terms of the trust state how the death benefit is to be distributed. If the trust has been properly created, the death benefit does not become part of the grantor’s estate, and the proceeds may be used to either pay any estate taxes that might be due on the grantor’s other assets, or paid to his or her heirs.

Regulations permit an existing life insurance policy to be transferred into an ILIT, but the policy’s death benefit will be included in the grantor’s estate if death occurs within three years of the transfer. It is essential to change both the owner and beneficiary of the policy to the trust to avoid inadvertently failing to remove the proceeds in the grantor’s estate.

With so much uncertainty about the existence or extent of future estate taxes, ILITs continue to be popular estate planning vehicles. In order to fully benefit from this strategy, you must be especially diligent to comply with strict rules about the language of the trust, the selection and powers of the trustee, the procedure and documentation of gifts to the trust, and other constraints. For this reason, it is especially important to work with a competent and experienced estate planning attorney.

Elaine Morgillo is a Certified Financial Planner and president of Morgillo Financial Management Inc. She has offices in Portsmouth and North Andover, Mass., and can be reached at emorgillo@morgillofinancial.com

Bookmark and Share

Tags: ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 2 Comments »

Death Cometh for the Greenback

October 30th, 2009

by Joseph E. Stiglitz
10.27.2009
From the November/December issue of The National Interest.

THE DOLLAR is in trouble. That’s clear, and it’s been true for a while.

The cornerstone of the global economic system has long been the greenback. In the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the oil shocks that brought on inflation, the value of the dollar relative to other currencies could not be maintained, so countries moved away from pegging their currencies to America’s. But still, the almighty dollar was used by countries all over the world for their reserves. The reserves provided backing for the currency and the country. They were a bank account that could be drawn upon in times of need. If oil prices shot up, a crop failed or lenders demanded their money back, there was a stockpile of money that could be used.

There was a longtime confidence in the dollar, even more when then–Chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker brought down inflation in the early ’80s. The dollar was a good “store of value.” And the fact that others were willing to hold American dollars was a big advantage to the United States—it could borrow cheaply abroad.

To assure the dollar’s standing, by the ’90s, America officially had a strong-dollar policy. Speeches by then–Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin affirmed our determination to maintain the value of the dollar. And for much of the period, the dollar was indeed “strong.” But it had little to do with the speeches, though I sometimes suspect not only that the secretary of the treasury but also the financial markets thought so.

For the past eight years, the dollar has increasingly become less revered. Its value has been volatile. As the rest of the world saw the United States struggling with a failing war and soaring budget deficits, many who had large dollar holdings began to reduce those reserves (or increase them less than they otherwise would have). All this put downward pressure on the dollar. And thus began the first signs of a vicious circle. The strength of the dollar is becoming riskier and riskier. The growing U.S. deficit and the ballooning of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheets leave many worried that in their wake will come inflation, undermining the long-term attractiveness of the U.S. currency.

In this article, I try to explain why the dollar is in trouble, but ask—should we care? What are the consequences? I will suggest that, for the most part, and for most Americans, it is probably a good thing. But the adjustment to a lower value of the dollar will not necessarily come easily. One of the consequences—already under way—is the fraying of the dollar-reserve system. I argue that a move to a global reserve system would be good for the United States, and good for the world.

Read More

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | 1 Comment »

2010 Roth IRA Conversions

October 16th, 2009

Most of us dread the thought of the ever-changing tax laws. This time around you may be lucky enough to benefit from the already established changes. Beginning in 2010, new tax rules offer the unique opportunity for previously excluded, higher-income individuals to establish a Roth IRA. Here is what the changes mean to you:
What are the current rules?
Taxpayers with a MAGI (modified adjusted gross income) of $100,000 or less in the year of con-version are eligible to process a Roth IRA conversion. Taxpayers who are married but file a sepa-rate tax return are not eligible for Roth IRA conversions. When determining eligibility the amount of conversion is not included in the $100,000 MAGI limit. The conversion, however, will be taxed as ordinary income.
How will the rules change after January 1, 2010?
Beginning in 2010 the current MAGI limit and filing status restrictions will be removed.
Who will be eligible to convert a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA?
As of January 1, 2010 anyone with a traditional IRA will be eligible to convert their IRA into a Roth IRA. The normal 10% tax penalty for traditional IRA distributions prior to the account owner at-taining age 59 ½ will not be assessed for a Roth IRA conversion.
Will I be taxed on the conversion?
The entire Roth IRA conversion amount will be considered taxable income. The IRS will allow you to spread the tax payments over two years—2011 and 2012. You may also choose to withhold for income taxes at the time of conversion. Please work closely with your CPA or tax professional to determine the best tax strategy for your situation.
How is a Roth IRA different from a traditional IRA?
A traditional IRA is characterized by deductible contributions that grow tax deferred until distribu-tion. When distributions are made from a traditional IRA they are considered ordinary income. Contributions to a Roth IRA are not deductible. Roth IRA contributions grow tax free because they are not taxed within the Roth IRA or at the time of distribution (as long as the minimum hold-ing period, usually five years from time of contribution, and other requirements, such as age, are met). Distributions from Roth IRA earnings that have not satisfied the IRS requirements are sub-ject to income tax and in certain situations an additional 10% tax penalty may apply.
What are the disadvantages and benefits of the Roth conversion?
While there are a lot of benefits to convert to a Roth IRA, there are a few disadvantages you should consider before making a decision. First, if you are under 59 ½ you must use cash (outside of your IRA) to pay for your income tax liability. If you do not have the cash available the withholding (if taken from an IRA) may be subject to an additional 10% tax penalty. Next, if you believe your effective tax rate will decrease between the present and when you will begin distrib-uting your IRA you may want to reconsider – in this situation the traditional IRA may be more beneficial.
In contrast, there are various benefits available if you decide to do a Roth conversion. Obviously, tax free withdrawals are one of the main attractions to Roth IRAs. Conversions also offer signifi-cant tax advantages with estate planning. Converting all or a portion of your traditional IRA to a Roth IRA will reduce your taxable estate without a reduction in the tax-free earnings and distribu-tions that can be transferred to your beneficiaries. Last, there is no required minimum distribu-tion for Roth IRAs allowing you to leave your money invested for as long as you want.
Who should convert to a Roth IRA?
Since there is no easy formula or rule of thumb individual analysis is required. Many factors must be considered including age, health, net worth, retirement goals, tax planning, estate and income taxes. It is important to discuss your options and determine the amount, if any, would be most beneficial to convert to a Roth IRA.
How do I get started?
If you are interested in the possibility of a Roth IRA conversion in 2010 please call your Financial Advisor in December 2009 or January 2010 to get the process started.

Charles C. Zhang, CFP®, ChFC, MBA, MSFS
Zhang Financial
Portage, MI

Bookmark and Share

Tags: ,
Posted in Finding The Best Financial Advisor | No Comments »

« Older Entries