Anonymous wrote:Op here.
Thanks for the responses. Shouldn’t a net worth be what you could actually realize if you had to sell everything?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How do you deal with 401k assets? Do you include them in your net worth pre-tax or do you apply a factor to reduce their value to account for taxes when you ultimately withdraw?
Right now, I multiply my 401k assets by .65 to account for future taxes.
OP.. It's simple and practical to keep track of just your liquid net worth (exclude RE; include 529) for retirement planning at full value. All assets ( (except Roth IRAs) have a tax liability attached to them, unless managed, and it gets cumbersome if you start factoring that in. 65+ retirees get additional tax deductions and you could withdraw 100K+ and get away with paying zero to very low tax. Deal with taxes as an expense. If you need to spend, say $200K/yr in retirement, plan on a 20% overall tax on your withdrawal vs. reducing your assets by 35% and zero tax in retirement.
I know some pedantic idiot will come by to yap about my treatment of 529 and RE. Here's how to deal with it:
529 - Treat the balance as an asset and withdrawals as an expense. The money you have is yours, any balance left over is yours as well to gift your grandkids later, or just withdraw, pay penalty and spend. Excluding it makes no sense.
RE - You always need a roof over your head. If your have "excess RE" (live in a fully paid off $4M house but can easily downsize to a $1M house, have investment property, etc), by all means include that excess into your net worth. Otherwise ignore. Treat mortgage payments as an expense.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I worked at Brown Brothers Harriman where actual super wealthy bank.
We only tracked “investable assets” or free money. Theory was that is all you can spend or invest. Under that metric most people in DCOM are poor.
Stocks, bonds, real estate, 401ks, IRAs, Gold, Cars all zero.
I recall one very very wealthy lady back in 1997 I was helping. She had 100 million in cash in 1997. She did have 900 million in stocks. Plus 100 million in bonds and REITs.
But the 100 million was her only number we cared about as that was only money she could spend or invest. Literally wanted cash in case business opportunity, mansion she could write did someone was selling a 50 million dollar house in Southampton in a distress sale for $40 million write a check or get in a pre IPO investment write a check.
What amazed me her onr billion was throwing off 100 million in dividends, interest, capital gains each year. So that 100 million built up quick
Did you get fired for incompetence and failure to understand basic finance, by any chance?
Anonymous wrote:I worked at Brown Brothers Harriman where actual super wealthy bank.
We only tracked “investable assets” or free money. Theory was that is all you can spend or invest. Under that metric most people in DCOM are poor.
Stocks, bonds, real estate, 401ks, IRAs, Gold, Cars all zero.
I recall one very very wealthy lady back in 1997 I was helping. She had 100 million in cash in 1997. She did have 900 million in stocks. Plus 100 million in bonds and REITs.
But the 100 million was her only number we cared about as that was only money she could spend or invest. Literally wanted cash in case business opportunity, mansion she could write did someone was selling a 50 million dollar house in Southampton in a distress sale for $40 million write a check or get in a pre IPO investment write a check.
What amazed me her onr billion was throwing off 100 million in dividends, interest, capital gains each year. So that 100 million built up quick
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I worked at Brown Brothers Harriman where actual super wealthy bank.
We only tracked “investable assets” or free money. Theory was that is all you can spend or invest. Under that metric most people in DCOM are poor.
Stocks, bonds, real estate, 401ks, IRAs, Gold, Cars all zero.
I recall one very very wealthy lady back in 1997 I was helping. She had 100 million in cash in 1997. She did have 900 million in stocks. Plus 100 million in bonds and REITs.
But the 100 million was her only number we cared about as that was only money she could spend or invest. Literally wanted cash in case business opportunity, mansion she could write did someone was selling a 50 million dollar house in Southampton in a distress sale for $40 million write a check or get in a pre IPO investment write a check.
What amazed me her onr billion was throwing off 100 million in dividends, interest, capital gains each year. So that 100 million built up quick
That is absolutely not how most banks view “investable assets” or “ liquid net worth”. Liquid DOES include stocks because they can be sold rapidly, unlike say real estate. Liquid has never meant just cash.
Anonymous wrote:How do you deal with 401k assets? Do you include them in your net worth pre-tax or do you apply a factor to reduce their value to account for taxes when you ultimately withdraw?
Right now, I multiply my 401k assets by .65 to account for future taxes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I worked at Brown Brothers Harriman where actual super wealthy bank.
We only tracked “investable assets” or free money. Theory was that is all you can spend or invest. Under that metric most people in DCOM are poor.
Stocks, bonds, real estate, 401ks, IRAs, Gold, Cars all zero.
I recall one very very wealthy lady back in 1997 I was helping. She had 100 million in cash in 1997. She did have 900 million in stocks. Plus 100 million in bonds and REITs.
But the 100 million was her only number we cared about as that was only money she could spend or invest. Literally wanted cash in case business opportunity, mansion she could write did someone was selling a 50 million dollar house in Southampton in a distress sale for $40 million write a check or get in a pre IPO investment write a check.
What amazed me her onr billion was throwing off 100 million in dividends, interest, capital gains each year. So that 100 million built up quick
That is absolutely not how most banks view “investable assets” or “ liquid net worth”. Liquid DOES include stocks because they can be sold rapidly, unlike say real estate. Liquid has never meant just cash.
Anonymous wrote:Look there is no one I officially report by net worth to - it is something I try to assess every once in a while for my own benefit. And to keep it as meaningful for me as possible, I do roughly factor in taxes.
For example, I have $1M in a regular IRA and $1M in a Roth IRA. I do not consider those two accounts to be equally valuable - because the Roth one is not going to be taxed so it is worth more to me.
Similarly, I am in the highest tax bracket and planning to work for 10 + years (hopefully at this income level) and just inherited a $2M in an IRA. Do I consider myself $2M richer? Nope I consider myself to be about $1.15M richer because I mentally net out the taxes.
Anonymous wrote:How do you deal with 401k assets? Do you include them in your net worth pre-tax or do you apply a factor to reduce their value to account for taxes when you ultimately withdraw?
Right now, I multiply my 401k assets by .65 to account for future taxes.
Anonymous wrote:I worked at Brown Brothers Harriman where actual super wealthy bank.
We only tracked “investable assets” or free money. Theory was that is all you can spend or invest. Under that metric most people in DCOM are poor.
Stocks, bonds, real estate, 401ks, IRAs, Gold, Cars all zero.
I recall one very very wealthy lady back in 1997 I was helping. She had 100 million in cash in 1997. She did have 900 million in stocks. Plus 100 million in bonds and REITs.
But the 100 million was her only number we cared about as that was only money she could spend or invest. Literally wanted cash in case business opportunity, mansion she could write did someone was selling a 50 million dollar house in Southampton in a distress sale for $40 million write a check or get in a pre IPO investment write a check.
What amazed me her onr billion was throwing off 100 million in dividends, interest, capital gains each year. So that 100 million built up quick