brown caddy
brown buick
brown OLDSmobile
something like that
I only get a car every 10 years also, but we have two cars. $30k doesn’t buy much nowadays,
i bought a new hyundai for $23k. Better than a honda or toyota imo
Kia Optima + ricer kit imo
2 Likes
I’m driving my 100k Porsche off a cliff when I’m diagnosed with terminal cancer Thelma and Louise style.
i’m curing my cancer with all the money i saved
like Steve Jobs?
1 Like
that’s just mean
1 Like
20K (four years ago). More expensive cars aren’t worth it to me, and 90% of the time it’s just me in the car.
Honda civic and then enough money left over to paint it tan since they don’t sell it in that color anymore.
My CRV was less than $30k (a few years ago at least) and I love that thing.
2 Likes
How about a brown on brown Lincoln Town Car?
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/845593526/overview/
we are actuaries, not mobsters
You do need to be careful about taking out too much taxable when you’re on Medicare or they’ll ding your premiums.
I haven’t totally figured out the details here but my father has. He has figured out how to game it with the timing of when he files his taxes so that they will basically look at every other year. And he and my stepmom file separately so he splits their income so she’s high they year they look at his and then he’s high the year they look at hers so that neither one of them ever gets dinged for higher Medicare premium.
But I think if you just file your taxes by April 15 every year like a normal person then they look at it every year although I’m admittedly not positive.
So I think you want to save enough Roth stuff to cover car purchases or other one-time expenses so that your taxes and Medicare premiums don’t go through the roof the one year you have high income. Also be careful on the sale of your residence. You don’t pay tax on the first $250,000 of gain ($500,000 if you’re married and you both own the property) but if you bought when you were 25 and sell when you’re 75 then $250,000 doesn’t go very far.
yeah
look at that bling
I don’t think his house is even worth that much.
Also, it needs to be your primary residence for at least 2 years for the 250k exclusion to apply.
Oh, I’m assuming most actuaries will buy homes worth more than $250,000, even ones in the Po. Maybe not at age 25, but at some point. (I was younger than 25 when I bought my first place, but not by much and I’m weird that way. Got a lot of “are your parents home” when I answered the door, which was insulting and infuriating.)
Yes, specifically 2 of the last 5 years. And widow(er)s have two years after the death of their spouse to sell and still qualify for the $500,000 exclusion. If they keep the house for 2 years and 1 day after the death of their spouse then the exclusion goes back to $250,000.
Glad to see we’re keeping those widows from gaming the tax system
1 Like
Yeah, I think two years is a little harsh.
It also seems silly that there’s no time component.
Suppose that we are the same age. When we are 25 we both buy a house for $200,000.
You hold the house until you are 75 at which point it is worth $2,500,000. You have a $2.3 million gain and must pay tax on $2.05 million.
I, however, sold the $200,000 house when it reached $450,000 and paid no tax on the gain. I bought another $450,000 house which I held until it hit $700,000. Then I bought another $700,000 house and held it until it until hit $950,000… etc.
I will pay no capital gains tax at all. You will pay quite a LOT.
Why am I more deserving of a tax break than you?!?! I don’t think I am at all.
I’d say exempt $25,000 per year you owned the home or something along those lines. Double for every year that you were married and you & your spouse lived in the home together. Then there is essentially no difference between 2 years and 2 years + 1 day for the widow(er).
Alas… no one consulted me when they came up with the law. The current law is fairly simple… it does have that going for it.
That’s fair, yeah making the tax code more complex is always an easy temptation but just adds to the issue.
That said, we seem to be happy to recognize a married couple as a joint entity in many ways (like pension benefits). Seems unnecessarily cruel to carve out a widow (why not just treat her as a married unit until she dies), not to mention leapfrog issue you note.
Just imaging the old people who remain in their home for a couple years after their spouse dies for probably sentimental reasons. Then the kids finally convince them to move into a retirement home and sell their house and, whoops shoulda gotten over grandpa sooner.