Ask a Question
Use this Question Forum to ask questions about how the software works, how to model different "what if" cases, or other user-related question. If you have a support issue (something seems to be wrong with the software) then please create a support ticket. How to browse this forum: SCROLL and click titles to read complete question/answer, use the FILTERS below, pick from TOPICS on the list at right (think of them as folders), use the SEARCH BOX (see also "advanced search" when you use it), choose from RECENT COMMENTS at the right below.
Registered users may create a question here.
Hi - As a long-time ESPlanner user, I'm trying to decide when to switch over to MaxiFi, and like the sound of several of its new features. However the fact it does not yet support Monte Carlo has me concerned.
My report seems to have a major inconsistency. In the "Inputs and Assumptions" section, "Net Worth" and the other subsections like "Retirement Accounts" accurately reflect what I entered.
I have a friend who has her retirement plan in ESPlannerPLUS already, but going forward she doesn't have time to update it each year and would like to pay a certified financial planner to do the updates.
While in retirement the Total Income tab shows concurrent withdrawals from my IRAs as well as my taxable brokerage accounts. I was expecting to see withdrawal order: Taxable first, then withdrawals from tax advantaged.
I am interested in understanding how the MC function uses data and does its calculations.
Regardless of planning method used to run reports, the Spending table consistently shows discretionary spending in the years before electing for Social Security (post retirement age) to be lower by an amount roughly equal to the net Social Security amount.
If I sell stocks for a gain this year I would enter the amount received as a special receipt taxable at capital gains rate if held over 1 year.
We are retired and most of our cash flow is out of our IRA accounts and Social Security. I understand that my quarterly estimated tax payments are not part of our "consumption" or "special" funds and is assumed to be a deduction from income.
Is this the best way to track HSA contributions and account balances... (1) enter annual HSA contributions as special expenditures excludible from AGI. I thought about entering them as Roth contributions, but then the taxes wouldn't be calculated correctly.
I am modeling costs for joining a "continuing care retirement community" (CCRC). The contract we are looking at covers all housing, some meals, and medical care for life (from Independent Living through and including Assisted Living, Nursing Home andMemory Unit care), but at a price, of course.
We increased my date of death from age 85 to 90 on the Demographics tab and now the report shows both of our current ages as 0. We did not change birthdates. How do we correct this?
I've relied on ESPlanner for years and love it. Having entered retirement, though, I need to understand a bit more about what's going on "under the hood."
I have established a detailed plan and I am now starting into retirement.
I'd like to model reductions in future SS benefits but the program will not accept reductions greater than 50%. Is this by design?
I'm simulating a case where the person wants to rent her house indefinitely and never buy a home. She lives in an area where rent increases are large and common. I don't see any way on the "primary residence" tab where she can allow for these rent increases.
We have 5 years left on our mortgage and I would like to rent out our primary residence next year and buy another house to live in on a 15 year mortgage.
I'd then sell the primary residence (now a rental) in 15 years.
What's the best way to set this up?
I'm unclear about the survivor results in Contingency Planning when the Key Ages for converting my 403b and IRAs are set to a later date than the date I'll die (e.g., 70 for the accounts vs 66 for death).
I did a "maximize" on my base profile in Maxifi (I'm sure something similar would be the case in ESPlanner) and the net result was that it shifted a large amount of discretionary spending from pre-retirement to post-retirement.