Connect with us

Personal Finance

$400 to change a lightbulb? Appliance repair costs are no joke

Published

on

Author Stephanie Dhue’s difficult-to-repair microwave.

Courtesy Stephanie Dhue

I bought a General Electric microwave oven in 2020 for $355. Recently, I noticed the interior light was out.

I told my husband, since he’s the one who takes care of repairs in our house. He took a look, only to learn that this wasn’t going to be an easy fix. The lightbulb is built into the unit so that it requires taking the microwave apart to change, and a technician is recommended. 

It sounds like the setup to a lightbulb joke: How much does it cost to change a microwave bulb?

The answer, however, wasn’t funny. When my husband and I started gathering estimates, we learned that the labor costs involved could be up to $400, maybe more — and that didn’t include the cost of the lightbulb.

More from Your Money:

Here’s a look at more stories on how to manage, grow and protect your money for the years ahead.

While my lightbulb situation may be somewhat unique, experts say it is not uncommon to learn the cost of repairs is more than the cost to replace an appliance.

Gay Gordon-Byrne had a similar experience with a microwave she purchased to match a stove. The microwave touchpad stopped working.

She figured out how to do the repair herself, but said the manufacturer tried to charge her $600 for the replacement part. Instead, she bought a new microwave for $175.

“I tell the story all the time because it’s so emblematic of what’s wrong with appliances these days,” said Gordon-Byrne, who is the executive director of Repair.org, which advocates for the legal right of owners to repair their own devices. 

Figuring out the cost for a repair

My first call to repair our microwave was to the appliance store where I made the purchase. The service center told me there would be $140 charge to come out, and they couldn’t guarantee that the technician would have a lightbulb on the truck. The service representative suggested I simply purchase a new microwave or shop around for other repair options. 

Next, I went to the GE site and filled out a form for service. I learned that the charge for a technician to come would be $125.

One of the the main reasons why it’s so difficult to fix things is because they’re designed with kind of a hostility to repair, or an ambivalence to repair.

Nathan Proctor

senior director of U.S. PIRG’s Right to Repair campaign

When the technician called, I explained the situation and that I needed to know how much it would cost before he came out. He told me he would charge for labor and parts. 

How much? Since the microwave sits in a cabinet above the counter, to remove it would be a “two man job,” he said, and could cost upwards of $400 for the labor. What if my husband and I took the microwave out and placed it on the counter? In that case the labor charge would be closer to $200, but that wasn’t an exact estimate. It also didn’t include the cost of the lightbulb.

I canceled the visit and the technician said there would be no charge.

When I asked GE Appliances why the microwave was designed this way, a spokesperson responded via e-mail that microwave lights are designed to last the lifetime of the product and failures are very uncommon in their products. The light fixture is more than a standard bulb that has to be encased behind a metal enclosure. 

“It’s not a simple screw-in and requires electrical training and background,” the spokesperson said. “Given the high voltage nature of microwaves, it not safe for consumers without a deep electrical understanding to operate on the interior of a microwave.” She also noted that service techs are required to test for emissions to comply with strict standards set by the U.S. government.

How ‘right to repair’ laws may affect options, costs

Studio4 | E+ | Getty Images

State lawmakers and consumer advocates have been trying to make it easier and cheaper for consumers to get their devices repaired.

Several states — including California, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New York — have implemented so-called “right to repair” laws. Typically, the laws require manufacturers of certain devices — such as consumer electronics or appliances — to make parts, physical and software tools and repair information, like schematics, available at a fair and reasonable price. These laws can make it more straightforward for consumers to do repairs themselves, and widen professional repair options, too.

Colorado and Oregon have passed right to repair legislation that will go into effect in the next year, and more than a dozen others have introduced bills, according to Repair.org.

“We are just now starting to see the impact of legislation that we’ve been working on for 10 years,” said Gordon-Byrne. The earliest right to repair bills were filed in 2014, she said — including the first, in South Dakota, which failed — and “we really only got the first three laws in place to start July first of this year.”

There are limits to what these laws can do. Typically they only cover purchases made in recent years, and can be product-specific. New York’s law, for example, doesn’t include appliances. Some states have separate laws to cover specific products like autos, farm equipment and electronic wheelchairs.

Car ownership is getting more expensive due to rising repair costs

At the federal level, the Federal Trade Commission said in a 2021 report to Congress that “restricting consumers and businesses from choosing how they repair products can substantially increase the total cost of repairs, generate harmful electronic waste, and unnecessarily increase wait times for repairs.” The Commission has also brought warranty-related enforcement actions and this summer sent warning letters to several manufacturers about their warranty practices. 

Critics of right to repair legislation say the patchwork of state laws are too broad and may do more harm than good.

“These state proposals and state laws could lead to a lose-lose situation in which manufacturers are harmed because it undercuts their profits, and consumers are harmed because they either see a decreased kind of quality of these products or an increase in price,” said Alex Reinauer, a research fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Some products designed ‘with a hostility to repair’

Consumer advocates say state laws and the FTC actions help, but haven’t solved the problem. 

“One of the main reasons why it’s so difficult to fix things is because they’re designed with kind of a hostility to repair, or an ambivalence to repair,” said Nathan Proctor, the senior director of U.S. PIRG’s Right to Repair campaign. 

To give consumers more information, US PIRG is also launching a new effort to bring repair-score labeling to the U.S. Right now, “there’s no way to tell what products are designed to be serviceable, and therefore last, and be resilient and durable,” Proctor said.

France already has this kind of system, he said, and the EU is rolling out a “repairability index,” with a rating system that scores a product based on factors including a repair-friendly design and the price and availability of parts. Scores range from zero to 10, with higher numbers indicating a more repairable product and greater longevity expectations.

However, those scores are subjective and may not hold up over time. For example, if a manufacturer discontinues making a part, that reparability score may not longer be accurate.

Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Reinauer is keeping a score of his own, using a spreadsheet that compares the Ingress Protection (IP) rating, which grades how a product stands up to water and dust intrusion, with the reparability index. He says that comparison doesn’t favor repairs.

“When a when a product is more repairable, typically it’s less durable,” said Reinauer, “so there are trade-offs in this.”

Do-it-yourself help

Halfpoint Images | Moment | Getty Images

Depending on the nature of the problem and safety issues involved, a repair may be worth trying to tackle on your own. Appliance owners may find help from others online.

“Researching the broken item’s issue on the web often leads to information and guides posted by others who have encountered the same issue, or a similar issue and how they addressed it,” said Peter Mui, the founder of Fixit Clinics. Product owners can get help with a do-it-yourself project at a Fixit Clinic or online at Discord. 

I’m weighing whether it’s worth trying to fix our microwave ourselves or to just live without an interior light. We could try to make it a fun community DIY event, but we risk a repair failure. The microwave model we have now typically costs between $420 and $480 new, if we want to replace it — but I promise I will not buy another appliance without checking if I can change the lightbulb.  

 Feels like there’s a bad joke in here somewhere. 

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

IRS’ free tax filing program is at risk amid Trump scrutiny

Published

on

Vithun Khamsong | Moment | Getty Images

The IRS’ free tax filing program is in jeopardy as the agency faces continued cuts from the Trump administration.

After a limited pilot launch in 2024, the program, known as Direct File, expanded to more than 30 million taxpayers across 25 states for the 2025 filing season.   

Funded under the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, the program has been heavily scrutinized by Republicans, who have criticized the cost and participation rate. Over the past year, Republican lawmakers from both chambers have introduced legislation to halt the IRS’ free filing program.

Now, some reports say Direct File could be at risk. Meanwhile, no decision has been made yet about the program’s future, according to a White House administration official. 

More from Personal Finance:
Federal Reserve: College is still worth it for most students
Here’s why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks
Here’s how a trade war could impact the price of clothing

During his Senate confirmation hearing in January, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent committed to keeping Direct File active during the 2025 filing season without commenting on future years.  

“I will consult and study the program and understand it better and make sure it works to serve the IRS’ three goals of collections, customer service and privacy,” Bessent told the Senate Finance Committee at the hearing. 

However, the future of the free tax filing program remains unclear.

As of April 17, the Direct File website said the program would be open until Oct. 15, which is the deadline for taxpayers who filed for a federal tax extension.

Many taxpayers can also file for free via another program known as IRS Free File, which is a public-private partnership between the IRS and the Free File Alliance, a nonprofit coalition of tax software companies.

The IRS in May 2024 extended the Free File program through 2029.

Mixed reviews of IRS Direct File

Direct File supporters on Wednesday blasted the possible decision to end the program.

“No one should have to pay huge fees just to file their taxes,” Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in a statement on Wednesday.

Wyden described the program as “a massive success, saving taxpayers millions in fees, saving them time and cutting out an unnecessary middleman.”

In January, more than 130 Democrats, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Chris Coons, D-Del., voiced support for Direct File.

73% of Americans are financially stressed

However, opponents have criticized the program’s participation rate and cost.

During the 2024 pilot, some 423,450 taxpayers created or signed in to a Direct File account. Roughly one-third of those taxpayers, about 141,000 filers, submitted a return through Direct File, according to a March report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

Those figures represent a mid-season 2024 launch in 12 states for only simple returns. It’s unclear how many taxpayers used Direct File through the April 15 deadline.

The cost for Direct File through the pilot was $24.6 million, the IRS reported in May 2024. Direct File operational costs were an extra $2.4 million, according to the agency.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Should investors dump U.S. stocks for international equities? Experts weigh in

Published

on

Investors should use the relief rally to reduce exposure, says Fairlead's Katie Stockton

Some investors accustomed to the dominance of U.S. stocks versus the rest of the world are making a stunning pivot toward international equities, fearing U.S. assets may have taken on more risk amid escalating trade tensions initiated by President Donald Trump.

The S&P 500 sank more than 6% since Trump first announced his tariff plan, while the Dow and Nasdaq have each tumbled more than 7%.

There was a strong argument to dial back U.S. stock holdings and adopt a more global portfolio even before the recent volatility, said Christine Benz, director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar.

“But I think the case for international diversification is even greater 1744909145, given recent developments,” she said.

Jacob Manoukian, head of U.S. investment strategy at J.P. Morgan Private Bank, offered a similar assessment. “Global diversification seems like a prudent strategy,” he wrote in a research note on Monday.

U.S. had the world beat by ‘sizable margin’

Some experts, however, don’t think investors should be so quick to dump U.S. stocks and chase returns abroad.

The United States is still “a quality market that looks like a bargain,” said Paul Christopher, head of global investment strategy at the Wells Fargo Investment Institute.

U.S. stocks had been outperforming the world for years heading into 2025.

We are in an incredible moment for those who want to bet against U.S. stocks, says Jim Cramer

The S&P 500 index had an average annual return of 11.9% from mid-2008 through 2024, beating returns of developed countries by a “sizable margin,” according to analysts at J.P. Morgan Private Bank.

The MSCI EAFE index — which tracks stock returns in developed markets outside of the U.S. and Canada — was up 3.6% per year over the same period, on average, they wrote.

However, the story is different this year, experts say.

“In a surprising twist, the U.S. equity market has just offered investors a timely reminder about why diversification matters,” the analysts at J.P. Morgan Private Bank wrote. “Although U.S. outperformance has been a familiar feature of global equity markets since mid-2008, change is possible.”

More from Personal Finance:
Why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks
Cash may feel safe when stocks slide, but it has risks
How a trade war could impact the price of clothing

The Trump administration’s tariff policy and an escalating trade war with China have raised concerns about the growth of the U.S. economy.

U.S. markets have been under pressure ever since the White House first announced country-specific tariffs on April 2. Trump imposed tariffs on many nations, including a 145% levy on imports from China.

As of Thursday morning, the S&P 500 was down roughly 10% year-to-date, while the Nasdaq Composite has pulled back more than 16% in 2025. The Dow Jones Industrial Average had lost nearly 8%. Alternatively, the EAFE was up about 7%.

Is U.S. exceptionalism dead?

The sharp sell-off in U.S. markets has raised doubts as to whether U.S. assets “are as attractive to foreigners now as they once were and, perhaps as a consequence, whether ‘U.S. [equity] market exceptionalism’ could be on the way out,” market analysts at Capital Economics wrote Thursday.

At the same time, rising global trade tensions have taken a toll on the bond market, threatening to shake the confidence of holders of U.S. debt. The U.S. dollar has also weakened, nearing a one-year low as of Thursday morning.

It’s unusual for U.S. stocks, bonds and the dollar to fall at the same time, analysts said.

Former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Monday that President Donald Trump’s tariffs have made it more difficult for Americans to find comfort in the U.S. financial system.

“This is really creating an environment in which households and businesses feel paralyzed by the uncertainty about what’s going to happen,” Yellen told CNBC during a “Squawk Box” interview. “It makes planning almost impossible.”

The U.S. fire had ‘already been burning’

A trader works on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange at the opening bell in New York City, on April 17, 2025.

Timothy A. Clary | AFP | Getty Images

That said, international and U.S. stock returns tend to ebb and flow in cycles, with each showing multi-year periods of relative strength and weakness.

Since 1975, U.S. stock returns have outperformed those of international stocks for stretches of about eight years, on average, according to an analysis by Hartford Funds through 2024. Then, U.S. stocks cede the mantle to international stocks, it said.

Based on history, non-U.S. equities are overdue to reclaim the top spot: The U.S. is currently 13.8 years into the current cycle of stock outperformance, according to the Hartford Funds analysis.

Link: When it feels worst, it's often the best time to buy

U.S. markets had already showed weakness heading into the year amid concerns about the health of the economy grew and as “air came out the valuations of ‘big-tech’ stocks,” according to Capital Economics analysts.

“In that respect, ‘Liberation Day’ — which accentuated these moves — only added fuel to a fire that had already been burning,” they wrote.

Advisors: ‘Tread carefully here’

A good starting point for investors would be to mirror a global stock fund like the Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF (VT), said Benz of Morningstar. That fund holds about 63% of assets in U.S. stocks and 37% in non-U.S. stocks.

It may make sense to pare back exposure to international stocks as individual investors approach retirement, she said, to reduce the volatility that comes from fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.

“Part of our core models for clients have always had international exposure, it’s traditionally part of any risk-adjusted portfolio,” said certified financial planner Douglas Boneparth, president of Bone Fide Wealth in New York, of the conversations he is having with his clients.

Financial advisor or business people meeting discussing financial figures. They are discussing finance charts and graphs on a laptop computer. Rear view of sitting in an office and are discussing performance

Courtneyk | E+ | Getty Images

Even though those asset classes didn’t perform as well over the last few years, “they’ve done a pretty good job here of helping reduce the brunt of this tariff volatility,” said Boneparth, a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.

Still, Boneparth cautions investors against making any sudden moves to add non-U.S. equities to their portfolios.

“If you are thinking about making changes now, be careful,” he said. “Do you lock in losses to U.S. stocks to gain international exposure? You want to tread carefully here,” he said. “Are you chasing or timing? You usually don’t want to do those things.”

However, this may be a good time to check your investments to make sure you are still allocated properly and rebalance as needed, he added. “By rebalancing, you can rotate out of less risky assets into equities, strategically buying the dip.”

There have been very few times in history when clients asked about increasing their investments overseas, “which is happening now,” said CFP Barry Glassman, the founder and president of Glassman Wealth Services.

“Given that both stocks and currency are outperforming U.S. indices it’s no wonder there is greater interest in foreign stocks today,” said Glassman, who is also a member of the CNBC Advisor Council.

“Even in the past, when U.S. stocks have fallen, the dollar’s gains helped to offset a portion of the losses. In the past two weeks, that has not been the case,” he said.

Glassman said he maintains a two-thirds to one-third ratio of U.S. stocks to foreign stock funds in the portfolios he manages.

“We are not making any moves now,” he said. “The moves for us were made over time to maintain what we consider the appropriate foreign allocation.”

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Here’s why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks

Published

on

Lordhenrivoton | E+ | Getty Images

Retirees may think moving all their investments to cash and bonds — and out of stocks — protects their nest egg from risk.

They would be wrong, experts say.

Most, if not all, retirees need stocks — the growth engine of an investment portfolio — to ensure they don’t run out of money during a retirement that might last decades, experts said.

“It’s important for retirees to have some equities in their portfolio to increase the long-term returns,” said David Blanchett, head of retirement research for PGIM, an investment management arm of Prudential Financial.

Longevity is biggest financial risk

Longevity risk — the risk of outliving one’s savings — is the biggest financial danger for retirees, Blanchett said.

The average life span has increased from about 68 years in 1950 to to 78.4 in 2023, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What’s more, the number of 100-year-olds in the U.S. is expected to quadruple over the next three decades, according to Pew Research Center.

Retirees may feel that shifting out of stocks — especially during bouts of volatility like the recent tariff-induced selloff — insulates their portfolio from risk.

Seeking safety amid market volatility: Strategies to keep your money safe

They would be correct in one sense: cash and bonds are generally less volatile than stocks and therefore buffer retirees from short-term gyrations in the stock market.

Indeed, finance experts recommend dialing back stock exposure over time and boosting allocations to bonds and cash. The thinking is that investors don’t want to subject a huge chunk of their portfolio to steep losses if they need to access those funds in the short term.

Dialing back too much from stocks, however, poses a risk, too, experts said.

More from Personal Finance:
Cash may feel safe when stocks slide, but has risks
How a trade war could impact the price of clothing
Is now a good time to buy gold?

Retirees who pare their stock exposure back too much may have a harder time keeping up with inflation and they raise the risk of outliving their savings, Blanchett said.

Stocks have had a historical return of about 10% per year, outperforming bonds by about five percentage points, Blanchett said. Of course, this means that over the long term, investing in stocks has yielded higher returns compared to investing in bonds. 

“Retirement can last up to three decades or more, meaning your portfolio will still need to grow in order to support you,” wrote Judith Ward and Roger Young, certified financial planners at T. Rowe Price, an asset manager.

What’s a good stock allocation for retirees?

So, what’s a good number?

One rule of thumb is for investors to subtract their age from 110 or 120 to determine the percentage of their portfolio they should allocate to stocks, Blanchett said.

For example, a roughly 50/50 allocation to stocks and bonds would be a reasonable starting point for the typical 65-year-old, he said.

An investor in their 60s might hold 45% to 65% of their portfolio in stocks; 30% to 50% in bonds; and 0% to 10% in cash, Ward and Young of T. Rowe Price wrote.

Someone in their 70s and older might have 30% to 50% in stocks; 40% to 60% in bonds; and 0% to 20% in cash, they said.

Why your stock allocation may differ

However, every investor is different, Blanchett said. They have different abilities to take risk, he said.

For example, investors who’ve saved too much money, or can fund their lifestyles with guaranteed income like pensions and Social Security — can choose to take less risk with their investment portfolios because they don’t need the long-term investment growth, Blanchett said.

Target date funds

The less important consideration for investors is risk “appetite,” he said.

This is essentially their stomach for risk. A retiree who knows they’ll panic in a downturn should probably not have more than 50% to 60% in stocks, Blanchett said.

The more comfortable with volatility and the better-funded a retiree is, the more aggressive they can be, Blanchett said.

Other key considerations

Continue Reading

Trending