Connect with us

Personal Finance

Americans are YOLO spending more but savings hits lows of Great Recession

Published

on

Arriel Vinson hadn’t traveled much before the pandemic. Now she can’t stop.

The 28-year-old writer leaves her Dallas apartment every chance she gets: to see Beyoncé in Atlanta, Usher in Chicago and for girls’ trips in Jamaica and Mexico. When a favorite artist announces new tour dates, Vinson starts rallying friends and snapping up tickets, flights and hotel rooms for their next hurrah.

“My mind-set has completely changed after covid: When I see something I want to do, I make it happen,” she said, adding that her new priorities have required some financial rejigging. “For a while I was going to dinner all the time. I was getting things delivered, but now I’m like, ‘I don’t want to waste money on that.’ I want to travel and go to shows.”

Whatever you call it — doom spending, soft saving, YOLOing (“you only live once”) — the coronavirus pandemic has changed the way Americans spend money. They are saving less but vacationing more, splurging on concerts and sporting events, and booking lavish trips years in advance. Spending on international travel and live entertainment surged roughly 30 percent last year, five times the rate of overall spending growth. Meanwhile, the personal savings rate is at a low not seen since the Great Recession.

And the spending spree has continued into 2024. Consumers spent $145.5 billion more in February than they did the month before — much of that on services — fueling the biggest monthly increase in more than a year, according to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis released Friday. Meanwhile, the personal savings rate fell to 3.6 percent, from 4.1 percent the previous month.

Just like the Great Depression ushered in decades of frugality and austerity — with an entire generation reusing plastic bags, jam jars and aluminum foil — there are signs the coronavirus crisis has had the opposite effect: nudging Americans toward spending more, especially on experiences.

“When you live through a crisis, it gets ingrained in your brain,” said Ulrike Malmendier, a professor of behavioral finance at the University of California at Berkeley. “The official economic reports might say everything is coming back to normal, but we are different people than we were before the pandemic.”

Financial shocks have repeatedly reshaped the way people think about money, Malmendier said. “Depression babies,” those who came of age after the stock market crash of 1929, were notoriously mistrustful of banks and financial markets. People who have been unemployed are often cautious about spending long after they have found another job. And after the 2008 financial crisis, Americans began saving more of their paychecks, to guard against another massive downturn.

But unlike those financial crises, which led people to pull back, the coronavirus pandemic has left a decidedly different legacy.

“The adverse effects of covid weren’t necessarily financial; people got jobs quickly and the government stepped in with support,” Malmendier said. “Instead, it’s about all of the things we were starved for: human interaction, socializing, travel. People are spending money on the things they missed most.”

Carolyn McClanahan, a financial adviser in Jacksonville, Fla., is seeing this firsthand. Her clients are generally saving less than they were before the pandemic, she said. Instead of solely planning for retirement, they’re focused on “maximizing life now” to make room for more travel, concerts and fun.

“People already had this attitude that you only live once — and that’s been put on steroids,” she said. “Covid was a big wake-up call that life is precious, so you’ve got to enjoy it now.”

It helps that many Americans still have more money in the bank than they did before the pandemic. They have gotten substantial raises or higher-paying jobs that have made it possible to keep spending, despite inflation. Stock portfolios and home prices have soared, giving middle- and upper-class households an extra boost. As of last fall, Americans were still sitting on an extra $430 billion in pandemic savings, according to estimates from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Yet consumers have been saving consistently less since the pandemic, with a particular drop-off last summer, coinciding with a strong spending boom.

Still, in a worrisome twist, families have been spending even if they don’t have the money. Credit card debt has risen 22 percent since the pandemic, and more shoppers are turning to “buy now, pay later” installment plans for routine purchases. Bank of America cardholders, for example, spent 7 percent more on travel and entertainment last year than they did in 2022. European summer vacations were particularly popular, with a 26 percent increase from the previous year.

That momentum has continued into the new year. More Americans are traveling than they were a year ago, Transportation Security Administration passenger data shows. And a near-record 22 percent of Americans say they are planning to vacation in a foreign country in the next six months, roughly double pre-pandemic levels, according to Conference Board survey data released this week.

Meanwhile, Live Nation — the parent company of Ticketmaster and the world’s largest entertainment company — posted a record $23 billion in sales last year and expects this year to be even bigger.

“Shows are flying out the door from top to bottom,” chief executive Michael Rapino said in a February earnings call. “We’re seeing no slowdown on the consumer.”

In interviews with more than a dozen Americans, many acknowledged that they are financially better off than they were a few years ago. But just as importantly, they said, they were spending differently — cutting back on midweek restaurant visits, for example, or buying fewer clothes, in favor of big-ticket items and memorable experiences.

All that spending on services helped push economic growth even higher in late 2023, up to a strong 3.4 percent — making the latter half of 2023 the strongest since 2014, outside of the pandemic years, according to data released Thursday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In Seattle, Mike Lee’s free time has become a whirlwind of comedy shows, concerts, hockey games and weekend trips. The software developer, who got divorced early in the pandemic, has been lining up experiences far in advance: Hawaii in April, a Foo Fighters show in August.

“It’s changed the way I move through life,” the 40-year-old said. “I used to save obsessively, almost to a fault, but I’m learning to go out and enjoy life a little bit more.”

But he isn’t splurging across the board. Lee still drives a 20-year-old Toyota Corolla and has cut his restaurant spending by half. Instead, he has stocked his freezer with soup dumplings, chicken wings and other prepared foods to hold him over on evenings when he doesn’t feel like cooking.

Those types of trade-offs, economists say, are likely to continue as households settle into new habits. Families are canceling HBO Max and Disney Plus subscriptions, for example, or ditching grocery delivery and getting rid of Pelotons they hoarded back in 2020.

“People are trying to find the right balance between how they lived during the pandemic and how they want to live now,” said Nadia Vanderhall, a financial planner in Charlotte. “They’re spending more on experiencing life, but they’re also trying to figure out what it means for their finances.”

Michelle Singletary: TikTok’s ‘loud budgeting’ viral trend

Although economists expect a drop-off in spending this year, some are revising their forecasts: Fitch Ratings, for example, now expects consumer spending to grow by 1.3 percent in 2o24, even after inflation, more than double what it had initially predicted. Consumers are poised to keep tapping into savings, the firm said, which is expected to “support spending well into 2024.”

Susan Blume, a travel agent in Garden City, N.Y., is already booking river cruises along the Danube for 2026. International travel has exploded in the past few years, she said, and this year is on track to top them all.

“Everybody was just so confined during the pandemic that they never want to have that experience again,” she said.

But the biggest surprise: the rush of travelers in their mid-20s, far younger than Blume’s usual clientele.

“Gen Z has a very different attitude — they’re not going broke on Gucci or takeout,” she said. “Instead they’re squirreling away for travel. And they’re already planning next year’s big trip: all of Italy, or island-hopping in Greece, or four stops in France.”

It’s unclear exactly how long this era of experiential living will last, though economists say it’s likely to take a major shock, such as widespread job losses or a recession, to get Americans to rethink their spending.

“You have to really have a crash in employment to derail this consumer,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG. “This spending isn’t just a mirage, it’s a fundamental change.”

That relentless consumption has invigorated the economy and propped up millions of service-sector jobs. But it has also contributed to a run-up in prices: Inflation for services is at 3.8 percent, compared with a 0.2 percent decline for goods in the past year. That’s creating an ongoing challenge for the Federal Reserve, which has specifically flagged the need to see services inflation cool.

“There is certainly a big question mark there: Can the Fed get hotel inflation, airline inflation, concert inflation down without slowing demand for those things?” said Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo Global Management. “But so far people are still spending.”

Michael Sheridan, who lives in Clearwater, Fla., has been on 13 cruises in 17 months. The latest, which he booked on a Friday afternoon, left for the Bahamas the next morning.

The 58-year-old, who once owned a couple of Outback Steakhouses, is on a fixed income. He receives $2,400 a month in Social Security Disability Insurance payments because of a rare genetic disorder that forced him to stop working a decade ago. Sheridan relies on a wheelchair to get around, but he says he has been financially fortunate: His mother, who died in 2020, left him enough cash to buy a $109,000 condo outright.

Now his monthly checks go toward homeowners association fees ($350), phone bills ($40), groceries ($250) — and travel. He’s in Japan now and headed to Seattle in April, the Caribbean in June and Switzerland in July.

“The pandemic absolutely fed this travel addiction,” he said, adding that he was quick to take advantage of cheap airfares and hotel rates during early lockdowns. “I just realized, if all of a sudden something goes south, I’m going to regret not having traveled while I could.”

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

How appealing property taxes can benefit new homeowners

Published

on

If you just bought a house, it may be a good time to check the accuracy of your property tax assessment, experts say. 

Your property tax assessment is the way officials determine the value of your property for tax purposes. Inaccuracies about your home that factor into that formula could mean that you’re overpaying.

If it’s inaccurate, you likely have most of the essential documents you need to appeal, as part of your recent home purchase, according to Sal Cataldo, a real estate lawyer and partner at O’Doherty & Cataldo in Sayville, New York. 

The title report, for instance, is going to tell you the age of the house, Cataldo said. You might have a home inspection report on hand that details the property’s flaws, as well as an appraisal and your mortgage, which show the value of the house and the comparable value in the neighborhood. 

“You’ve gotten a wealth of information about your house, whether you realize it or not,” Cataldo said. 

More from Personal Finance:
House Republican bill calls for bigger child tax credit
College majors with the best and worst job prospects
Here’s how to save on groceries amid food price inflation

A home sale will typically trigger a property tax reassessment because the property is changing hands, with the new market value applied to the assessment. But the specific rules of when the new value is applied and the frequency of reassessments will depend on your area. 

Here’s why it may be valuable to add reviewing your property tax assessment to your to-do list as a newly minted homeowner:

Property taxes on the rise

In addition to your mortgage payment, home insurance and maintenance costs, property taxes are another factor to consider as you assess your housing expenses.

In recent years, property taxes have climbed because of rising home values and tax rates.

The median property tax bill in the U.S. in 2024 was $3,500, up 2.8% from $3,349 in 2023, according to an April report by Realtor. 

Home affordability plummets: Here's what's needed to balance the market

How much you pay varies widely depending on where you live, and some areas see higher bills and price hikes.

As of 2023, the median property tax for homeowners in New York City was $9,937, LendingTree found in a recent report. The city ranks first among the metropolitan areas with the highest median property taxes. Rounding out the top three are San Jose, California and San Francisco, where homeowners paid a median $9,554 and $8,156, respectively.

Inaccuracies may be costing you

Success in the appeal can lead to savings for several years as the change becomes the basis for the next assessment, said Sepp. While some state or local governments reassess annually, others have less-frequent cycles with gaps of several years. Some have no set schedule at all.

Over 40% of homeowners across the U.S. could potentially save $100 or more per year by protesting their assessment value, with median savings of $539 a year, per Realtor.com estimates.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Deferred capital gains tax on mutual funds: Lawmakers pitch rule change

Published

on

Artistgndphotography | E+ | Getty Images

If you own mutual funds, year-end payouts can trigger a surprise tax bill — even when you haven’t sold the underlying investment. But some lawmakers want to change that.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, this week introduced a bill, known as the Generate Retirement Ownership Through Long-Term Holding, or GROWTH, Act. If enacted, the bill would defer reinvested mutual fund capital gains taxes until investors sell their shares.

Bipartisan House lawmakers introduced a similar bill in March.

Why mutual funds incur capital gains tax

When you own mutual funds in a pre-tax 401(k) or individual retirement account, growth is tax-deferred. But if you hold assets in a brokerage account, capital gains distributions and dividends incur yearly taxes.

More from Personal Finance:
What the House GOP budget bill means for your money
Tax bill includes $1,000 baby bonus in ‘Trump Accounts’
House GOP tax bill passes ‘SALT’ deduction cap of $40,000 

Depending on performance, some mutual funds can spit off substantial gains during the fourth quarter. In 2024, some paid double-digit distributions, Morningstar estimated.

These payouts are subject to long-term capital gains taxes of 0%, 15% or 20%, depending on your taxable income. Some higher earners also pay an extra 3.8% surcharge on investment earnings.

About $7 trillion of long-term mutual fund assets held outside of retirement accounts could be impacted by the legislation, according to the Investment Company Institute, which represents the asset management industry.

Bill would ‘provide parity’ for mutual funds

In a statement Wednesday, Cornyn described the mutual fund proposal as a “no-brainer” that would “help provide parity with other investment options.”

If enacted, the proposal would “incentivize Americans to save and invest for their long-term goals” without the stress of an “unexpected tax bill,” Eric Pan, president and CEO of the Investment Company Institute, said in a statement following the bill’s introduction.

However, it’s unclear whether the bill will advance amid competing priorities. Lawmakers are wrestling over President Donald Trump‘s multi-trillion-dollar tax and spending package, which passed in the House on Thursday, and could face hurdles in the Senate.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has also asked Congress to raise the debt ceiling before August to avert a government shutdown.

Switch to exchange-traded funds

While deferring yearly taxes could benefit some investors, you could also make portfolio changes, financial experts say.

You can avoid mutual fund payouts by switching to similar exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, which typically disburse less income, Tommy Lucas, a certified financial planner and enrolled agent at Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo in Orlando, Florida, previously told CNBC.

Of course, the trade could also trigger taxes if the mutual fund has embedded gains, which may require some planning, he said.

Alternatively, investors could opt to keep mutual funds in tax-deferred accounts, such as pre-tax 401(k)s or IRAs.

House advances President Trump's tax & spending bill

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

What Medicaid, SNAP cuts in House Republican bill mean for benefits

Published

on

A “Save Medicaid” sign is affixed to the podium for the House Democrats’ press event to oppose the Republicans’ budget on the House steps of the Capitol on Tuesday, February 25, 2024. 

Bill Clark | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday includes historic spending cuts to Medicaid health coverage and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Now, it is up to the Senate to consider the changes — and to perhaps propose its own.

As it stands, the legislation — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — would slash Medicaid spending by roughly $700 billion and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, by about $300 billion.

“Bottom line is, a lot of people will lose benefits, including people who are entitled to these benefits and who are not the target population of this bill,” said Jennifer Wagner, director of Medicaid eligibility enrollment at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

More from Personal Finance:
How the House Republican tax bill favors the rich
Tax bill includes $1,000 baby bonus in ‘Trump Accounts’
Food stamps face ‘biggest cut in the program’s history’

The cuts to Medicaid and SNAP — the largest in the programs’ histories — come as the reconciliation bill would add roughly $3 trillion to the nation’s debt including interest over the next decade, estimates the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

To help pay for a variety of tax perks included in the bill, House Republicans have targeted Medicaid and SNAP for savings.

“We don’t want any waste, fraud or abuse,” President Donald Trump said Tuesday on Newsmax when asked about prospective Medicaid changes. “Other than that, we’re leaving it.”

Likewise, some Republican leaders have pointed to rooting out abuse of SNAP benefits.

One way House Republicans are seeking to curb the programs’ spending is through new work requirements.

New Medicaid work requirements to get earlier date

Under the House proposal, new Medicaid work requirements will apply to people who are covered through the Affordable Care Act expansion. To be eligible, those individuals will need to participate in qualifying activities for at least 80 hours per month unless they can prove they have an approved exemption, according to Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of KFF’s Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured.

In last-minute negotiations, House Republicans moved the date for implementing those work requirements to no later than Dec. 31, 2026, up from a previously proposed effective date of Jan. 1, 2029 — around two years earlier than the original version, CBPP’s Wagner noted.

Notably, it also gives states permission to start implementing the work requirements earlier than that date.

“On the Medicaid side, the work requirement is arguably the harshest provision,” Wagner said. “It will lead to the greatest cuts of enrollment in Medicaid.”

Rep. Chip Roy on House tax bill: Hope the Senate addresses issues around deficit and Medicaid

The new accelerated timeline also doesn’t allow time for rulemaking, a process by which the public can submit comments, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may respond to those submissions, Wagner noted. Instead, the legislative proposal calls for guidance to be issued by the end of 2025, which she said is a “big deal” because it eliminates the opportunity for adjustments to be made in response to public comments.

Moving up the effective date also limits the ability to conduct public outreach to notify individuals of the coming changes, said Tolbert of KFF. States will also have less time to adjust their systems to track whether individuals are working the required number of hours or engaging in other necessary activities, she said.

CMS Administrator Dr. Oz: Major goal in Medicaid is to align the federal government with the states

Within the work requirements, the House also moved to limit the discretion to determine other medical conditions that may make someone exempt that had been in the original version, Wagner said.

Notably, the proposal also calls for states to conduct more frequent eligibility redeterminations for adults who are eligible for Medicaid through Affordable Care Act expansions. Starting Dec. 31, 2026, states will be required to conduct redeterminations every six months, compared to current requirements that require eligibility reviews within 12 months of changes in a beneficiary’s circumstances, according to KFF.

The increased frequency of the redeterminations are “likely to have a big impact,” Tolbert said.

Ultimately, the work requirements may make it difficult for people to access the health coverage they need, she said.

“What this may end up doing is having the opposite of the intended effect,” Tolbert said. “They may lose access to the very treatments and services that are enabling them to work.”

SNAP work requirements would be expanded

Under the House Republican bill, work requirements would also be expanded for SNAP benefits.

Individuals ages 18 to 54 who have no dependents and are able to work are already face SNAP benefit limitations based on 80-hour per month work requirements.

The proposal would extend those requirements to individuals ages 55 to 64, as well as households with children, unless they are under age seven. In addition, states would also be limited in the flexibility they may provide with waivers of the work requirements or discretionary exemptions, according to the Urban Institute.

In addition, federal funding cuts would make it so states would have to contribute more toward benefits and administration of the program.

Ultimately, those changes could take away food assistance for millions, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Continue Reading

Trending