Connect with us

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

Personal Finance

Student loan borrowers still at risk of wage garnishment

Published

on

The Trump administration paused its plan to garnish Social Security benefits for those who have defaulted on their student loans — but says borrowers’ paychecks are still at risk.

“Wage garnishment will begin later this summer,” Ellen Keast, a U.S. Department of Education spokesperson, told CNBC.

Since the Covid pandemic began in March 2020, collection activity on federal student loans had mostly been on hold. The Biden administration focused on extending relief measures to struggling borrowers in the wake of the public health crisis and helping them to get current.

The Trump administration’s move to resume collection efforts and garnish wages of those behind on their student loans is a sharp turn away from that strategy. Officials have said that taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook when people don’t repay their education debt.

“Borrowers should pay back the debts they take on,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in a video posted on X on April 22.

Here’s what borrowers need to know about the Education Department’s current collection plans.

Social Security benefits are safe, for now

Keast said on Monday that the administration was delaying its plan to offset Social Security benefits for borrowers with a defaulted student loan.

Some older borrowers who were bracing for a reduced benefit check as early as Tuesday.

The Education Department previously said Social Security benefits could be garnished starting in June. Depending on details like their birth date and when they began receiving benefits, a recipient’s monthly Social Security check may arrive June 3, 11, 18 or 25 this year, according to the Social Security Administration.

More than 450,000 federal student loan borrowers age 62 and older are in default on their federal student loans and likely to be receiving Social Security benefits, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

More from Personal Finance:
What the House GOP budget bill means for your money
‘Maycember’ is over — here’s how to recover financially
Court order challenges Trump’s plan to move student loans to SBA

The administration’s announcement gives borrowers more time to try to get current, and to avoid a reduced benefit check down the line.

“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting Social Security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,” said Keast.

Wages are still at risk

The Education Dept. says defaulted student loan borrowers could see their wages garnished later this summer.

The agency can garnish up to 15% of your disposable, or after-tax, pay, said higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz. By law, you must be left with at least 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage ($7.25) a week, which is $217.50, Kantrowitz said.

Borrowers in default will receive a 30-day notice before their wages are garnished, a spokesperson for the Education Department previously told CNBC.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Trump pauses Social Security benefit cuts over defaulted student loans

Published

on

The U.S. Department of Education is seen on March 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump is preparing to sign an executive order to abolish the Department of Education. 

Win Mcnamee | Getty Images News | Getty Images

The U.S. Department of Education is pausing its plan to garnish people’s Social Security benefits if they have defaulted on their student loans, a spokesperson for the agency tells CNBC.

“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting Social Security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,” said Ellen Keast, an Education Department spokesperson.

The development is an abrupt change in policy by the administration.

The Trump administration announced on April 21 that it would resume collection activity on the country’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio. For nearly half a decade, the government did not go after those who’d fallen behind as part of Covid-era policies.

The federal government has extraordinary collection powers on its student loans and it can seize borrowers’ tax refundspaychecks and Social Security retirement and disability benefits. Social Security recipients can see their checks reduced by up to 15% to pay back their defaulted student loan.

More than 450,000 federal student loan borrowers age 62 and older are in default on their federal student loans and likely to be receiving Social Security benefits, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

What the national debt, deficit mean for your money

Published

on

Annabelle Gordon/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The massive package of tax cuts House Republicans passed in May is expected to increase the U.S. debt by trillions of dollars — a sum that threatens to torpedo the legislation as the Senate starts to consider it this week.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the bill, as written, would add about $3.1 trillion to the national debt over a decade with interest, to a total $53 trillion. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates a higher tally: $3.8 trillion, including interest and economic effects.

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was one of two Republicans to vote against the House measure, calling it a “debt bomb ticking” and noting that it “dramatically increases deficits in the near term.”

“Congress can do funny math — fantasy math — if it wants,” Massie said on the House floor on May 22. “But bond investors don’t.”

A handful of Republican Senators have also voiced concern about the bill’s potential addition to the U.S. debt load and other aspects of the legislation.

“The math doesn’t really add up,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said Sunday on CBS.

The legislation comes as interest payments on U.S. debt have surpassed national spending on defense and represent the second-largest outlay behind Social Security. Federal debt as a percentage of gross domestic product, a measure of U.S. economic output, is already at an all-time high.

The notion of rising national debt may seem unimportant for the average person, but it can have a significant impact on household finances, economists said.

“I don’t think most consumers think about it at all,” said Tim Quinlan, senior economist at Wells Fargo Economics. “They think, ‘It doesn’t really impact me.’ But I think the truth is, it absolutely does.”

Consumer loans would be ‘a lot more’ expensive

A much higher U.S. debt burden would likely cause consumers to “pay a lot more” to finance homes, cars and other common purchases, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s.

“That’s the key link back to us as consumers, businesspeople and investors: The prospect that all this borrowing, the rising debt load, mean higher interest rates,” he said.

Sen. MarkWayne Mullin: Overall structure of House GOP reconciliation bill will stay intact

The House legislation cuts taxes for households by about $4 trillion, most of which accrue for the wealthy. The bill offsets some of those tax cuts by slashing spending for safety-net programs like Medicaid and food assistance for lower earners.

Some Republicans and White House officials argue President Trump’s tariff policies would offset a big chunk of the tax cuts.

But economists say tariffs are an unreliable revenue generator — because a future president can undo them, and courts may take them off the books.

How rising debt impacts Treasury yields

U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) speaks to the media after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump’s agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025.

Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Ultimately, higher interest rates for consumers ties to perceptions of U.S. debt loads and their effect on U.S. Treasury bonds.

Common forms of consumer borrowing like mortgages and auto loans are priced based on yields for U.S. Treasury bonds, particularly the 10-year Treasury.

Yields (i.e., interest rates) for long-term Treasury bonds are largely dictated by market forces. They rise and fall based on supply and demand from investors.

The U.S. relies on Treasury bonds to fund its operations. The government must borrow, since it doesn’t take in enough annual tax revenue to pay its bills, what’s known as an annual “budget deficit.” It pays back Treasury investors with interest.

More from Personal Finance:
How GOP tax bill could change in the Senate
3 key moves to consider while Fed keeps rates higher
Trump administration axes barrier for crypto in 401(k) plans

If the Republican bill — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — were to raise the U.S. debt and deficit by trillions of dollars, it would likely spook investors and Treasury demand may fall, economists said.

Investors would likely demand a higher interest rate to compensate for the additional risk that the U.S. government may not pay its debt obligations in a timely way down the road, economists said.

Interest rates priced to the 10-year Treasury “also have to go up because of the higher risk being taken,” said Philip Chao, chief investment officer and certified financial planner at Experiential Wealth based in Cabin John, Maryland.

Moody’s cut the U.S.’ sovereign credit rating in May, citing the increasing burden of the federal budget deficit and signaling a bigger credit risk for investors. Bond yields spiked on the news.

How debt may impact consumer borrowing

The bond market is 'sounding the alarm' on U.S. and global fiscal situations, says Subadra Rajappa

A fixed 30-year mortgage would rise from almost 7% to roughly 7.6%, all else equal — likely putting homeownership further “out of reach,” especially for many potential first-time buyers, he said.

The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell from about 101% at the end of 2025 to an estimated 148% through 2034 under the as-written House legislation, said Kent Smetters, an economist and faculty director for the Penn Wharton Budget Model.

Bond investors get hit, too

‘Pouring gasoline on the fire’

“But it’s not going out on too much of a limb to suggest financial markets the last couple years have grown increasingly concerned about debt levels,” Quinlan said.

Absent action, the U.S. debt burden would still rise, economists said. The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell to 138% even if Republicans don’t pass any legislation, Smetters said.

But the House legislation would be “pouring gasoline on the fire,” said Chao.

“It’s adding to the problems we already have,” Chao said. “And this is why the bond market is not happy with it,” he added.

Continue Reading

Trending