Letters to the editor: January 7

Great Retirement 2.0 blog post by Mary Beth Franklin (“Why singles should not claim Social Security at 66,” InvestmentNews.com, Dec. 19).

Many of us at our firm chat about her retirement-planning articles, as they are thought-provoking.

As a financial adviser to a great number of singles and same-sex couples (who for federal benefits are considered single even if they are married), I deal with the “single” issue all the time. Some of my clients have even mentioned to me that they have read articles about joint strategies, and I remind them that for Social Security purposes, they aren’t married.

Surely, I come up with joint strategies for their retirement income streams like any other couple knowing that not every benefit is available to them. But thanks for writing about a topic that isn’t covered enough: single Social Security beneficiaries.

John H. LeBlanc

Principal and wealth manager

Modera Wealth Management LLC

Boston

The article “Do you know where (else) your clients are?” (InvestmentNews.com, Dec. 19) was very interesting.

Within my practice, I make sure that my clients know I don’t need to manage every asset they own.

However, in order to put together the best financial and retirement plan for them, I at least need to know about each investment account.

That way, I can include it in the analysis and asset allocation model.

Each quarter, I request the statement and update the numbers. I may even add a touch of value from time to time by commenting on holdings.

Clients with other brokerage accounts or financial advisers are welcome here within my practice. As long as other professionals are on the same page as me and my financial planning clients, there are never any problems.

Timothy M. Heidenberg

Financial adviser

Ameriprise Financial Services Inc.

Columbia, Md.

Related Topics: Letters To The Editor