MONEY Kids and Money

Why Virginia Teens Have a Big Edge Over Teens in Florida

high school students walking out of school
Getty Images

Florida's governor just sold the state's teenagers short.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott vetoed a pilot project at the end of June that would have taken a big step toward mandating personal finance as a standalone course in high schools throughout the state. Meanwhile, Virginia’s high school class of 2015 just became the state’s first to finish with a personal finance requirement.

The developments highlight the on-again, off-again nature of the effort to make financial instruction a part of every child’s education. “Virginia’s class of 2015 enters the real world with a comparative advantage,” says Nan Morrison, CEO of the Council for Economic Education, adding that she was “disappointed” Florida killed the Broward County project, which would have cost just $30,000.

Financial education is gaining traction globally. The U.K. and Australia have mandatory money management classes in schools. Last month, Canada announced a national strategy for financial literacy and is rolling out 50 programs as part of Count Me In, Canada. These will include websites with educational resources for students as well as seminars and workshops for seniors.

The U.S. has a formal national strategy for financial capability, approved in 2006 and updated in 2011. Yet a persistent barrier to progress, at least at the school level, is that individual states have domain over their school curricula. There can be no federal mandate for financial education, as in other countries. So organizations like Jumpstart Coalition and the CEE have been leading the effort to establish standards for personal finance coursework and convince states to sign on, one by one.

It’s been a long slog. Just 17 states currently require students to take a personal finance course, according to the most recent Survey of the States report; 22 require high school economics. Both numbers are trending upward.

Will There Be a Test on That?

But in education, unless students get tested on a subject it never really gets taken seriously. And in both economics and personal finance, the number of states with required testing in these areas is falling — to 16 from a peak of 27 in economics and to six from nine in personal finance.

Why does this matter? Advocates for financial education see it as a buttress against the next financial meltdown. If more people understand more about how their mortgage works and why an emergency fund equal to six months of living expenses is important, they may be less likely to take on debts they cannot afford or default at the first hiccup in their financial plan. The idea is that this could stop any downward spiral in the national economy.

Yet even if that seems far-fetched, it is hard to deny the individual benefits of a population that knows more about retirement saving, budgets and credit. Millennials and younger generations will grow old in an age of greatly diminished public and private pensions; the sooner they understand that — and many are getting the message — the more likely they will be to save more at an earlier age.

So bravo, Virginia class of 2015. You have blazed an important path. One recent study found that a required high school course in economics and personal finance resulted in higher credit scores and lower delinquency rates as adults.

“In Virginia, since our course is relatively new, we have only anecdotal evidence,” says Daniel Mortensen, executive director of the Virginia CEE. “One student recently wrote a letter to the editor, talking about the required course and the value it has brought to his life.”

As for the setback in Florida, it is somewhat surprising in that the state last summer became the first to adopt CEE K-12 national standards for financial literacy. This is not a backward-thinking group of legislators. In effect, all the governor did was shoot down an attempt to strengthen what’s already in place: a required one-semester economics course that is 25% personal finance.

By comparison, Virginia’s requirement is two semesters — about half of which is personal finance. So it’s not as though Florida is doing nothing about financial illiteracy; it just isn’t doing enough.

MONEY Donald Trump

Donald Trump Employees’ 401(k) Plans Come With a Huge Catch

trump-401k-plan-big-catch-year
Chicago Tribune—TNS via Getty Images Presidential candidate and businessman Donald Trump

They have to wait a year to open an account

It turns out that Donald Trump—the real estate mogul and Republican presidential hopeful who has promised to be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created”—is a bit of a Scrooge when it comes to his employees’ retirement plans.

Workers who are eligible for Trump’s company 401(k) cannot actually open an account until they have been employed by the tycoon for a year, Bloomberg reports. And the employer match—a generous-enough 4.5% for employees who invest at least 6% of their earnings—doesn’t kick in for six years. (That’s the longest amount of time allowed by United States law).

While these policies may simply signal how much Trump values loyalty, one other important 401(k) feature is lacking in the plan: automatic enrollment. Studies have shown that by automatically signing employees up for savings, employers can greatly boost how much workers end up having for retirement.

“If the plan really wanted to facilitate employee savings, it would institute automatic enrollment, reduce or eliminate the eligibility requirement, and vest employees in the employer match more quickly,” Harvard Kennedy School professor Brigitte Madrian told Bloomberg.

Read next: 8 Epic Business Failures with Donald Trump’s Name on Them
 

MONEY Greece

Here’s How Greece Could Affect Your Retirement Savings

Reaction As Greece Imposes Capital Control
Bloomberg—Bloomberg via Getty Images A customer places her daily cash machine withdrawal limit of 60 euros into her purse after using an automated teller machines (ATM) outside a closed Eurobank Ergasias SA bank branch in Athens, Greece, on Monday, June 29, 2015.

Your 401(k) or IRA will probably be fine

Greek leaders are scrambling to nail down a new bailout deal before July 20, when the country would otherwise default on a €3.5 billion bond repayment to European creditors and might be forced to abandon the Euro currency altogether.

As recent stock performance in the U.S. suggests, fears of what a so-called “Grexit” could do to Europe’s economy has spread to American shores. Indeed, U.S. markets may very well be choppy for at least the next several weeks until there’s more certainty about the future.

But there are many reasons to believe that any impact on your 401(k) or IRA investments would be short-lived.

For one, Greece comprises only 0.3% of the global economy. And a typical target date mutual fund, used by many retirement plans, has an even smaller sliver of exposure to the country.

Even if the worse case scenario happens and the Greek crisis affects Europe—or even causes a slowdown among U.S. companies that rely on European demand—history has shown that people who keep investing through recessions make their money back more quickly than one might expect. For example, if you had been so unlucky as to start investing $1,000 per year in the stock market right before the most recent recession, you would have made your money back after only two years post-recession.

That’s a good reason to stay calm and not do anything rash.

Certainly, investing in today’s globalized markets comes with risks. While Greece is relatively tiny, for example, China is a top global trader—and its current market crash could potentially affect economies across the world. But the fact that it’s hard to predict how market forces will play out on a global level is a reason to stay diversified, with portfolios exposed to many different countries and their economies.

Watch the video below to learn more about why foreign stocks are important to your portfolio:

MONEY financial advice

The Painful Secret to Retirement Success

The co-founders of retirement and investment analytics firm BrightScope share the secret of a well-funded retirement.

BrightScope co-founders (and brothers) Mike and Ryan Alfred say saving is the most important thing you can do for your retirement. Start saving early and start saving a lot—way more than the 5% or 6% that workers put in their 401(k) to get an employer match. Ryan, president and chief operating officer, said he knows it can be hard to start saving when you’re young and just started a career, but he thinks you should start saving a little bit and try to increase how much you save each year.

MONEY Savings

When Good Investments Are Bad for Your Retirement Savings

Q: I have an investment portfolio outside of my retirement plans. That portfolio kicks out dividend and interest income. If I roll all that passive income back into my portfolio, can I count that toward my retirement savings rate? — Scott King, Kansas City, Mo.

A: No. The interest income and dividends that your portfolio generates are part of your portfolio’s total return, says Drew Taylor, a managing director at investment advisory firm Halbert Hargrove in Long Beach, Calif. “Counting income from your portfolio as savings would be double counting.”

There are two parts to total return: capital appreciation and income. Capital appreciation is simply when your investments increase in value. For example, if a stock you invest in rises in price, then the capital you invested appreciates. The other half of the equation is income, which can come from interest paid by fixed-income investments such as bonds, or through stock dividends.

If your portfolio generates a lot income from dividends and bonds, that’s a good thing. Reinvesting it while you’re in saving mode rather than taking it as income to spend will boost your total return.

But dividends can get cut and interest rates can fluctuate, so counting those as part of your savings rate is risky. “The only reliable way to meet your savings goal is to save the money you earn,” says John C. Abusaid, president of Halbert Hargrove.

It’s understandable why you’d want to count income in your savings rate. The amount you need to save for retirement can be daunting. Financial advisers recommend saving 10% to 15% of your income annually starting in your 20s. The goal is to end up with about 10 times your final annual earnings by the time you quit working.

How much you need to put away now depends on how much you have already saved and the lifestyle you want when you are older. To get a more precise read on whether you are on track to your goals, use a retirement calculator like this one from T. Rowe Price.

It’s great that you are saving outside of your retirement plans. While 401(k)s and IRAs are the best way to save for retirement and provide a generous tax break, you are still limited in how much you can put away: $18,000 this year in a 401(k) and $5,500 for an IRA. If you’re over 50, you can put away another $6,000 in your 401(k) and $1,000 in an IRA.

That’s a lot of money. “But if you’re playing catch-up or want to live a more lavish lifestyle when you retire, you may have to do more than max out your 401(k) and IRAs,” Taylor says.

Read next: How to Prepare for the Next Market Meltdown

MONEY Greece

How Investors Should React to the Greek Crisis

150701_INV_WhatGreeceMeans
Louisa Gouliamaki—AFP/Getty Images The Greek economic crisis isn't ending anytime soon.

Step one: Don't panic.

Even from afar, it’s hard for U.S. investors to ignore the Greek economic crisis, which continues to roil global markets.

After Greece saw its bailout funds expire Tuesday—and became the first developed country to fail to pay back a loan from the International Monetary Fund—Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras sent a letter offering concessions to European creditors in hopes that a new agreement might help the country remain afloat.

The fate of the Greek economy depends in large part on whether its government can quickly make a deal with European leaders.

One point of tension: Leaders in Germany, Greece’s biggest creditor, are insisting that the country accept additional austerity measures like pension cuts before it can get more emergency funds. Though a compromise could be reached this week, the worst case scenario is that Greece would continue to miss debt payments and, eventually, be forced out of the euro currency. Doing so would allow Greece to pursue its own fiscal and monetary policies in pursuit of economic recovery.

But what would that mean for investors around the world? The short answer, assuming you have a fairly diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds, is that it probably wouldn’t have a dramatic long-term effect.

Here’s why: If you look at the kind of target-date mutual funds that are popular compenents of many American retirement accounts, like 401(k)s—the Vanguard Target Retirement 2035, for example—about a third of their holdings are in foreign stocks. And of those foreign stocks, only a small fraction tend to be Greek companies. The Vanguard Total International Stock (which the 2035 fund holds), for example, has only about 0.07% of assets in Greek companies. So not a lot of direct impact.

The indirect impact is also likely to be muted. More than 45% of the holdings in Vanguard Total International Stock are in European countries—and if Greece leaves the Eurozone, that could affect companies and markets throughout the Continent. But some analysts are arguing that the market has already reacted, and perhaps even over-reacted, to the possibility of a so-called Grexit. “You have to assume that a substantial amount of the correction is priced in,” Lawrence McDonald, head of U.S. macro strategy at Societe Generale, recently told MarketWatch.

That being said, a note of caution ought to be sounded about the dollar. If the Greek crisis isn’t resolved quickly, it could lead to a flight to safety away from the euro and toward the U.S. dollar. The dollar’s strength has already led to sluggish profit growth in the U.S. In the past few months, the euro has rebounded a bit. But the euro could weaken again if crisis persists in Greece, putting U.S. companies that sell their goods abroad in a tough spot.

Still, even if you believe things in Greece will get worse before they get better, history suggests you’d be unwise to pull much of your money from the market right now. Though we could be in for more bad news and some painful market gyrations in the near term, keeping your money invested and sticking to your long-term strategy will likely pay off in the end—no matter what happens in Greece. Plus, there’s potentially good news for bond investors: If fear of European instability drives investors to seek out safe assets like U.S. Treasuries, then many bond funds will do well.

MONEY retirement income

3 Retirement Loopholes That Are Likely to Close

77867394
Design Pics/Darren Greenwood—Getty Images

The government has a knack for catching on to the most popular loopholes.

There are plenty of tips and tricks to maximizing your retirement benefits, and more than a few are considered “loopholes” that taxpayers have been able to use to circumvent the letter of the law in order to pay less to the government.

But as often happens when too many people make use of such shortcuts, the government may move to close three retirement loopholes that have become increasingly popular as financial advisers have learned how to exploit kinks in the law.

1. Back-door Roth IRA conversions
The U.S. Congress created this particular loophole by lifting income restrictions from conversions from a traditional Individual Retirement Account (IRA) to a Roth IRA, but not listing these restrictions from the contributions to the accounts.

People whose incomes are too high to put after-tax money directly into a Roth, where the growth is tax-free, can instead fund a traditional IRA with a nondeductible contribution and shortly thereafter convert the IRA to a Roth.

Taxes are typically due in a Roth conversion, but this technique will not trigger much, if any, tax bill if the contributor does not have other money in an IRA.
President Obama’s 2016 budget proposal suggests that future Roth conversions be limited to pre-tax money only, effectively killing most back-door Roths.

Congressional gridlock, though, means action is not likely until the next administration takes over, said financial planner and enrolled agent Francis St. Onge with Total Financial Planning in Brighton, Michigan. He doubts any tax change would be retroactive, which means the window for doing back-door Roths is likely to remain open for awhile.

“It would create too much turmoil if they forced people to undo them,” says St. Onge.

2. The stretch IRA
People who inherit an IRA have the option of taking distributions over their lifetimes. Wealthy families that convert IRAs to Roths can potentially provide tax-free income to their heirs for decades, since Roth withdrawals are typically
not taxed.

That bothers lawmakers across the political spectrum who think retirement funds should be for retirement – not a bonanza for inheritors.

“Congress never imagined the IRA to be an estate-planning vehicle,” said Ed Slott, a certified public accountant and author of “Ed Slott’s 2015 Retirement Decisions Guide.”

Most recent tax-related bills have included a provision to kill the stretch IRA and replace it with a law requiring beneficiaries other than spouses to withdraw the money within five years.

Anyone contemplating a Roth conversion for the benefit of heirs should evaluate whether the strategy makes sense if those heirs have to withdraw the money within five years, Slott said.

3. “Aggressive” strategies for Social Security
Obama’s budget also proposed to eliminate “aggressive” Social Security claiming strategies, which it said allow upper-income beneficiaries to manipulate the timing of collection of Social Security benefits in order to maximize delayed retirement credits.

Obama did not specify which strategies, but retirement experts said he is likely referring to the “file and suspend” and “claim now, claim more later” techniques.

Married people can claim a benefit based on their own work record or a spousal benefit of up to half their partner’s benefit. Dual-earner couples may profit by doing both.

People who choose a spousal benefit at full retirement age (currently 66) can later switch to their own benefit when it maxes out at age 70 – known as the “claim now, claim more later” approach that can boost a couple’s lifetime Social Security payout by tens of thousands of dollars.

The “file and suspend” technique can be used in conjunction with this strategy or on its own. Typically one member of a couple has to file for retirement benefits for the other partner to get a spousal benefit.

Someone who reaches full retirement age also has the option of applying for Social Security and then immediately suspending the application so that the benefit continues to grow, while allowing a spouse to claim a spousal benefit.

People close to retirement need not worry, said Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff, who wrote the bestseller “Get What’s Yours: The Secrets to Maxing Out Social Security.”

“I don’t see them ever taking anything away that they’ve already given,” Kotlikoff said. “If they do something, they’ll have to phase it in.”

MONEY

You’ll Never Guess the Latest Victims of the Student Loan Crisis

hand reaching out of hole using adding machine with rolls of paper
Renold Zergat—Getty Images

A fast-growing number of seniors are hitting retirement with a student debt burden. Even their Social Security is at risk.

Most debt you can get out of—painful as it might be. Credit card debt can be cleared in bankruptcy. A mortgage can end in foreclosure. But student debt is more sticky, and it turns out it can have big consequences in retirement.

Last year, Richard Minuti’s Social Security payments were cut by 10%.

The Philadelphia native was already earning only a bit over $10,000 a year, including some part-time work as a tutor. “I was desperate,” says Minuti. “Taking 10% of a person’s pay who’s trying to live with bills, that’s the cruelty of it.”

The Treasury Department was taking the money to pay for federal student loans he had taken out years before. Just before age 50, Minuti had gone back to college to get a second bachelor’s degree and a better job in social work and counseling. But the non-profit jobs he landed afterwards were lower paying, and he defaulted on the debt.

Student debt’s painful new twist

Minuti is one of the small but expanding group of seniors who are hitting retirement with a student debt burden. Over the past decade, people over the age of 60 had the fastest growing educational loan balances of any age group, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The total amount grew by more than nine times, from $6 billion in 2004 to $58 billion in 2014.

SeniorEduLoanGrowth

Only about 4% of households headed by people age 65 to 74 carry educational debt, according to a 2014 U.S. Government Accountability Office report. But as recently as 2004, student loans balances in retirement were close to unheard of, affecting less than 1% of this group.

Educational loans are very difficult to pay off when you are in or near retirement. Unlike a new college grad, there’s little prospect of years of rising salary income to help pay off the loan. That’s one reason older debtors have the highest default rate of any age group. (Also, most people who can’t pay off a loan will eventually age into being included among older debtors.) Over half of federal loans held by people over age 75 are in default, according to the GAO.

Student loan debts can’t be discharged in bankruptcy. And, as Minuti learned, federal tax refunds and up to 15% of wages and Social Security can be garnished.

This can be devastating, says Joanna Darcus, consumer rights attorney at Community Legal Services of Philadelphia.

“Most clients find me because the collection activity that they’re facing is preventing them from paying their utilities, from buying food for themselves, from paying their rent or their mortgage,” says Darcus, who works with low-income borrowers.

The number of seniors whose Social Security checks were garnished rose by roughly six times over the past decade, from about 6,000 to 36,000 people, says the GAO. Legislation from the mid-1990s ensured recipients could still get a minimum of $750 a month. At the time, this was enough to keep them from sliding below the poverty threshold. But to meet the current threshold, Congress would need to increase this to above $1,000 a month.

In other words, with enough debt, a Social Security recipient can be pulled into poverty.

“That’s pretty stressful for seniors when they understand that,” says Jan Miller, a student loan consultant who has seen a rise in his senior clients.

What’s behind the rise?

It’s not, despite what you might guess, only about parents who are taking on loans for their kids late in their careers.

Listen: How to decide if you should take out loans for your children’s education

In the GAO data, about 18% of federal educational debt held by seniors was from Parent PLUS loans for children or grandchildren. The remaining 82% was taken out by the borrower for his or her own education. (The GAO data differs from the New York Fed’s, showing lower total balances, so it may be missing some parental borrowing.)

SeniorLoansforOwnEdu

Darcus says many of her clients turned to education as a solution to unemployment and long-stagnant wages. Enrollment for all full and part-time students over age 35 increased 20% from 2004 to its recessionary peak in 2010, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

“Among many of my clients, education is viewed as a pathway out of poverty and toward financial stability, but their reality is much different from that,” Darcus says. “Sometimes it’s their debt that keeps them in poverty, or pushes them deeper into it.”

And in recent years, both tuition and older debts have been especially difficult to pay, as home values and household assets took a hit in the Great Recession. Meanwhile, of course, the cost of higher education has soared. Tuition for private nonprofit institutions is up 78% in real dollars since 2004, according to the College Board.

What may be changing

New regulations and legislation this year may bring some relief to educational loan borrowers. The Senate in March introduced legislation to make private loans, but not federally subsidized loans, dismissible through bankruptcy.

For federal loans, more favorable income-driven repayment plans may be extended to up to 5 million borrowers this year. These plans, which have been growing in popularity since launching in 2009, adjust monthly payments according to reported discretionary income. The Department of Education is scheduled to issue new regulations by the end of 2015 that may allow all student borrowers to cap payments at 10% of their monthly income.

But it is unclear what percentage of that 5 million people are older borrowers who would benefit. Some borrowers have also complained that income-driven repayment plans require too much complex paperwork to enroll and stay enrolled. Borrowers who want to find out if they are already eligible for income-driven repayment plans can go here.

Parent PLUS loans would not be included in the new regulations. However, Parent PLUS loans can still be consolidated in order to take advantage of a similar, albeit less generous option, called the Income Contingent Repayment plan. This plan allows borrowers to cap their monthly payments at 20% of their discretionary income.

Still, some feel the best way to help seniors with student loan debt is to stop threatening to garnish Social Security benefits altogether. This spring, the Senate Aging Committee called for further investigations of the effects of student debt on seniors.

“Garnishing Social Security benefits defeats the entire point of the program—that’s why we don’t allow banks or credit card companies to do it,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri in a statement.

Getting out from under

Richard Minuti was able to enroll in an income-based repayment plan last year with the help of a legal advocacy group. Because Minuti earned less than 150% of the federal poverty level, the government set his monthly obligation at $0, eliminating his monthly payment.

“I’m appreciative of that, thank God they have something like that,” Minuti says, “because obviously there are many people like myself who are similarly situated, 60-plus, and having these problems.”

But Deanne Loonin, director of the National Consumer Law Center’s Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project, says she doesn’t see the trend of rising educational debts ending any time soon. And some seniors will struggle with this debt well into retirement.

“I’ve got clients in nursing homes who are still having their Social Security garnished and they were in their 90s,” she says.

MONEY Saving

More Than Half of Americans are Delaying Major Life Events Because of This

15026_FF_PostponeBigDecisions
iStock

Some say money doesn’t buy happiness, but a lack of money might actually delay it.

A new study shows more than half of Americans have put off major life events like retirement and marriage because of financial worries in the last year. And that number has grown significantly since the recession, according to a poll from the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA).

When asked whether they delayed an important life decision because of money woes, 51% of respondents answered yes, up from only 31% in 2007.

A closer look shows the number of Americans putting off certain life events for financial reasons has more than doubled. For example, 24% put off going back to college last year, up from only 11% before the financial downturn, and 18% put off retirement, compared with only 9% in 2007.

Many also put starting a family on the back burner: 12% put off getting married, compared with 6% in 2007; 13% delayed having kids, up from 5%; and 22% put off buying a home, compared with 14% before the housing bust.

The number one financial worry that held people back from these milestones? A lack of savings, cited by 60% of survey respondents.

“If you don’t have adequate savings in place or you’re having trouble paying your bills, it may make sense to hold off on major life decisions until you’re on more solid financial footing,” explained Ernie Almonte, chairman of the AICPA’s National CPA Financial Literacy Commission.

But there are many ways people can make sure financial worries don’t get in the way of life goals, Almonte added. Among them: sticking to a monthly budget to keep you living within your means, starting an emergency fund to help with unexpected costs, and increasing the amount you save from each paycheck.

 

MONEY Social Security

This Surprising Sign May Tell You When to Claim Social Security

old woman facing younger woman in profile
Liam Norris—Getty Images

For aging Americans, the condition of your skin can be a barometer of your overall health and longevity.

Skin is in, and not just for beach-going millennials. For boomers and older generations, the condition of your skin, especially your facial appearance, is a barometer of your overall health and perhaps your life expectancy, scientists say. And as the population ages—by 2020 one in seven people worldwide will be 60 or above—dollars are pouring into research that may eventually link your skin health to your retirement finances.

What does your skin condition have to do with your health and longevity? A skin assessment can be a surprisingly accurate window into how quickly we age, research shows. Beyond assessing your current health, these findings can also be used as to gauge your longevity. This estimate, based on personalized information and skin analysis, may be more reliable than a generic mortality table.

All of which has obvious implications for financial services companies. One day the condition of your skin—your face, in particular—may determine the rate you pay for life insurance, what withdrawal rate you choose for your retirement accounts, and the best age to start taking Social Security.

Skin health is also a growing focus for consumer and health care companies, which have come to realize that half of all people over 65 suffer from some kind of skin ailment. Nestle, which sees skin care as likely to grow much faster than its core packaged foods business, is spending $350 million this year on dermatology research. The consumer products giant also recently announced it would open 10 skin care research centers around the world, starting with one in New York later this year.

Smaller companies are in this mix as well. A crowd funded start-up venture just unveiled Way, a portable and compact wafer-like device that scans your skin using UV index and humidity sensors to detect oils and moisture and analyze overall skin health. It combines that information with atmospheric readings and through a smartphone app advises you when to apply moisturizers or sunscreen.

This is futuristic stuff, and unproven as a means for predicting how many years you may have left. I recently gave two of these predictive technologies a spin—with mixed results. The first was an online scientist-designed Ubble questionnaire. By asking a dozen or so questions—including how much you smoke, how briskly you walk and how many cars you own—the website purports to tell you if you will die within the next five years. My result: 1.4% chance I will not make it to 2020. Today I am 58.

The second website was Face My Age, which is also designed by research scientists. After answering short series of questions about marital status, sun exposure, smoking and education, you upload a photo to the site. The tool then compares your facial characteristics with others of the same age, gender, and ethnicity. The company behind the site, Lapetus Solutions, hopes to market its software to firms that rely heavily on life-expectancy algorithms, such as life insurers and other financial institutions.

Given the fledgling nature of this technology, it wasn’t too surprising that my results weren’t consistent. My face age ranged between 35 and 52, based on tiny differences in where I placed points on a close-up of my face. These points help the computer identify the distance between facial features, which is part of the analysis. In all cases, though, my predicted expiration age was 83. I’m not taking that too seriously. Both of my grandmothers and my mother, whom I take after, lived well past that age—and I take much better care of my health than they ever did.

Still, the science is intriguing, and it’s not hard to imagine vastly improved skin analysis in the future. While a personalized, scientific mortality forecast might offer a troublesome dose of reality, it would at least help navigate one of the most difficult financial challenges we face: knowing how much money we need to retire. A big failing of the 401(k) plan—the default retirement portfolio for most Americans—is that it does not guarantee lifetime income. Individuals must figure out on their own how to make their savings last, and to be safe they should plan for a longer life than is likely. That is a waste of resources.

I plan to live to 95, my facial map notwithstanding. But imagine if science really could determine that my end date is at 83, give or take a few years. It would be weird, for sure. But I’d have a good picture of how much I needed to save, how much I could spend, and whether delaying Social Security makes any sense. I’m not sure we’ll ever really be ready for that. But not being ready won’t stop that day from coming.

Read next: This Problem is Unexpectedly Crushing Many Retirement Dreams

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com