Race from $2M to $4M...and Beyond!

[Much Fishing to Do]

I loved this latest blog post on Social Security and early retirement from the Finance Buff

https://thefinancebuff.com/early-retirement-social-security-benefits.html

This tool is really great, the most helpful I've seen on figuring/analyzing SS options for early retirees.  It also helped me better visualize what the options are when your spouse is a little younger and will be taking the spousal benefit (my case), I hadn't really put in the time before to figure that out but this made it immediately clear. 

I put in my numbers and it looks like I'll hit the second bend point around Summer of next year.

[BeanCounter]

Curious, for those of you that have RE'd with this level of investments and are buying insurance on the ACA, how do dividends and capital gains affect your premiums/subsidy for your insurance? Does it change your insurance expense each year?

[PathtoFIRE]

I'm no historian, but I always felt that this seemed like a decent window into what someone retiring in 1965 would have felt like
https://www.gocurrycracker.com/the-worst-retirement-ever/

[Enigma]

IMO there was no push in the US to make more money in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. 
"The 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s - Over the next three decades, the top federal income tax rate remained high, never dipping below 70 percent."

1981 Regan became president moving from the Dem party to the Rep party.  I remember he said something like actors only did 3 or 4 movies.  After that taxes ate up everything.  No push or drive to make more or do more.

[pecunia]

I'm no historian, but I always felt that this seemed like a decent window into what someone retiring in 1965 would have felt like
https://www.gocurrycracker.com/the-worst-retirement-ever/

That was good.  I guess she wrote that in 2014.  So it was multiple things.  The oil was a big one.  The world economy was changing.  New producers had emerged taking market share away.  Economic policy wasn't so good allowing all that inflation. (Stagflation)  Are we more insulated from such things today?  The world is awash in oil and alternatives are waiting in the wing to take up the slack.

" there was no push in the US to make more money in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. "  - Not sure about that as the only resource that seems unlimited is human greed.  I don't think human nature was that different then.

Seems like new businesses were being developed all along

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_companies_established_in_1967

Thanks for the great link.  I guess when I cut loose from working it will be with the acceptance that it can happen again.

[Exflyboy]

And just like that the Mexico tariffs were gone.....

[pecunia]

And just like that the Mexico tariffs were gone.....

Yeh,....https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/us/politics/trump-tariffs-mexico.html

And what weren't the news media talking about when this tariff thing was all over the news?

[Bateaux]

And just like that the Mexico tariffs were gone.....

Starting fires so you can take credit for putting them out.  I'm curious to see if the markets just start ignoring the orange menace altogether.

Whatever, chances are our accounts will rebound quite a bit on Monday.

[Exflyboy]

And just like that the Mexico tariffs were gone.....

Starting fires so you can take credit for putting them out.  I'm curious to see if the markets just start ignoring the orange menace altogether.

Whatever, chances are our accounts will rebound quite a bit on Monday.

Maybe.. Looking at the way the market rebounded last week I wonder if the traders had been tipped off and the good news has been baked in already.

Still either way its good news even if we don't get an immediate bounce upwards... Might prevent the self inflicted recession even?

[soccerluvof4]

And just like that the Mexico tariffs were gone.....

Starting fires so you can take credit for putting them out.  I'm curious to see if the markets just start ignoring the orange menace altogether.

Whatever, chances are our accounts will rebound quite a bit on Monday.

Maybe.. Looking at the way the market rebounded last week I wonder if the traders had been tipped off and the good news has been baked in already.

Still either way its good news even if we don't get an immediate bounce upwards... Might prevent the self inflicted recession even?

Found yesterday interesting being pretty much a neutral day after how much it bounced back.

[pecunia]

Looking at this thing and trying to discern a pattern like a jillion other people, it looks like most every time there's been a long plateau, there's a dip followed by a very steep rise.

https://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chart

[2sk22]

Whats the common wisdom here on investing large amounts of money in one shot? We currently have a sizable amount in company stock (vested RSUs) and would like to move this to a total market index fund.

Jim Collins seem to be in favor of doing this in one shot and doesn't like dollar cost averaging: https://jlcollinsnh.com/2014/11/12/stocks-part-xxvii-why-i-dont-like-dollar-cost-averaging/

Any dissenting opinions?

[wannabe-stache]

Whats the common wisdom here on investing large amounts of money in one shot? We currently have a sizable amount in company stock (vested RSUs) and would like to move this to a total market index fund.

Jim Collins seem to be in favor of doing this in one shot and doesn't like dollar cost averaging: https://jlcollinsnh.com/2014/11/12/stocks-part-xxvii-why-i-dont-like-dollar-cost-averaging/

Any dissenting opinions?

Nope. Do what’s best for you psychologically.  Just plan to get it invested per your IPS by 6-9 months IMO.

[Car Jack]

If you have the money......
And your plan is to invest it......
What are you waiting for?
DCA makes no sense to me.  All my money's invested.  It would be just as valid for me to ask "Should I take all my money out of the market and dribble it back in?".
The answer is certainly no....that would be stupid.

[Dicey]

There's the kind of Dollar Cost Averaging that happens when you have money deposited from your steady paycheck, which is good, but kind of accidental. Then there's dealing with a lump sum or windfall. Time in the market is very important, so get that platoon of green soldiers working for you asap. Then stay put. Even if the market dips, with time it will recover, especially if you're not buying individual stocks. And getting out of company stocks is always a smart move.

[itchyfeet]

It is more likely that the stock market will be up tomorrow rather than down, invest it all and don’t touch it no matter what happens in the coming months.

[DavidAnnArbor]

someone's done the math before regarding the advantage of investing it all right away versus dollar cost averaging.
it's somewhere in a thread.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Whats the common wisdom here on investing large amounts of money in one shot? We currently have a sizable amount in company stock (vested RSUs) and would like to move this to a total market index fund.

Jim Collins seem to be in favor of doing this in one shot and doesn't like dollar cost averaging: https://jlcollinsnh.com/2014/11/12/stocks-part-xxvii-why-i-dont-like-dollar-cost-averaging/

Any dissenting opinions?

Nope. Do what’s best for you psychologically.  Just plan to get it invested per your IPS by 6-9 months IMO.

I personally like this answer more than the 'mathematically optimal' solution of lump sum in and ignore for 30 years.  If you put a retirement sum in just before 2008 and 2009, and saw it drop by 40% in value and not know when it would come back (talks of financial collapse, investment houses going bankrupt, government bailouts...) would you be able to sit tight?

Once you have 'enough' to fund retirement comfortably in equities, you don't have to optimize every last dollar.  But this goes back to your IPS and risk tolerance, which is different for all of us.  I wish I could draw a graph, but on one side you aren't FI and need every dollar in equities to optimize your chances of reaching your number.  Then there's a middle ground where you are comfortably FI and 100% equities exposes you to short term risk to lose FI.  Then, on the other end of the curve, you are 2x FI or more and you can lose 50% and be fine....

This is definitely a first world problem to have!  Good luck

[2sk22]

There's the kind of Dollar Cost Averaging that happens when you have money deposited from your steady paycheck, which is good, but kind of accidental. Then there's dealing with a lump sum or windfall. Time in the market is very important, so get that platoon of green soldiers working for you asap. Then stay put. Even if the market dips, with time it will recover, especially if you're not buying individual stocks. And getting out of company stocks is always a smart move.

Thanks for clarification - this situation is indeed different from the implicit dollar cost averaging that happens when you invest regularly.

[2sk22]

Once you have 'enough' to fund retirement comfortably in equities, you don't have to optimize every last dollar.  But this goes back to your IPS and risk tolerance, which is different for all of us.  I wish I could draw a graph, but on one side you aren't FI and need every dollar in equities to optimize your chances of reaching your number.  Then there's a middle ground where you are comfortably FI and 100% equities exposes you to short term risk to lose FI.  Then, on the other end of the curve, you are 2x FI or more and you can lose 50% and be fine....

This is definitely a first world problem to have!  Good luck

You've put this very well. This is genuinely a windfall and is in addition to our main retirement funds. We won't need this for many years, hopefully.

Incidentally, we have kept our automated monthly investments running continuously on autopilot since 1998 through multiple recessions :-)

[ysette9]

As Vanguard states it, dollar cost averaging is just taking the risk later:

https://personal.vanguard.com/pdf/s315.pdf

“We conclude that if an investor expects such trends to continue, is satisfied with his or her target asset allocation, and is comfortable with the risk/return characteristics of each strategy, the prudent action is investing the lump sum immediately to gain exposure to the markets
as soon as possible. But if the investor is primarily concerned with minimizing downside risk and potential feelings of regret (resulting from lump-sum investing immediately before a market downturn), then DCA may be of use.”

[Bateaux]

Whats the common wisdom here on investing large amounts of money in one shot? We currently have a sizable amount in company stock (vested RSUs) and would like to move this to a total market index fund.

Jim Collins seem to be in favor of doing this in one shot and doesn't like dollar cost averaging: https://jlcollinsnh.com/2014/11/12/stocks-part-xxvii-why-i-dont-like-dollar-cost-averaging/

Any dissenting opinions?

I'll face a similar question when I FIRE.  It's not company stock, it will be a lump sum retirement amount between 400 and 500K.  I'm not sure how much of that will go into stocks, if any.  It's drawing 5% interest right now, so with it making between 20 and 25k annually with no risk it might stay parked for a while.

[PathtoFIRE]

With a windfall, there's risk either way. Lump sum it, and you risk a downturn. Do periodic purchases of a windfall, and you risk missing an upturn. I prefer a lump sum because:
1) In 12 month periods, lump sum wins out 60% of the time uses historic data (although the 40% of the time losses tend to be larger)
2) Annual returns can be halved (or doubled) by missing just a few particular good (or bad) days throughout the year

[pecunia]

As far as this lump sum thing goes, let's say you put it in and KaBam Plop, the market hits a correction.  The average correction lasts 18 months and then you wait to climb out of the hole.  Now 1929 and 1965 were bad according to the chart, but pick a lot of other points.  Just take a look.  That curve went up a lot in it's history.

https://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chart

If you've got the time, it looks like the way to go.  There sure seem to be a lot of people on this site that have rode that stock market curve up.  No reason you can't be one of them.  Hey,........I'm even one of them.

[itchyfeet]

A little hypothetical test for those of you that say DCAing is ok because it helps with the psychology.

Say you decide to invest the lump sum in 2 installments. The first installment today and the 2nd installment in 1 week.

A. You invest the first installment and in the coming days the market drops 20%. Do you still invest the 2nd installment?
B. You invest the first installment and in the coming days the market rises 20%. Do you invest the 2nd installment?

I think if your response to what you would do is impacted by the market movements then you are likely to continue to try and time the market which is pretty impossible. You need to unlearn the desire to try and time the market.

If the market drops 20%, it doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t drop by another 20% the week after. Many would say it’s a buying opportunity. You won’t know and maybe you’ll want to see a rebound before you invest. Your mind will play tricks on you. Equally if the market is booming you also won’t know whether to buy or if the market has become too expensive.

If your response is that you would make the 2 installment regardless of what the market does, then that says to me that you have belief in the market, and there is nothing to say that
Investing the 2nd installment in 1 weeks Time will be a better or worse time to invest than today. The general market trend is upwards over time, so the more days your money is invested the higher the probability of making more money.

[soccerluvof4]

I was in the lump sum situation when i close my business and I took the DCA approach but i took the money and basically divided it by 12 and put it in each month unless there was a dip then sooner. I agree to the psychological part of it and feel you have to do what lets you sleep at night. Once you have it all invested to me thats more important.

[2sk22]

I was in the lump sum situation when i close my business and I took the DCA approach but i took the money and basically divided it by 12 and put it in each month unless there was a dip then sooner. I agree to the psychological part of it and feel you have to do what lets you sleep at night. Once you have it all invested to me thats more important.

An update: Based on the good advice from this group, I tried to persuade my wife that we should take a big-bang approach to re-investing our vested RSUs but she was nervous so its going to be spread out over the next couple of months in a manner similar to @soccerluvof4 's approach.

[wannabe-stache]

A little hypothetical test for those of you that say DCAing is ok because it helps with the psychology.

Say you decide to invest the lump sum in 2 installments. The first installment today and the 2nd installment in 1 week.

A. You invest the first installment and in the coming days the market drops 20%. Do you still invest the 2nd installment?
B. You invest the first installment and in the coming days the market rises 20%. Do you invest the 2nd installment?

I think if your response to what you would do is impacted by the market movements then you are likely to continue to try and time the market which is pretty impossible. You need to unlearn the desire to try and time the market.

If the market drops 20%, it doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t drop by another 20% the week after. Many would say it’s a buying opportunity. You won’t know and maybe you’ll want to see a rebound before you invest. Your mind will play tricks on you. Equally if the market is booming you also won’t know whether to buy or if the market has become too expensive.

If your response is that you would make the 2 installment regardless of what the market does, then that says to me that you have belief in the market, and there is nothing to say that
Investing the 2nd installment in 1 weeks Time will be a better or worse time to invest than today. The general market trend is upwards over time, so the more days your money is invested the higher the probability of making more money.

most of the people that are in this thread (with $2M+ invested) are probably pretty smart with money and get what you are saying.  however, just like the "should i pay off my mortgage or invest in the market", some of it depends on factors other than what you list above.

now, if they stray from their intentions due to subsequent market factors, that is a different circumstance.

[Bateaux]

Hey I'm new to MMM but not new to the quest to retire early.  I'm 45, married and have two boys in college. 
We have our mortage paid off and have a little over 1 million saved in retirement accounts. 
My goal is to retire before 50, which I reach in 2018.
Being debt free is wonderful.   Get it done.

This is my first MMM post, it's from 2014 and a million dollars more in net worth.   I'm just as finance dumb as I was then!  I blame YOU people.   This shit is easy and you absolutely don't need to be smart.  You can hate spreadsheets and still get here.  I have no advice to give, John Bogle gave me this gift.

[Exflyboy]

Hey I'm new to MMM but not new to the quest to retire early.  I'm 45, married and have two boys in college. 
We have our mortage paid off and have a little over 1 million saved in retirement accounts. 
My goal is to retire before 50, which I reach in 2018.
Being debt free is wonderful.   Get it done.

This is my first MMM post, it's from 2014 and a million dollars more in net worth.   I'm just as finance dumb as I was then!  I blame YOU people.   This shit is easy and you absolutely don't need to be smart.  You can hate spreadsheets and still get here.  I have no advice to give, John Bogle gave me this gift.

Nice.. You sound pretty finance savvy to me...:)

[itchyfeet]

Awesome sh&t

It been an incredible ride since 2014. I have been bantering on  these forums from around the same time.

So many things (mostly “initially” non financial) got in the way of the goal.

Being here 5 years down the road marks us as peeps that can set aside the noise and plot head on to the destination. Yeeehaaaa

[soccerluvof4]

I wanta say it was around 2014 I joined here as well. Not sure how to look that up but be some reasons of deduction 13 or 14.

[markbike528CBX]

I wanta say it was around 2014 I joined here as well. Not sure how to look that up but be some reasons of deduction 13 or 14.

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/profile/?u=8328.  The Profile button near the top of the screen. Says: 2014

soccerluvof4
Magnum Stache
My Journal
Offline Offline
[Add To Buddy List]
Posts: 4833 (2.451 per day)Personal Text: Retired at 50Gender: MaleAge:N/ALocation:Artic Midwest
Date Registered: January 18, 2014, 09:36:49 AMLocal Time:June 14, 2019, 08:37:33 AMLast Active: Today at 04:42:53 AM
Signature:" In life you don't get what you deserve you get what you negotiate"


Also available to other users by clicking on your username.  I've seen it used to detect if users AWOL from a thread are still active. Example: thorstache for the Top Is IN thread.

[ysette9]

Ooh, you just beat me! I registered 11 Feb 2014.

[Exflyboy]

A few of us around that time I think.. I registered on Oct 1st 2013. My first journal post was Jan 9th 2014.. The first day of my (first) retirement..:).

I am so thankful that I was already FI when I first stumbled on MMM.. If I would have had to wait/save for several years that would have been tough.

[londonbanker]

I found MMM early 2014 and posted my first thread with the start of my journal in July 2014. Back then my NW was slightly over £800k (with the FX at the time pre-Brexit). I was just starting on my mustachian journey.

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/my-journal-to-$4-5m-nw-(ex-$13m)

Almost 5years later our NW jumped to £2.1m and our spending habits have changed diametrically opposite to our income growth... a powerful combination

[soccerluvof4]

I wanta say it was around 2014 I joined here as well. Not sure how to look that up but be some reasons of deduction 13 or 14.

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/profile/?u=8328.  The Profile button near the top of the screen. Says: 2014

soccerluvof4
Magnum Stache
My Journal
Offline Offline
[Add To Buddy List]
Posts: 4833 (2.451 per day)Personal Text: Retired at 50Gender: MaleAge:N/ALocation:Artic Midwest
Date Registered: January 18, 2014, 09:36:49 AMLocal Time:June 14, 2019, 08:37:33 AMLast Active: Today at 04:42:53 AM
Signature:" In life you don't get what you deserve you get what you negotiate"


Also available to other users by clicking on your username.  I've seen it used to detect if users AWOL from a thread are still active. Example: thorstache for the Top Is IN thread.

Awesome! Thank you very much for that so 5 years ago. That went quick!

[JoJoP]

I joined May 26. 2014.   That apparently was a very good year to join MMM! 

Bateaux, I just got back from a few weeks in rural France and we enjoyed canoeing down the Arles river in a bateaux.  There are bateaux rentals everywhere in that area and I thought of you every time I saw the word. 
 

[Bateaux]

I joined May 26. 2014.   That apparently was a very good year to join MMM! 

Bateaux, I just got back from a few weeks in rural France and we enjoyed canoeing down the Arles river in a bateaux.  There are bateaux rentals everywhere in that area and I thought of you every time I saw the word.

My boat fetish is part of the reason, I'm still having to work.

[Much Fishing to Do]

Curious, for those of you that have RE'd with this level of investments and are buying insurance on the ACA, how do dividends and capital gains affect your premiums/subsidy for your insurance? Does it change your insurance expense each year?

Trying to figure this all out now as I'm likely FIREing soon, primarily figuring income and its effects on ACA (for a family of 5 like mine you have to have like six figures of income to get no subsidy, and there are obviously lots of levels down to the point of what you pay is minimal) and the FAFSA (as my kids are spread out enough they'll likely be in school for at least 2020 thru 2032, and the ability to have net worth ignored if your income is below a certain amount makes it worth spending time tinkering).

One consideration is you don't always know what the distributions will be very far ahead of time given the varying year end cap gains distributions for many funds.  One consideration is there are ways to invest in equities in a somewhat diversified manner without getting dividends and forced distributed cap gains (e.g. Berkshire hathaway stock).  One consideration is hard lines you dont want to cross versus sliding scales (not crossing the income level for FAFSA ignoring assets versus the sliding scale of the ACA subsidies.).  One consideration is that you can control recognized cap gains from the sale of funds to receive cash to spend, which includes bunching in years, having different funds with different percentage gains available, etc. for taxable accts, and separately control income from retirement accounts you hit early with a SEPP.

I'm just saying there's a lot to consider, but you have to have a ton of assets to get to the point its not worth thinking about.  I have approx $2M in taxable and $1M in retirement.  Of the $2M taxable, it gives off about $35k in dividends, but I've seen the year end distributed gain vary greatly from near zero to not that far from the dividend amount.  And I do keep 10% in cash, so its always possible for me to not sell anything for a year or two, but I eventually have to sell something, and of the stuff I could sell I have options with little gain and other with lots percentage-wise.  So its easy to see my income in a year being $35k, and easy to see how it could be $80k, and the difference between the two can have drastic consequences for ACA and FAFSA results.

Its a complex evaluation and one worth working your way thru.

[Car Jack]

So its easy to see my income in a year being $35k, and easy to see how it could be $80k, and the difference between the two can have drastic consequences for ACA and FAFSA results.

I don't understand your FAFSA reference.  $2M in countable assets yields $112k in EFC (ignoring allowance).  What this means, before considering your income or the kid's income and assets is that you get nothing until you've paid $112k towards college in a year.

There are certainly things you can do with that $2M.  If you have any debts or mortgage, certainly you'd want to pay them all.  But unless there's a huge mortgage, it's not going to do much to qualify you for any aid beyond Stafford loans.

I know nothing about ACA.

[ysette9]

I believe if the investments are in retirement accounts then they are shielded from FASFA calculations. So spend down the taxable account first do you can look poor to colleges on paper by the time the kids are old enough.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.   

[ysette9]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.

I thought home equity was sheltered also. Am I mistaken?

[EscapeVelocity2020]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.

I thought home equity was sheltered also. Am I mistaken?

Net home equity is not sheltered - http://www.finaid.org/calculators/finaidestimate.phtml (but, like many FAFSA issues, it is a complicated situation.  It IS sheltered for Federal purposes apparently, so you can get the federal loans, but is not sheltered for institutional purposes, so you'll get less financial aid.  I mostly focus on the financial aid part.)

[MiserlyMiser]

I'm sorry, how can you have significant income and still receive a subsidy?  I thought subsidies were income-based? 

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.   

[ysette9]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.

I thought home equity was sheltered also. Am I mistaken?

Net home equity is not sheltered - http://www.finaid.org/calculators/finaidestimate.phtml (but, like many FAFSA issues, it is a complicated situation.  It IS sheltered for Federal purposes apparently, so you can get the federal loans, but is not sheltered for institutional purposes, so you'll get less financial aid.  I mostly focus on the financial aid part.)

Ahhh. That sucks. Not interested in federal loans either. Thankfully we have a long tone to figure this out

[Much Fishing to Do]

So its easy to see my income in a year being $35k, and easy to see how it could be $80k, and the difference between the two can have drastic consequences for ACA and FAFSA results.

I don't understand your FAFSA reference.  $2M in countable assets yields $112k in EFC (ignoring allowance).  What this means, before considering your income or the kid's income and assets is that you get nothing until you've paid $112k towards college in a year.

There are certainly things you can do with that $2M.  If you have any debts or mortgage, certainly you'd want to pay them all.  But unless there's a huge mortgage, it's not going to do much to qualify you for any aid beyond Stafford loans.

I know nothing about ACA.

The FAFSA doesn't look at your assets under a certain income threshold (I think its $50k), so the $2M is no longer countable if you do it right.

[Much Fishing to Do]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.

My strategy is to try to get income below $50k (for at least some years) and meet other criteria so I can use the simplified assets test and they be assumed as $0.  It will not be easy and maybe not worth it, but looks possible.

[Bateaux]

For those of us with significant assets outside of retirement accounts (taxable brokerage, home equity, a business), FAFSA is a very difficult system to game, especially if we like our dividends, interest, and capital gains income.  I'm also interested in what your strategy is @Much Fishing to Do ...

ACA subsidy is the larger opportunity for ERs since you can have significant income and unlimited wealth and still receive a subsidy.

My strategy is to try to get income below $50k (for at least some years) and meet other criteria so I can use the simplified assets test and they be assumed as $0.  It will not be easy and maybe not worth it, but looks possible.

Getting income low enough is another reason we're having to work a bit longer.  There are some expenses we need to knock out first.  Then we can live pretty cheap.