Female investors have a cautious view of equities. That is a problem—for women as well as the rest of the finance world.
3 min
“I think we’re a bit outnumbered, but we’re here.” So said one commenter on a Reddit thread about whether women joined in the recent WallStreetBets trading frenzy.
Female investors largely sat out the riskiest punts taken on stocks like GameStop. That may be no bad thing considering the videogame retailer’s stock is down over 80% from its late-January peak. But low female participation in stock-market investing more generally is a problem, for women and the finance industry alike.
Less than one-quarter of deposits into U.S. brokerage accounts were made by women in January, according to consumer-spending data analytics firm Cardify. Globally, the situation may be even worse: Israel-based brokerage eToro said that female investors make up just 14% of its registered users, most of whom are in the U.S. and Europe.
Some trading platforms did a good job of signing up women during the pandemic. Just over a third of Robinhood users were female at the beginning of this year, up from 20.5% a year before, according to Cardify. For the finance industry as a whole, though, attracting more female custom remains a frustratingly slow work in progress.
Women tend to be more conservative investors than men, preferring to put their wealth into real estate, cash or bonds while steering clear of equities. Credit Suisse surveyed a sample of existing clients and found that almost half of its female customers have 90% of their wealth tied up in low-yielding cash and fixed income—well over double the exposure the Swiss bank recommends.
That kind of caution has downsides, particularly when interest rates are as low as they are today. Since the global financial crisis, cash has returned a paltry 0.6% annually, while 10-year Treasury bills have returned 4.8%, based on Portfolio Visualizer calculations. By comparison, the U.S. stock market has averaged 12% a year.
Governments and companies are increasingly shifting the responsibility for a secure retirement onto individuals, raising the stakes for individuals’ investment decisions. Getting women to increase their exposure to equities is all the more important because they outlive men, so need their pension pots to last longer.
The underlying reasons for women’s caution as investors are complex. They are still paid less than men. Earnings and pension contributions can be disrupted when mothers take time out of the workforce to rear children, hampering their ability to put money aside for the future. Many women prioritize keeping what they have safe instead of investing in better-returning assets that could help offset these pay gaps. The wider issue here is that risk tolerance typically rises with wealth, for both sexes.
The finance industry also has a longstanding image problem with women. For some, investment jargon is the turnoff; for others it is the sometimes patronizing financial products targeted at them.
Warren Buffett once quipped that part of his investing success came from “only competing with half the population.” In reality, few people are benefiting from the status quo. Women are missing out on a share of stock-market spoils. Asset managers are losing out on the higher fees that come from higher-yielding assets. Robinhood needs female customers to maintain its blistering user growth as the startup prepares for a mooted initial public offering.
When they do enter the stock market, women’s investment behaviours often lead to good returns. They tend to think long-term, spread their risk by buying diversified funds and rack up lower fees by trading less frequently than men. That kind of steady capital might help to offset some of the excesses seen in the market this year.
Currently, women’s share of financial assets globally is estimated at 30% by Credit Suisse, or 40% including real assets such as property, which tend to be more evenly distributed. Those numbers should grow as women join the workforce in greater numbers and accept higher-paying jobs. That may automatically improve the situation, as they have more money to invest and can afford to take greater risks with it. Catering to women’s financial needs is likely to become a more competitive business in future.
Yet the finance sector also has a role to play. Robinhood makes much of its mission to “democratise” the industry, and has indeed turned more women’s heads in a matter of months than some traditional brokerages managed in years. With women still heavily outnumbered on even the most accessible apps, though, there is much further to go. Democratising finance needs to include a better pitch to the other 50% of the population.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
BNW Developments has established a Sydney presence, joining Arada and Sobha Realty among the growing number of UAE developers pursuing Australian buyers and development opportunities.
The Australian leather house has opened an immersive four-day pop-up in Manhattan, unveiling its Bloom Collection and redefining what a product launch can look like.
Strong family financial planning can help reduce taxes and support younger generations. From intrafamily loans and asset gifts to inheritance disclaimers, strategic cooperation can create meaningful financial benefits—when families have the trust and structure to make it work.
4 min
Happy is the family whose members—parents, grandparents and grown children—trust each other enough to cooperate on shared goals, especially financial ones. When that is truly the case, Uncle Sam’s tax rules can help as well.
This matters especially now that mortgage rates are above 7%, and many families are looking for ways to help younger members. If the elders have resources and are confident younger ones can cooperate, a family loan could make homeownership possible while providing the elders with a useful income stream.
Other strategies can actually lower taxes, such as when funding 529 plans or Roth IRAs, or when someone inherits a traditional IRA with required withdrawals larger than they will need.
Here are three strategies useful for functional families.
It is perfectly legal for families to lend money to a relative for a down payment or even a private mortgage.
But it is important not to cut corners, says Ryan McKeown, a CPA with Modern Wealth Enhancement in Minnesota. If the loan is for a down payment, be honest with the mortgage provider and have a formal agreement. The lender owes tax on the interest payments received.
If the loan is for a private mortgage, both sides should have legal representation with a formal written agreement, including payment terms. The lender owes tax on the interest, and the borrower often can deduct it if he or she itemizes.
To avoid IRS trouble, the interest rate shouldn’t be lower than the agency’s Applicable Federal Rate at the time of the loan. Currently that is about 5% for loans longer than nine years; about 4.5% for loans three to nine years; and about 4% for loans three years or less. Currently, traditional mortgage rates are generally above 7%.
In addition, the lender could use the $19,000 annual gift-tax exemption (described below) to forgive some or all of the interest or principal annually. If both lenders and borrowers are married, that is up to $76,000 a year. There is no tax for the borrower on such forgiveness, because it is from a gift.
If you’re going this route, McKeown advises against having a fixed plan to forgive the debt. Instead, do it in one-off letters specifying the amount—and keep careful records. Otherwise the IRS might try to treat the loan as a taxable gift.
Powerful tax-saving moves for families often use gift-tax provisions. Under current law, anyone can give anyone else up to $19,000 of assets annually, free of gift tax. That means a married couple with three grandchildren could give them a total of $114,000 in 2026.
The gifts can be cash or other assets, like stock. For noncash gifts, the cost basis—which is the starting point for measuring taxable gain after a sale—“carries over” to the recipient. So if someone buys $1,000 of stock and gives it away when it is worth $5,000, the recipient’s cost basis is $1,000. If the recipient later sells the shares for $8,000, the taxable gain is $7,000.
Here’s an example showing how gifts could save a family taxes. Grandma is a widow of modest means, while her child and spouse have prospered. The couple has two children, and they want to contribute $5,000 to a 529 college-savings plan for each—but they need to sell stock to do it. Their tax rate on the sale would be 18.8%, and they would need to sell about $11,000 of stock.
However, Grandma’s federal tax rate on the stock sale is 0%. If the couple gives $10,000 of shares to Grandma, she could sell them, pay no tax, and fund the grandchildren’s 529 plans. This saves about $1,000 of tax.
These moves are legal, and they could be used in other ways, such as to help a young person fund a Roth IRA.
But trust among family members is essential: Under the law, givers can’t put conditions on a gift. Grandma could use her stock proceeds to take a cruise, but she makes 529 contributions instead.
Mark Sellner, a retired tax attorney and CPA living in Sarasota, Fla., uses this strategy. His children sell stock he gives them and fund 529 plans for his grandchildren.
The family’s tax savings aren’t huge, but he likes other benefits. The sales by his children don’t boost his adjusted gross income, which in turn could raise his Medicare Irmaa premiums or his 3.8% surtax on net investment income.
Sellner doesn’t worry about his children using the funds for another purpose.
“There can’t be any strings attached to gifts. Of course, it is up to us to decide whether to make them in the future,” he says.
Two caveats: The “kiddie tax” applies to most children under age 24, and it is levied at the parents’ rate on investment income above $2,700 in 2026. Consider this before making gifts to a young person.
Investors who give away stock also forgo the step-up, an important provision that exempts assets held at death from capital-gains tax.
Sellner knows he’s losing a step-up, but says, “The children could use a little more now. Why should they wait 20 years to get it?”
A disclaimer is a highly useful strategy in which one heir renounces an inheritance in favor of another heir. Assuming family members cooperate, this can save taxes.
Here’s one example. Dad died and had a large traditional IRA that he left to Mom. She has enough assets and income to cover her expenses, and she lives in a state with a stiff estate tax. The inherited IRA would put her estate over the threshold.
Also surviving are three young-adult children. If Mom disclaims all or part of Dad’s IRA within nine months of his death, that amount could go directly to the children. They will have 10 years to empty the account, and the family as a whole will likely save estate and income taxes.
Disclaimers have many key details, especially regarding beneficiary documents. Although heirs have great freedom in choosing what assets to disclaim, the rules about who gets disclaimed property are rigid. It is best if the original owner names tiers of heirs so that if one disclaims, the next recipient is clear.
