Paul O. Dillon, Attorney at Law

How Should I Prepare for My Child’s Future?

It’s been a common path for millennials and their predecessors to go to a four-year college and get a job. If they were short on funds, they’d take out some loans. However, there have been some signals that this norm is changing.

With worries about a student debt crisis and with the experience of recent graduates, new college-age students are increasingly turning to alternatives to the established route to create their own debt-free future.

Kiplinger’s recent article entitled “How to Stay Flexible in Saving for Your Child's Future” says that student debt is leading to obstacles, when it comes to achieving major milestones of financial freedom. Of the young millennials surveyed, nearly half (47%) said they delayed purchasing a home because of  their debt, 40% delayed saving for retirement and 31% waited to move out of their parents’ home. A total of 28% of parents said they delayed saving for their own retirement, to pay for their children’s education.

Saving for a child’s future now looks different than when these 18-year-olds were born.  It certainly will be the case, when they leave the nest. As a result, it’s critical for parents to try to give them help, by learning how to adapt to the changing times.

With the gig economy and digitally enabled side jobs, parents have more flexibility to maintain their financial goals, while preserving their personal lives.

When considering flexibility, especially when saving for a child’s education, it’s actually one of the big benefits of a 529 plan. Although you’re responsible if you make a withdrawal that isn’t for a qualified education expense, the penalties aren’t too steep. Federal income tax is imposed on the plan’s growth, plus a 10% penalty on the growth. Therefore, depending on the amount withdrawn, the penalty may be very little.

Nonetheless, the tax penalties may worry parents enough that even when their goal is to save for their child’s education, they want to spread their savings into multiple accounts. This has some clear advantages, when the child decides not to go to college after high school. The good news is that there are plenty of options to account for both possibilities.

• Other investment accounts: You could also create a brokerage account with money earmarked for a child. This gives parents complete flexibility in how the money is used. The money can be used for expenses other than education, but the downside is not having the tax benefits of the 529 plan (tax deferral and potential tax-free growth).
• Trusts: a trust allows parents to keep complete control over the funds and lets parents provide instructions to the trustee, on how the trust can be used.
• Custodial accounts: These accounts are managed by a guardian (or custodian), until the child is an adult. These accounts are pretty easy to set up but don’t have the restrictions that can be placed on trust funds.

The digital world has changed everything, including how we plan for our children and their future. Be flexible and make your plans accordingly.

Reference: Kiplinger (Dec. 27, 2019) “How to Stay Flexible in Saving for Your Child's Future”

Do Unmarried Couples Need Estate Planning?

A couple that has no intention of ever getting married should know that they won’t get the automatic rights and protections that legally wed spouses get, particularly when it comes to death. Therefore, unmarried couples must make a concerted effort to cover all the bases, says CNBC’s recent article entitled “Here’s what happens to your partner if you’re not married and you die.”

The number of unmarried couples who live together reached 18 million in 2016, a 29% increase from 14 million in 2007, according to the Pew Research Center. Among adults age 50 and older, the increase was 75% with roughly 4 million cohabiting in 2016, compared to 2.3 million in 2007.

These couples still face some key differences from their married counterparts. For example, there’s no filing federal taxes as a couple, and if an employer allows health insurance for a partner, the amount the company contributes is taxable to the employee, rather than being tax-free for a spouse.

End-of-life considerations also need attention. Unmarried couples can sign some legal documents that will dictate what happens, if one of them either becomes incapacitated or passes away, which is a type of estate plan.

If you die without a will or intestate, the state probate court will decide how your assets are distributed. A will by itself also won’t address everything. If you want to make sure your tax-advantaged retirement accounts — like your Roth IRA and 401(k) plans — go to your partner, make sure that individual is the designated beneficiary on those accounts. Even if your will says otherwise, whoever’s listed as the beneficiaries on those accounts will get the money. It’s the same for insurance policies and annuities.

If both partner’s names are on checking, savings or investment accounts, the account will pass directly to the surviving partner. However, for an account with only one partner’s name on it, ask the bank about the appropriate form to be completed, so the money is left directly to the surviving partner. This is what’s called a transfer-on-death or payable-on-death designation. Without this designation, the assets will end up in probate and distributed either in accordance with the will or intestacy state laws.

Regardless of how the mortgage is paid or whose name is on the loan, the person named on the deed is the owner. If the house in one partner’s name, it won’t automatically pass to the partner, as it would with a married couple (via joint tenancy with rights of survivorship). It would become part of the probate estate. To remedy this, you can retitle the home, so that both partners are listed as joint owners on the deed, “with rights of survivorship.” Each partner then equally owns the house and is entitled to assume full ownership upon the death of the other. Note that there could be other factors to consider before adding a partner’s name to an existing deed, such as expenses, tax implications and protection from potential creditors. Ask your estate planning or probate attorney before you make a change. A partner owning the house, could leave it to the surviving partner in the will. Remember, though, any asset passing via the will is subject to probate, which may lead to unforeseen issues.

In addition, a partner has no legal say in his or her partner’s medical treatment, if he or she is in a situation where they can’t make decisions for themselves. To give the partner that right, partners can grant each other a durable power of attorney over health care. This allows the partner to make important health-care decisions, if the one in the hospital is unable to do so. This is different from a living will, which states a person’s wishes if they are on life support or suffer from a terminal condition. This document helps guide the agent’s decision-making. If no one is named, medical personnel must follow the instructions in that document.

Likewise, partners may want to give each other durable power of attorney for finances. This would let them handle one another’s money, including accessing accounts as necessary, if the incapacitated partner could not do so.  If the partners have dependents, name a guardian for them in the will. Otherwise, that decision will be left to the courts.

Reference: CNBC (Dec. 16, 2019) “Here’s what happens to your partner if you’re not married and you die”

What’s the Senior Freeze?

Many states and counties have what is known as a “Senior Freeze” program. This program reimburses eligible senior citizens and disabled persons for property tax or mobile home park site fee increases on their principal residence. To qualify, a senior must meet all the eligibility requirements for each year from the base year through the application year.

As far as property with a life estate, nj.com’s recent article, “Will I get the Senior Freeze if I have a life estate for my home?” explains that it’s important to determine who remains the owner of the property. The article says that the Senior Freeze program is a bit of a misnomer, because the benefit doesn’t actually “freeze” property taxes. The program actually reimburses eligible individuals for any property tax increases incurred, once an individual qualifies for the benefit.

An eligible person gets the difference between the property tax amount in the first year of eligibility—the “base year”—and the current year’s property tax amount, presuming it is higher. For example, in New Jersey, a person has to have two consecutive years of eligibility before applying and satisfy the following requirements:

• The applicant or his/her spouse are at least 65 or receiving Social Security disability benefits;
• The applicant lived in the state continuously since Dec. 31, 2007, or earlier, as a homeowner or renter;
• The applicant owned and lived in his/her home since Dec. 14, 2014 or earlier (and still owns and lives in the home);
• He or she has paid the full amount of the property taxes due; and
• The applicant meets the income limit (currently $89,013 in NJ).

The program typically doesn’t apply to vacation homes, second homes, rental properties, or properties that have more than four units.

It’s not uncommon for seniors to transfer a home to a trust for a variety of purposes including government benefit planning but conveying your home entirely may disqualify you from the Senior Freeze program. An applicant is considered the owner of the property, if she retains a life estate in the property, which must be evidenced in the deed or other legal document showing the applicant’s right to occupy the property.

The retention of a life estate will let an applicant qualify for the program if the other eligibility qualifications are met, but it could create collateral issues that risk qualification for government benefits if the property is sold. Therefore, it’s critical that you talk to a certified elder law attorney before transferring real estate or making substantial gifts.

Reference: nj.com (December 11, 2019) “Will I get the Senior Freeze if I have a life estate for my home?”

What Does an Estate Planning Attorney Really Do?

Vents Magazine’s recent article, “Understanding What an Estate Planning Attorney Does,” explains that estate planning is a legal set of instructions for your family about how to distribute your wealth and property after you die. Estate planning attorneys make sure the distribution of property happens according to the decedent’s will.

An estate planning attorney can provide legal advice on how to prepare your will after you pass away or in the event that you experience mental incapacity. She will have all the information and education on all the legal processes, beginning with your will and moving on to other important estate planning documents. She will also help you to understand estate taxes.

An estate planning attorney will also help to make certain that all of your savings and property are safe and distributed through the proper legal processes.

Estate planning attorneys can also assist with the power of attorney and health care directives. These documents allow you to designate an individual to decide issues on your behalf, in the event that you become mentally incapable of making decisions for yourself. They can also help you with a guardian who will look after your estate.

It’s important that you select the right estate planning attorney to execute the legal process, as you’ve instructed in your estate plan. You should only retain an attorney with experience in this field of law because other legal counsel won’t be able to help you with these issues—or at least, they may say they can, only to find out later that they’re not experienced in this area.

You also want to feel comfortable with your estate planning attorney because you must disclose all your life details, plans and estate issues, so she can create an estate plan that’s customized to your circumstances.

If you choose the right attorney, it will save you money in the long run. She will help you save from all the estate taxes and make all the processes smooth and easy for you and your loved ones.

Reference: Vents Magazine (December 12, 2019) “Understanding What an Estate Planning Attorney Does”

How Should Baby Boomers Claim Their Social Security?

How you handle your Social Security income has an important effect on an overall retirement financial plan. For baby boomers, employing an intelligent Social Security strategy can increase income over their lifetimes. You show know your full retirement age, coordinate the timing of benefit claims with your spouse and weigh the advantages of delaying your Social Security benefits.

Kiplinger’s recent article, “Time Claims to Maximize Social Security Benefits,” says that with more baby boomers becoming eligible for Social Security benefits, some strategies for how to claim the benefits are going away. Full retirement age is also going up, and there’s the threat of curbs to future benefits.

However, the rules for claiming retirement benefits have become a little simpler. Under a law passed in 2015, those born on or after January 2, 1954 are presumed to be applying for the highest benefit for which they qualify—regardless of whether it’s their own benefit or a spousal benefit—no matter what their age is when they claim. The law also phases out the restriction on an application for spousal benefits, which could boost a couple’s total payout by tens of thousands of dollars. However, a small group of boomers still may be eligible to use it.

These important moves can help you maximize your lifetime benefits—and help your nest egg go much further. Full retirement age (FRA)—calculated by your birth year—is on a gradual slope upward from age 66 to age 67. Social Security benefits increase monthly by a small percentage from age 62 to your full retirement age. As a result, if you err and claim at age 66 when your full retirement age is really 66½, the loss won’t be significant, but it could be permanent, decreasing your benefits for a lifetime.

The rising full retirement age for Social Security means that those who claim early will see a larger benefit reduction. For those with a full retirement age of 66, claiming at 62 permanently reduces their benefits by 25%. However, for those with a full retirement age of 67, the reduction is 30%. A higher full retirement age also decreases the bonus for people who wait to claim until age 70. Those with a full retirement age of 66, can earn up to 32% extra—or 8% a year in delayed retirement credits up to age 70. People with a full retirement age of 67 can earn up to 24% extra.

Know your exact full retirement age to understand how your benefit will be affected by claiming at different ages. All the cost-of-living adjustments are also calculated on that higher amount, so you receive the benefit of compounding.

Your FRA is also important, if you’re still working when you claim. Retiring and taking Social Security benefits are two separate decisions. You can do one without doing the other. However, if you apply for benefits before your FRA while still working, your benefits will be subject to the earnings test. Early claimers will temporarily lose $1 of benefits for every $2 of earnings above $17,640 in 2019. In the year you hit FRA, the threshold is higher—in 2019, you’d temporarily forfeit $1 of benefits for every $3 of earnings above $46,920.

But in the month that you turn FRA, the earnings test is no longer applicable. If you plan to keep working later in life, it’s typically wise to wait until FRA or later to claim benefits. If you do forfeit any benefits to the earnings test, your benefit will be adjusted upward at your FRA to replace the missing benefits over time.

Reference: Kiplinger (July 29, 2019) “Time Claims to Maximize Social Security Benefits”

What’s the Best Way to Take My Required Minimum Distribution?

CNBC’s recent article, “These tips can help retirees make required minimum distributions easy and tax penalty free,” gives the steps to follow, so we don’t leave money on the table.

RMDs or required minimum distributions, are the minimum amount people age 70½ and older must withdraw from their retirement funds. If you’ve inherited a retirement account, you may also have to make a withdrawal. The amount you need to withdraw varies from year to year and is based on specific calculations, including what your account values were as of December 31 the prior year and your age.

The time to get started on your RMD for this year is right now, because the paperwork may take some time. You have until April 1, if you just turned 70½ this year. Let’s look at a few tips:

Get your paperwork organized. In order to know how much you have to withdraw, you have to have an accurate picture of what you own. Create a list of accounts and take an inventory first, so you know where all your retirement accounts are located.

Know what you can take from what account. If you have multiple IRAs, you can take your total RMD from any one of those accounts because of the aggregation rule. However, with multiple IRAs, you still must calculate the amount you take out based on the value of all of them. It’s that same with multiple 403(b) retirement accounts. The rule doesn’t apply to 401(k) plans. If you have multiple 401(k) accounts, you must take money from each one, and you can’t take an RMD from an IRA to satisfy a 401(k), or vice versa.

Understand the rules, if you’re still working. If you’re 70½ and still employed, you could get a break from taking your RMD in certain circumstances. Generally, 401(k) plans have a still-working rule, which stipulates that you don’t have to take the RMD until you retire. However, you can only delay the RMDs, if the plan is attached to the company where you’re currently employed. Other accounts from a previous employer are excluded, so you must still take distributions from those.

Keep an eye on any inherited accounts. If you’ve inherited a retirement account, you may have to take an RMD by the end of this year. That generally doesn’t apply if you inherited the money from your spouse, because spouses can do a rollover and keep postponing the distributions. However, if you’re a non-spouse beneficiary, you probably must take a distribution by the end of 2019. If you inherited the account in 2018, you’ll need to take your first RMD in 2019.

RMDs from a Roth IRA will likely be tax-free. However, if you’ve inherited one of these accounts and you didn’t take that money out, you’ll have to pay a 50% penalty on the funds you should’ve withdrawn.

Consider giving to charity. A good way to avoid paying taxes on your RMD, is to give the money to charity. A qualified charitable distribution lets you to make donations to a charity directly from your IRA, instead of taking the RMD yourself. Therefore, if your RMD is $5,000, and you typically give $5,000 to charity each year, you can donate that money directly and not pay tax on it.

Reference: CNBC (November 29, 2019) “These tips can help retirees make required minimum distributions easy and tax penalty free”

If I Roll All My IRA Money to a Roth, Will I Forfeit Some Tax Benefits?

Rolling over all of your assets from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA can mean tax-free income down the road. However, remember that you’ll also pay taxes on the amount moved. That means there will be no future opportunity to reduce your tax rate further.

CNBC’s recent article, “Moving all your IRA money to a Roth means losing some tax benefits,” says that those lost tax benefits generally relate to medical expenses, charitable contributions and business losses. In contrast, if you leave too much in the IRA, the result may not be good. You may have higher required minimum distributions and taxes.

Roth IRAs grow tax-free and withdrawals generally are also untaxed. They also have no lifetime required minimum distributions, or RMDs. However, traditional IRAs have some potential tax benefits that are gone for good, once the money is moved.

The primary concept in managing taxes in retirement is that you want to get as much money out of your accounts at the lowest possible cost. When you roll over money from a traditional IRA to a Roth, the amount moved is taxed as ordinary income. As a result, you should complete the rollover when you’re in as low a tax bracket as possible. This means tax-free income available down the road, but it also means you’ll have already paid taxes on the rollover. Thus, there’s no opportunity to reduce your rate further. However, if you leave too much in the IRA, the result may not be good. If you think that you might have these future expenses, then it might make sense to keep money in the traditional IRA.

Medical expenses. These are usually a major expense for older Americans and that’s not including the cost of long-term care. However, a tax break for medical expenses is one of the few remaining deductions available to individuals, since the new tax law in 2018. It’s limited to the amount that exceeds 10% of your adjusted gross income and you must itemize your deductions to take advantage of it. However, those with high medical bills can potentially reduce their taxes by applying it. To take the deduction, you must have taxable income to weigh it against. So, if much of your income is coming from a Roth IRA tax-free, you could be restricted in whether you can take advantage of the break. If you took money from an IRA (whose withdrawals are taxed as ordinary income) to cover those health costs, you could use the medical deduction against that withdrawal. This could result in paying less in taxes than what you had paid by rolling that money to a Roth.

Qualified charitable distributions. If you give money to charity each year, keeping money in your traditional IRA to make those donations could be wise, because contributions made through qualified charitable distributions—funds sent directly to the charity from a traditional IRA—are excluded from your taxable income. However, the tax break for charitable contributions can only be used if you itemize your deductions, and generally, a deduction isn’t as valuable as an income exclusion.

Note that this strategy is only available to IRA owners and beneficiaries who are age 70½ or older. Since that is the age when RMDs kick in, the move could reduce your tax liability on the RMD to zero. If your RMD is $5,000, but you give $5,000 to charity anyway, do the qualified charitable distribution, and you don’t have to pick up any of the income.

Business losses. These can only be claimed on your tax return, if you have income to claim them against.

General tax considerations. No matter your overall income, any amount that falls into each of seven defined brackets is taxed at a specific rate. Therefore, the more income you can get taxed at those lower rates, the better. If you could leave some money in the IRA to soak up some of those lower tax rates in the future, you may pay less in taxes on the money than if you converted it.

The current tax brackets and rates will go back to pre-2018 levels at the end of 2025, unless Congress takes action before that time. Therefore, while tax rates are low now, odds are good that they’ll be higher after 2025.

Reference: CNBC (November 27, 2019) “Moving all your IRA money to a Roth means losing some tax benefits”

Where Will Veterans Reside in the Next 25 Years?

Rebecca Burgess, who is an American Enterprise Institute expert on veterans, told a national audience at a conference earlier this year how expanding the VA’s health benefits made her question how geography and demographics impact perceptions from the public and politicians about veterans. However, she discovered that it's difficult to find good data on where veterans live or predict future residences.

"In fact, the more one tries to piece together a clear picture of veteran demographics, the less coherent the data seem to be," Burgess wrote in her study. "States, counties, and the federal government seem to arrive at different outcomes in terms of veteran numbers, even using the same projection model, VetPop 2016."

Military.com’s recent article, “These States Will Be the Most Popular for Veterans in the Next 25 Years,” explains that VetPop 2016, or "Veterans Population Projection Model 2016," is data from the VA that’s used by the agency and other groups, such as Congress, for policy planning and budgeting.

Burgess said she examined the VA's data and compared it to other sources, like the Census Bureau's American Community Survey. She found that the actuarial projections didn’t always agree. Burgess said that the VA's core data about veterans is nearly 20 years old and the Census Bureau stopped collecting veteran status data with the 2010 Census. However, she says, visualizing where vets will be over the next three decades will offer at least two benefits: providing the best idea of where VA resources will be most needed in the future and which congressional districts might see veteran policies soon become an electoral issue.

The VA has estimated that the overall veteran population will drop about 40% in 25 years. Burgess's research shows geographic population shifts, grouped by states and counties from 2015 to 2045.

Unlike the general shifts in the veteran population, with most veterans in the South and West, high numbers of Vietnam-era vets remain in the Northeast and Midwest—especially compared to the West. Already with the Gulf War and post–Gulf War veterans, the data shows higher numbers in the Southeast, but a good number (in the 240,000–300,000 range) who reside in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Post-9/11 vets are moving to Texas, but also going to Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia and Washington State

Burgess would like to see better data regarding the veteran’s demographics. She also said that the VA should develop an updated veteran population projection model, regardless of what the Census Bureau does.

Reference: Military.com (November 26, 2019) “These States Will Be the Most Popular for Veterans in the Next 25 Years”

What Don’t I Know About Retirement?

Investopedia’s recent article, “6 Surprising Facts About Retirement,” writes that if you think most people are saving more in order to prepare for their long-term needs, you’d be incorrect. The article provides us with some of the more startling truths about retirement in the U.S.

1. Retirement May Be Longer Than You Think. The average American will retire at age 66 and live until about 79. However, many will see their retirement last much longer than 13 years. A 65-year-old woman has a 50% chance of making it to age 85, and a 65-year-old man has a 50% chance of reaching age 82. This is why younger people need to plan for 20 years or more of income in retirement. For current retirees, an ultra-conservative portfolio composed solely of bonds may not give them sufficient growth, especially with interest rates so low.
2. Social Security Doesn’t Do It By Itself. Many experts suggest replacing 80% of your usual income once you hit retirement. However, for many, Social Security payments alone won’t be nearly enough to hit that target. In 2019, the average monthly Social Security benefit is just $1,461. That’s just $17,532 per year.
3. We’re Waaaay Behind on Savings. Americans are quite far behind on saving for retirement. When the American workplace turned away from pension plans, workers needed to be responsible for securing their retirement funds. We’re not doing it: according to thestreet.com, in 2019 a typical couple in the 56-to-61 age bracket without any retirement accounts had just $17,000 in savings. For many, that’s not enough to live off for a year, let alone a whole retirement. However, the mean retirement savings of working households age 32 to 61 is $95,776, according to the Economic Policy Institute. 35% of workers have $100,000 or more saved for retirement.
4. Just Half of Americans Have a Retirement Plan. Today, the median annual pension amount for the fast dwindling number of Americans who have the old-fashioned defined-benefit plan is less than $10,000, according to CNBC.com. However, many of us aren’t replacing those pensions with a contribution plan, like a 401(k). Almost half of the population (43%) has no workplace savings vehicle of any kind in 2019, according to Bloomberg.
5. Many People are Staying in the Workforce. Because so many Americans are behind in their savings, it may not be surprising that many remain in the workforce well after reaching Social Security eligibility. Almost 19% of people 65 or older were working either full- or part-time, as of 2017. Consider this: about 20% of workers overall say they’ll never be able to retire!
6. Medicare Doesn’t pay for Assisted Living. Nearly 70% of individuals who reach age 65 will require long-term care at some point. What many seniors don’t know, is that Medicare doesn’t pay for most long-term care costs. It only covers 100 days of care at a skilled nursing facility, and only if it was preceded by a hospital stay of three days or more.

Begin your analysis, by looking at the amount of money you’ll need for retirement, based on your current spending and the standard of living you want. Then look at your savings balances and how much you’re saving regularly.

Roughly 55% of Americans build their nest eggs with a regular savings account. However, that might not be good enough, because of the low interest rates. Savers should consider other investment vehicles.

Be sure that you’re maxing out contributions to your 401(k) or 403(b) if you have one, or at least, saving enough to get the company match. If you don’t have a plan through your work, or you’re lucky enough to max out your plan each year, you can supplement your savings with an IRA. For 2019, you can contribute up to $6,000 a year to an IRA, or $7,000 if you’re age 50 or older.

Reference: Investopedia (September 27, 2019) “6 Surprising Facts About Retirement”

Why is Ashton Kutcher So Stingy with his Kids’ Inheritance?

Ashton Kutcher said, "My kids are living a really privileged life, and they don't even know it.”

The actor has an estimated net worth of $200 million.

Business Insider’s recent article, “Ashton Kutcher says he's not setting up a trust fund for his kids, and his parenting approach echoes what billionaires like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have said,” reports that Kutcher's parenting approach is similar to other well-known wealthy individuals. Elton John, Sting and Simon Cowell have all revealed they don't plan to leave their children a lot of money. Instead, they plan to emphasize educating them on the value of hard work.

Likewise, many billionaires aren't leaving their children much money. For example, Bill Gates has announced that he would leave $10 million to each of his three children. That’s just a fraction of his $108 billion net worth.

In a 2013 Reddit "Ask Me Anything" forum, Gates said: "I definitely think leaving kids massive amounts of money is not a favor to them. Warren Buffett was part of an article in Fortune talking about this in 1986 before I met him, and it made me think about it and decide he was right."

Mr. Buffett said he has pledged 100% of his estimated $87.3 billion fortune to various charities. Instead of giving each of his three children millions or billions, he’s promised to give about $2.1 billion of Berkshire Hathaway stock to each of his children's charities.

Buffett's decision might arise from his views on dynastic wealth, or the pattern of families passing money down from one generation to the next. Buffet has been vocal about his efforts to decrease the vast wealth sitting in the hands of a few influential people.

"Dynastic wealth, the enemy of a meritocracy, is on the rise," Buffett said in 2007. "Equality of opportunity has been on the decline."

Older generations might consider restricting their children's access to family wealth because of highly visible heirs and so-called trust-fund babies, who show off their wealth on social media. Parents may want to include provisions to ensure that any trust can be modified in the future.

Reference: Business Insider (November 10, 2019) “Ashton Kutcher says he's not setting up a trust fund for his kids, and his parenting approach echoes what billionaires like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have said”