ice9, you are young enough that it is very likely that “CA’s Proposition 13” (which protects CA parcels from being assessed at more than 2% over the previous tax year) may very well be repealed in full or piecemeal by the time you are ready to “semi-retire” or retire.

The major voting demographic that derives the most benefit from Prop 13 are aging and dying off. These are purchasers prior to April 1978 who still own the same parcels today (and/or their direct descendants/heirs).

There is even less public support for Prop 13’s more recent “progeny,” Proposition 58, which in part provides that these same owners’ property tax basis be transferred to their children or grandchildren by filing any form of familial transfer deed in their favor, either before or upon death. These (very often younger, able-bodied and high-earning) heirs/descendants are enjoying an artificially-low property tax rate that that would not otherwise be available to them had they acquired the same property by means other than a familial transfer deed or “quitclaim deed” from a parent/grandparent.

If you are counting on low property taxes in CA to help provide you a reasonable cost of living in retirement in 2030 and beyond, I feel you may end up having to rethink this current “perk.” The present state of CA’s current finances are VERY precarious at present, verging on bankruptcy. I have no doubt our Legislature will eventually seek and find every way to keep the state’s dwindling coffers funded.

ice9, you are young enough that it is very likely that “CA’s Proposition 13” (which protects CA parcels from being assessed at more than 2% over the previous tax year) may very well be repealed in full or piecemeal by the time you are ready to “semi-retire” or retire.

The major voting demographic that derives the most benefit from Prop 13 are aging and dying off. These are purchasers prior to April 1978 who still own the same parcels today (and/or their direct descendants/heirs).

There is even less public support for Prop 13’s more recent “progeny,” Proposition 58, which in part provides that these same owners’ property tax basis be transferred to their children or grandchildren by filing any form of familial transfer deed in their favor, either before or upon death. These (very often younger, able-bodied and high-earning) heirs/descendants are enjoying an artificially-low property tax rate that that would not otherwise be available to them had they acquired the same property by means other than a familial transfer deed or “quitclaim deed” from a parent/grandparent.

If you are counting on low property taxes in CA to help provide you a reasonable cost of living in retirement in 2030 and beyond, I feel you may end up having to rethink this current “perk.” The present state of CA’s current finances are VERY precarious at present, verging on bankruptcy. I have no doubt our Legislature will eventually seek and find every way to keep the state’s dwindling coffers funded.

[quote]
Savings: 375K 401K, 650K stocks, 50K cash, 100K home equity
[/quote]

With all due respect, I think CA is quite expensive and with the numbers you provided, I don’t think you could retire in CA at 39 and live “comfortably”

First off, you cant liquidate your 401k without a penalty until you are 65.

Second, 650k in stock, I’m assuming you would have to pay taxes on gain. So it’s not really 650k, not to mention that if you relocate to CA, you would be paying extra taxes on that.

Third, 100k equity…Unless you plan on selling or unless you can cash flow, you won’t be able to touch this either.

Fourth: 50k cash isn’t nearly enough of a cash reserve if you are going to be “retired”.

[quote]
* if my income is mostly dividends, I’ll pay no federal tax. State tax isn’t too bad, as my income will not be high.
[/quote]

Um… That isn’t true…Either that, or you have a very creative accountant.

[quote]
Number Children: 1 (< 1 year old) [/quote] Do you have any idea how much it's going to cost you to raise your child from 1 year to sending him/her to college? Sorry, but the numbers don't seem to add up here in CA especially because (a) your age (b) the age of your family (just starting out) (c) your home expenses (you don't own your home outright and you will either have to rent or buy in CA). (d) your medical expenses moving forward with you + spouse + kid Perhaps, the question you should ask folks here is how much you think you need to have to retire in CA at 39, married, with one kid...

[quote]
Savings: 375K 401K, 650K stocks, 50K cash, 100K home equity
[/quote]

With all due respect, I think CA is quite expensive and with the numbers you provided, I don’t think you could retire in CA at 39 and live “comfortably”

First off, you cant liquidate your 401k without a penalty until you are 65.

Second, 650k in stock, I’m assuming you would have to pay taxes on gain. So it’s not really 650k, not to mention that if you relocate to CA, you would be paying extra taxes on that.

Third, 100k equity…Unless you plan on selling or unless you can cash flow, you won’t be able to touch this either.

Fourth: 50k cash isn’t nearly enough of a cash reserve if you are going to be “retired”.

[quote]
* if my income is mostly dividends, I’ll pay no federal tax. State tax isn’t too bad, as my income will not be high.
[/quote]

Um… That isn’t true…Either that, or you have a very creative accountant.

[quote]
Number Children: 1 (< 1 year old) [/quote] Do you have any idea how much it's going to cost you to raise your child from 1 year to sending him/her to college? Sorry, but the numbers don't seem to add up here in CA especially because (a) your age (b) the age of your family (just starting out) (c) your home expenses (you don't own your home outright and you will either have to rent or buy in CA). (d) your medical expenses moving forward with you + spouse + kid Perhaps, the question you should ask folks here is how much you think you need to have to retire in CA at 39, married, with one kid...

[quote]
Savings: 375K 401K, 650K stocks, 50K cash, 100K home equity
[/quote]

With all due respect, I think CA is quite expensive and with the numbers you provided, I don’t think you could retire in CA at 39 and live “comfortably”

First off, you cant liquidate your 401k without a penalty until you are 65.

Second, 650k in stock, I’m assuming you would have to pay taxes on gain. So it’s not really 650k, not to mention that if you relocate to CA, you would be paying extra taxes on that.

Third, 100k equity…Unless you plan on selling or unless you can cash flow, you won’t be able to touch this either.

Fourth: 50k cash isn’t nearly enough of a cash reserve if you are going to be “retired”.

[quote]
* if my income is mostly dividends, I’ll pay no federal tax. State tax isn’t too bad, as my income will not be high.
[/quote]

Um… That isn’t true…Either that, or you have a very creative accountant.

[quote]
Number Children: 1 (< 1 year old) [/quote] Do you have any idea how much it's going to cost you to raise your child from 1 year to sending him/her to college? Sorry, but the numbers don't seem to add up here in CA especially because (a) your age (b) the age of your family (just starting out) (c) your home expenses (you don't own your home outright and you will either have to rent or buy in CA). (d) your medical expenses moving forward with you + spouse + kid Perhaps, the question you should ask folks here is how much you think you need to have to retire in CA at 39, married, with one kid...