When discussing estate planning, and especially estate tax, you have to include the home equity.
But when discussing retirement planning, I specifically exclude it, for all the reasons mentioned above. (Again, unless the client has both the ability and desire to downsize and monetize their home equity.)
I think the OP (as stupid as he is) is trying to use the term “net worth” as a big-dick competition. And if that’s the case, I think you should remove home equity from net worth.
good point but a car depreciates in value. a house on the other hand appreciates in value. majority of americans have the house as the majority of their net worth.
No offense, but not a good point. As has been said multiple times in this thread, it’s the EQUITY in the home that should count, not the total value of the home. Therefore, it’s the EQUITY in the car that should be added to net worth, not the total value. Yes, the car depreciates, but that’s why the net worth calculation is a snap shot in time, as is the balance sheet of a company.
I’d just like to state, again, this thread is possibly the most embarrassing thread in the history of AF. And I’ve seen some really, really stupid stuff on here.
“HNWIs are defined as those having investable assets of US$1million or more, excluding primary residence, collectibles, consumables, and consumer durables.”
Where do you fall in this scale? The numbers seem about 30% too low, based on my experience, but maybe since it’s 2017, a lot of people from DB brought down the London average.
btw are 401k included in net worth? if so how do you calculate the value…
do you calculate the future value and discount to today or take current value and apply early withdrawal and taxes to get the actual amount you can draw today?