Welcome back to Portfolio Rescue. Portfolio Rescue here is the Ask the Compound show at gmail.com. Today's show is sponsored by Innovator ETFs. Duncan, this is an interesting one. It came out hot off the presses, a new ETF from Innovator ETFs that actually allows you to hedge an individual stock position.

They do Tesla on a quarterly basis. You could buy this TSLH, and it caps your losses at 10% per quarter, and it also caps your gains at right around 10%. If you say, "I want to invest in Tesla, but I cannot handle the volatility," because I think the volatility is three to four times that of the S&P 500.

You say, "I want to invest in this company, but I can't handle it," you're actually protected, and your floor of losses is 10%. Of course, it caps you on the upside, too. They're using options to do this at Innovator ETFs. It's really interesting, the fact that you can do this.

A lot of the money is actually invested in T-bills, and then the rest is invested in options on Tesla. Basically, help you contain those really deep drawdowns, because obviously some of these individual stocks can do that, and take a little bit of advantage of their growth. What do you think?

That's pretty cool. It's like your own little hedge fund, kind of sounds like. Yes, it really is. The stuff that they're able to do these days with options and ETFs that we just couldn't do in the past is pretty interesting. If you want to learn more, go to InnovatorETFs.com.

We got a lot of good questions. I just want to start out with one for you today, Duncan. Just some housekeeping here. Next week, we're not going to have a show. A lot of people at the compound are taking some vacations. I'm going up to God's Country in Northern Michigan for a few days.

I'm going to go to Mackinac Island, the place where you take a ferry there, and then no cars. It's only horse and carriage. You ever heard of this place? I have not heard of this. It's got a lot of history, a lot of tourists there. It's good for about one day.

Duncan is going on his honeymoon. Here's my question for you, Duncan. You're going over to London. What are you most looking forward to spending your money on? Because I think it's important for people to spend their money on things they enjoy. You're going on your honeymoon. What are you most looking forward to spending your money on?

That's a tough one. Food, beverages? Probably the food. We were talking in the chat with some people a week or two ago, but London is the vegan capital of the world, pretty much. Oh, really? There's going to be all kinds of great food that I'm looking forward to. What are the big tourist attractions you're going to go see?

I'm going to see the Tower Bridge. I'm a big Whistler fan, so I want to go see where he painted a couple of scenes around the city. Then we're going to Liverpool for a night. We're going to Glasgow and Edinburgh. I'm Scottish on one side of my family, so I'm going to go connect with my homeland kind of stuff.

It should be fun. Cool. All right. You've seen National Lapoon's European Vacation? I don't think so, actually. Look, kids, Big Ben. They get stuck in a circle looking at Big Ben over and over. No, I haven't seen that. Put it on your airplane list. All right. No show next week.

We'll be back the following week. We're all taking some vacation here. Let's get right into it and do a quick question. First up today, many are saying -- this kind of made me laugh, because isn't this what Trump always said? Many are saying that real estate is the only way to get a real return in a safe manner.

Will you post some data on real estate versus bonds versus stocks? Intuitively, this one makes sense. I've talked in the past about how real estate is a good hedge against inflation if you have a fixed rate mortgage. But even going beyond that, if you think about the fact that when inflation is spiking higher, materials costs go up because the cost of commodities are going up and then wages go up.

So if you think the cost of building a house is up because material costs are up and wages are up for construction workers, that would make sense that houses now are more expensive, but also the house that you own in relation is probably worth more just to meet that level.

So that makes sense. But let's dig into the numbers, because I've looked at this through stocks before in the past. So if we look at -- I got data from 1928 to 1921 from Robert Shiller. So the annual nominal returns for stocks and bonds is like 10 percent. Bonds is 4.8 percent and housing is 4.1 percent.

Now, this shows what happens when inflation is rising or falling from one year to the next. You can see when inflation is rising from one year to the next, stock and bond returns are below average. Housing is above average. When inflation is falling, stock and bond returns are above average and housing is below average.

Same thing. Inflation I put here at above or below average is 3 percent because that's a long term, like a hundred year average. And kind of the same thing for stocks and housing. Inflation is above average. Stocks do poorly. Housing does well. Inflation is below average. Stocks do well.

Housing does poorly. Bonds are a little different. I think the biggest reason for bonds when inflation is above 3 percent doing better is because in the 80s and 90s rates were so high and inflation was actually a little higher. So this actually bears out. When inflation is falling below average, stocks outperform the long term averages.

When inflation is rising and above average, housing outperforms long term averages. Now, these are nominal returns. Let's look at it by an inflation regime. So, John, focus next chart. This shows by decade on a real basis what the annual returns were for stocks, bonds and housing. Stocks is the S&P 500.

Bonds is 10 year treasuries and housing is the Case-Shiller data, which he has going back to like the 1800s. But you can see on a real basis when inflation has been high, 1940s inflation was 5.5 percent. Housing had the best real returns of any decade. 70s inflation was 7 percent.

Housing outperformed by 1.3 percent when stocks and bonds were down on a real basis. This doesn't always work because in the 2010s inflation was very low and housing still did well. But that probably says more about the timing than anything, because that's when the housing market bottomed pretty much.

So housing is a really good inflation hedge. Now, here's the caveat this time around. There may have been so much pull forward. I don't know if it's going to work going forward from here. So I looked at the decades, the 30s through the 2010s. So if we look at just the 2020s.

So it's 2020 to Robert Shiller's data is only updated through February of 2022. He's a little slow, frankly, for my taste in updating his data. But he's a Nobel Prize winner. He's got other stuff to do. So in those 26 months on a real basis after inflation, housing is up 21 percent.

That's higher than seven out of the last nine decades in just a little over two years. So we've already had an enormous gain above inflation for housing. And so bigger than anything we've ever seen in that shorter period of time. And and so you could say it's about inflation.

A lot of it is probably more about the pandemic and demographics and household formation. But it's hard to see it going forward, keeping that that inflation hedge. But yes, housing historically has been a very good inflation hedge. You know what has not seemed to be that great of an inflation hedge is the housing stocks like Zillow and Redfin.

You guys on Animal Spirits were talking about that. Redfin is down like 92 percent. Zillow, yeah, was down 70 or 80 percent. This is why I like the disconnect between corporations in the stock market versus the real thing in housing. It's not even close to the same thing. Right.

But yeah. But an individual house, if you're and if you're someone who's doing this on, like if this person is thinking in terms of rentals, obviously you can raise your rent as well. So that that's what makes housing. It's that imputed rent. That's a big thing, too. So, yeah.

And some people enjoy being a landlord. Right. Yeah, I wouldn't personally, but I don't think I would. Yeah. All right. Let's do another one. OK. So up next, we have a question from Michael and some people might recognize this one from what are your thoughts, but we're doing a deeper dive.

As a long term investor with a 10 to 20 year horizon, is it a good idea to sell portions of a stock when it's up and take some profits, maybe reinvest when the price goes down or just pocket the gains? Or is it best to stay all in regardless of the ups and downs?

This question is basically asking, should I rebalance? Right. Should I take a little of what's done well and trim a little bit, take some profits? What's the quote? No one's ever gone broke taking a profit. Right. I think Kramer says that it's a it's a trader thing to say.

It sounds it sounds intelligent or just let things ride and just go with it. Obviously, there's a difference between individual stocks and owning the market as a whole. So William Bernstein wrote the original blog post way back in the day. This is from like 1996 and his blog called The Efficient Frontier.

And he wrote this post called The Rebalancing Bonus. And he calculated that the bump in return from rebalancing, looking at it, look at how old this is. William Bernstein was like the OG financial blogger. He wrote this way back in the day. By far my favorite financial writer of anyone.

I've learned more from him than I have from anyone, I think, in the in the investing world. So he calculated the bump in returns from rebalancing your portfolio is like point five percent annually, which doesn't sound like a lot. But over the over the long term compounds pretty well.

The way that I look at it is the reason that you diversify in the first place and set an asset allocation is because it matches your risk profile and your time horizon and kind of gives you a portfolio you can stick with over the long term. So why set an asset allocation in the first place if you're not going to rebalance over some time frame?

Right. And even if rebalancing doesn't provide some sort of bonus over time, because sometimes the timing could be off. It's a way to control for risk. Unfortunately, the reason that you rebalance in the first place is because nothing grows to the sky. Right. Markets are always in forever cyclical.

Things go up, things go down. And that's why you rebalance, because nothing that nothing works forever. Right. Tech stocks. Everyone said, why don't I put all my tech stocks for 10 years and then look what happened on the other side of that. You want to take some of those profits eventually by selling a little bit of what's gone well, buying a little bit what hasn't gone well and putting it back into into sort of symbiosis in your portfolio.

Now, the problem with the regression to meet regression to the mean as a concept is it sounds beautiful until you actually look at the data, because sometimes it just doesn't work. It doesn't follow a set pattern. So I looked at the 10 best and 10 worst years in the stock market history.

So, John, pull up the 10 best. This is the 10 best years since 1926. And what I did was I looked at the prior year and then the following year to see what happens. You can see sometimes the best years are followed by some really bad years. So 1975, that was following a really nasty turn in 73 and 74.

1958 was followed by it was following an 11 percent down draft. But sometimes those best returns come after a really good return. So in the 1920s, you had a really good return. It was followed up by an even better return. Right. Sometimes after a really good return, you see a nasty loss.

Right. 1936 was really good. 1937 was a crash. 1945 was really good. Then you had an 8 percent downturn. Same thing for 1928. And then sometimes you have a really good return that just keeps going up. So it's kind of the same thing in the worst year. So, John, put the chart on the worst years.

Right. So these are the 10 worst years since 1926. See, sometimes they follow a really good year. Sometimes they follow bad years. Sometimes those really bad years are followed by good years. Sometimes they're followed by even worse years. Duncan, can you imagine? So these are like the who's who of worst returns ever.

So this year, let's say the stock market is down 15 to 20 percent, depending on what day you're looking at. Right. And what what time frame you're looking at. So let's say we finish the year down 15 percent. Can you imagine being down 20 percent again next year like that?

It's rare for it to happen, but it's not out of the realm of possibilities. It happens on occasion. There are times when you can have two double digit down years in a row, maybe three down years in a row. It's not. But so the problem is, there's no pattern.

So the question is, I'm going to rebalance. What is my interval? And the answer is, it doesn't matter. You could do semi annually. You could rebalance on an annual basis. You could even wait two to three years sometimes to allow momentum to take effect. The problem is or you could do the bands.

You say, I'm going to let my asset weights go 5 percent or 10 percent outside of their band. So if I say 50 percent allocation to U.S. stocks, if it goes to 45, I'm going to buy. If it goes to 55, I'm going to sell. The thing is, whatever you choose, you just have to pick a strategy that you're going to follow without hesitation.

And probably you should probably automate it, whatever one you choose, because sometimes rebalancing is going to make you look a genius and you're going to you're going to buy stocks and they're down. Sometimes you're going to sell stocks when they're up and then they keep going up. So the thing is, you just have to kind of be consistent and stick with it.

And again, with individual stocks, all bets are off the table as far as regression to the mean. It doesn't work quite as easily or quite as good. So yeah, probably taking profits there makes more sense. But I think if you can find a fund or a strategy that automatically rebalances, that's probably the best case scenario.

Yeah, I think also the individual and what their goals are, it matters so much for this. You're obviously not necessarily talking about a college student who took $50 and doubled it on Robinhood or something. That's a little different scenario than, "Oh, should I take profits?" Are there certain stock picks that you could say, "This is going to be a buy and hold forever"?

That's fine. But just the point is to set that strategy ahead of time and don't try to figure it out when it's happening. If your stock is down 50% today and you said, "Well, it's a buy and hold forever when I bought it." Now today you go, "Eh, maybe I should sell and rebalance." That's the problem, is wavering and going back.

That doesn't mean you can't change your mind, but it's just important to have a strategy going into it. Even a bad plan is better than no plan at all, is what I say. All right, let's do another one. Okay. Also, someone complained about me saying, "Okay," too much. It's a transition.

You and Michael were talking about transitions yesterday on Animal Spirits. It's my transition as we're waiting on the next question to pop up. So, chill out. It's okay. Next up, we have, "Hi, Ben. In early January my portfolio was $150,000. In February I received $200,000 and did a lump sum investment into an index fund.

Now I'm down 25%. Can I still reach my goal in 20 years from now, or did I make a mistake?" The important thing is here, nice job for you for more than doubling your portfolio with some sort of inheritance or bonus or whatever it is. Twenty years is a long time.

I want to talk about process over outcome. So, there's this book, The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg. It's seven or eight years old, probably. One of the better non-fiction books I've read in a while. He had this chapter on Tony Dungy. He was a former coach at the Tampa Bay Bucs, then he went on to win a Super Bowl in Indianapolis Colts.

He talked about how when he first got to the Bucs, they were like a laughingstock. They were a terrible team. What he tried to instill in them was this idea of process over outcomes. Every day in practice, they would do the same thing over and over again. They said, "We don't care what everyone else does.

We're going to do what we do, and we're going to do it well." Then they would get into the games, and that's stuff that they tried to hammer home in practice that guys wouldn't do. He'd ask his team, "You did this in practice every single day. Why did you do something different in the game?" The players would be like, "Well, I kind of felt like I had to step it up, and I had to really try harder.

It was a critical play, so I went back to my gut instinct." He said, "No, no. This is the quote." What they were really saying was, they trusted our system most of the time, but everything was on the line. That belief broke down. I think thinking in terms of process over outcomes is really important when investing.

You can't be outcome-oriented. Obviously, unfortunately, there is a scoreboard there. You can see, if you make a decision in an investment, you buy something, you sell something, you can see that you're either happy about it, or you regret it, or whatever, because that scoreboard is there. I think making these decisions like that, you use probabilities.

If you decided that a lump sum was the best one for you, a decision at the time, I don't think you can say, "The stock market fell, so it was the wrong decision." I did this little list of what it means to be a process-oriented investor. I did a blog post about this in the past, and I kind of summarized it here.

I think being process-oriented means that you diagnose problems before you prescribe solutions. A lot of people don't do this. They say, "This is exactly what you need to invest in right now, no matter what." I think that you can't give that advice to everyone. I think you have to focus on the present as opposed to fighting the last war.

I think a lot of investors do that, and that's probably going to happen with inflation in the years ahead. People are going to be creating portfolios to fight inflation for years and years, even after it goes away or comes down. I think you have to have a plan in place instead of just having tactics.

I think tactics sound great in the moment, and most of the time, they're useless unless they're not in the concert of a whole plan. They're usually, it seems like they're reactionary, usually, right? Yes. I don't think, that's not the way that you want to invest. Not everyone here is a hedge fund manager, right?

Then I think you have to define your investing philosophy before implementing specific investment strategies. Again, I think if you decided at the time, "This was the best move for me," I don't think you can say, "The stock market goes up 20%, I was right. If it goes down 20%, I was wrong." Again, if you have 20 years, so my most famous blog post is about a guy named Bob who invested at the peak of the market every time.

He made four invests over the course of his 40 years, and every one of them was at a peak. He still retired with a million dollars because he kept his money in. I think as long as you keep that 20-year time horizon in the stock market, even though you did it right before a bear market, you're going to be fine.

You just have to wait it out a little. Patience is the ultimate equalizer when it comes to investing. Yes. It's something that is so personality-driven. I think it's hard for some people to wrap their heads around. Yes, it feels bad. When you're beyond or whatever, drops 50% over the course of a couple of months, you want to start making a bunch of moves and that kind of thing.

In hindsight, I probably should have. Anyway, for the sake of the point, it's not necessarily the best option to be changing up your thesis every time a stock drops. Unfortunately, there's no 0% or 100% when it comes to investing. There's no always or whatever. It's always somewhere in between.

You just try to make high-probability bets as much as you can. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But I think that doesn't mean you give up on it because it's a high-probability bet and it didn't work out once. That's why I only pick winners now. That's easy. Up next, we have a question from Greg.

"My wife has a six-figure IRA recently converted from an employer's 401(k). She won't be obligated to take RMDs, that's Required Minimum Distributions." Is that right? Lewis: That's right. You got it. "She won't be required to take those anytime soon, but in the interest of minimizing taxes over the long haul, would it make sense to transfer in kind some portion of the IRA balance into a taxable account and take the taxable income hit now, while the IRA's investment value -- target-day funds -- has been substantially reduced by the bear market?" Lewis: Let's bring in everyone's favorite tax advisor for this one, Bill Sweet.

Bill, not many investors are looking to pay taxes ahead of schedule. Is a bear market the only time to do this, or do you simply allow those tax deferrals to compound and say, "Okay, I see what you're trying to do. You're trying to game the system, but it probably doesn't matter if you have a certain time horizon." Yeah, this is a great question from Mr.

Fitz, but I want to start with where you guys started the show, talking about ferries to private islands, horses and carriages, Big Ben Parliament. Once again, with this Midwestern bias, looking down at us humble, purple-collar workers here in New York City, it hurts. Lewis: Hey, I'm saying, Mackinac Island, you would like it, because it used to actually be a fort.

There's a lot of military history there. You're coming out of this. Well, now you're speaking my language. Yeah, a lot going on there in the French and Indian Wars. But no, I love this idea from Mr. Fitz, and I hate to just twist everything and take a listener's question and just modify it based on what I want to talk to, but I'm going to do exactly that right now.

Ben, what's the tattoo on my back? Roth IRA. Roth IRA conversion. Why would you take assets in a tax-deferred account and convert them into taxable future dollars if you don't need the money right now, right? So this, to me, Mr. Fitz, this is the perfect scenario for a Roth IRA conversion, so let's talk about it.

As you know, if we have a traditional IRA, a traditional 401(k), that is tax-deferred, right? You do not pay tax on any of that income until you distribute it out of the account, and that's what Mr. Fitz is contemplating here. What Roth conversions allow you to do is time when the taxes happen.

Maybe you want to pay some of that tax now, as Mr. Fitz said, for one of two reasons. Let's say the market's declined. That's a pretty good reason to me if you expect to have a rebound in the future, or if your tax rate is low now, you expect it to be maybe a little higher later.

That makes a lot of sense to me. And Ben, what has the last six months of investing been for your average investor? It's not been a fun time, right? Not great. Yeah, so I think this is a great opportunity for Mr. Fitz. And to sort of illustrate why, John, let's go to the charts, man.

Let's do this thing. So this is a very quick scenario that I want to illustrate of, let's just say, a half-million-dollar account divided by 10 if you have 50,000, multiply it times 10 if you're very fortunate. The math still works. So let's just say from 2021 to now, we had a 20% decline, right?

I think that's more or less the median account, given what's happened here in the last year. And now we're 20% lower. So now we have this opportunity to convert. But let's say we don't convert. I want to lay that scenario out first. And then five years from now, just for hypothetical reasons, we distribute all the assets.

What happens? Our account grows to $644,000. We have to eat $230,000 of deferred tax. That's $400,000 net after tax, right? Not a terrible deal in the grand scheme of things. Let's flip over to chart two. So all the same investment returns. The conditions are the same. The difference in this scenario is you convert half of the assets.

You basically take $200,000 of your $400,000, you pay the tax now, you eat some of that now by $80,000, and then you distribute the entire balance again to get an apples-to-apples comparison after five years. You have now increased your after-tax return by almost 21% just by leveraging the tax code.

All right. So my wife has a 401(k). She's been sitting on it for a while. I need to roll it over. I just haven't done it because inertia. So we need you to run the numbers for me on whether that makes sense when I roll it over to do a Roth conversion, or at least partial Roth conversion, right?

I'll pay those taxes. We'll show you in the next episode. What I would need to know is how much is this private island costing you? That's the key question that I would need to understand. That's the key thing. I can't believe I missed this one. So the Roth is a way better option than going to some sort of taxable account?

Yeah, definitely. Definitely. And this is a very common theme. I mean, nine out of 10 questions, right, that I end up answering this show have to do with Roth conversions. So hence the tattoo. All right. How long until they crack down and stop this? Because it sounds too good to be true.

I'm glad you asked that, Duncan. The answer to that is coming up later. But yeah, that was actually something that we were nervous about, that they would basically sort of stop this, particularly for high-income taxpayers. But it looks like the answer is no time soon. OK. All right. You're not going to believe this, though.

This next question is about Roth IRAs. People love their Roth. Yeah, me too. All right. Up next, we have a question from Austin. "I'm 25 and fortunate to max out my Roth 401(k), HSA, and Roth IRA contributions each year through Vanguard, who is also my employer. I have $35,000 in pre-tax 401(k) holdings and $40,000 in a Roth.

How can I best transition into more Roth exposure, especially in the IRA, since I plan to use these funds for first-time home purchases or expenses and a future college fund? Would converting traditional 401(k) to a traditional IRA and using a backdoor Roth conversion be the best option during this downturn?

I understand five years is needed prior to withdrawal for backdoor route." First of all, Austin is my personal finance hero. He's a boglehead. He's maxing out his retirement accounts. I just want to remind Austin to enjoy some of your money, too. Don't save it all. But really nicely done at 25.

Bill, since you're third born, is going to be named Roth Suite. I'm sure you can get on board with this one. But when do you think it's a good strategy to use Roth for these types of goals? So they're talking about first-time home expenses and future college funds. Does that make sense?

Because I know you can take the contributions out tax-free. Is that a good savings vehicle for something like that? Yeah, it's interesting because it's really flexible. And I think that's the key benefit that you would have of using that in that, you're right, Ben, any basis that you have in a Roth IRA of your contributions, conversions are a little different.

I'm going to talk about that in a second. But your contributions, you can access those completely income tax-free due to the very favorable ordering of how Roth IRA distributions occur on the tax code. I don't want to get too much into the details, but the idea is you can always get your basis back tax-free.

And so if you use it for a home purchase, if you use those assets for a college or any other expense that you end up not paying any tax, you just have to leave the earnings alone. I think that's the key thing to think about. But time value of money, we do expect assets to appreciate over time.

I don't think it's a bad strategy. The problem is if you have other tax advantage vehicles, I think you should consider those. I think I would use the Roth distribution as a plan, as a backstop, because ultimately that future tax-free compounding is very, very valuable. And as the taxpayer is realizing, it's hard to get assets into Roth.

That's difficult. I have a couple of ideas for them, though, to talk about. But does that answer that question, Ben, that you asked about? Yeah. How? What are you thinking? So the first thing I would think about is like, look, we just went through the benefits of conversion, right?

We don't have to discuss that anymore. I think in a down market and if you expect assets to rebound, you have a good thing going there. Let's talk about what we've in the past referred to super, mega, ultra, pick your moniker, Roth 401(k)s. And so $20,500 is the 402(g) salary deferral limit in 401(k) plans.

However, there's another limit, $61,000, that applies to all the contributions, including your employer match. Vanguard, great company, great partner to Ritholtz Wealth Management. I'm a company man. We are big fans of Vanguard. Ben, has any company, I think, done more to kind of change the investing world than Vanguard?

They're at the top of my list. No. I love Vanguard, yes. They've saved investors countless billions of dollars over the years, trillions maybe. I don't know. It's, yes. John Vogel is a saint. Yeah, more so the impact on, yeah, on, and they should be sponsoring Portfolio Rescue. We need to have a chat with the marketing folks.

But moving that aside, the, some certain plans, certain 401(k) plans do allow you to contribute up to that $61,000 limit in excess of your salary deferral limit. The mechanics are a little funky, but the idea is if you can fund up to that 61(k), you do that, you immediately convert those assets to a Roth 401(k) if that's allowed, and now you've more or less tripled your 401(k) contribution every year.

And the added benefit is that additional after-tax money, if you roll it over quickly, can be completely tax-deferred into a Roth, and then you can roll that into IRA. It's a really super-charged way. Not every plan offers it. I would sort of look at the Vanguard SPD to see if it's allowed.

Given how smart Vanguard is, I would guess that it's allowed. So I would point the taxpayer in that direction. That's a great way to supercharge. The other quick answers, though, for college expenses, 529s are great. I'm in New York State. I get a $10,000 a year tax deduction if I max fund a 529.

Many states offer that. And then all of the distributions are completely tax-free. You don't have to worry about threading the needle with things like, "What is my basis in this Roth?" which is very difficult when you get to the distribution phase. My eight-year-old tells me she's going to become a YouTube influencer someday, so she doesn't need a college fund anymore.

Wow. That's aggressive. I would advise her to have a backup plan. Maybe get a CFA or something like that. Duncan asked about the Roth stuff potentially going on. I've heard that for years from people at WURT worried about that. So we had a surprise bill from the Democrats yesterday that included some tax provisions.

Anything big or interesting to note in their bill? Yeah. So again, I think, Duncan, to answer your question before, this is what I was alluding to. The proposal, and it's just a proposal, we do have text that came out last night. You bet your bottom dollar, me and Bill Arts and our new hire, Tariq Silliman, were digging into that thing and chewing it up for breakfast.

But it's more known that this bill, which it's a slimmed-down version of the Build Back Better bill. I think it's Build Back Biden, Build Back Better Back brought to you by the National Association of Chiropractors. This new bill is a very small version of it, and it's mostly what's not in the bill that's interesting.

It does not extend SALT. It does not extend net investment income tax. It does not tax unrealized capital gains. It does not tax corporate buybacks, and it does not alter the Roth IRA framework, which is probably good for investors who want to use this. A couple of neat goodies.

It does extend Obamacare ACA subsidies for another couple of years. Taxpayers are probably looking at a 10 percent increase instead of a 30 or 40 percent increase, so that's great for the 14 million Americans who are participating there. Interesting thing, electric vehicle extension credits, but these new ones are income-limited, and that's interesting.

Energy credits for your house, a couple of goodies here, but a lot of the more pernicious changes happen on the corporate side, which is probably not the purview of your average portfolio rescue listener. Nothing huge as far as taxes go for individuals. No, and I think compared to the Secure Act of 2019 compared to TCGA in 2017, I wouldn't say it's a snoozer, but not a lot of headlines here if you're not planning on buying an electric vehicle.

No help for homeowners on the coasts, right, for the SALT tax? Yeah, and Joe Manchin very much against private island trade that's coming out of pocket for the Carlson family. Hey, I live in a flyover state where housing is actually affordable. Midwest bias, again, Midwest bias, just raining down on us.

Sounds like a dream. All right. Reminder, remember, again, next week, no show. Duncan's going to be Abbey Road. No nothing except for Animal Spirits next week, right? Animal Spirits will be the only thing. We'll be carrying the compound next week. Duncan's going to be gone. I'm going to be gone.

Private Island tweets and tweets of Duncan swinging from Big Ben. Is it still 1,000 degrees in the UK right now? I think it is. Yeah. Wow. Good luck with that. Duncan, have fun spending some money over there. If you're listening in podcast form, give us a review on YouTube.

Leave us a comment. Leave us a question. Maybe we'll use it on a future show. If you want to email us, askthecompoundshow@gmail.com. For some of that compound merch, idontshop.com. Remember, there's the Ben doesn't drink coffee mug. Still never had a cup in my life. It's not changing. Keep those comments and questions coming.

We're going to change that one day. We'll see you in-- Maybe at Future Proof. Will you drink a cup of coffee at Future Proof maybe? Never. I've got to keep my ref up, Duncan. I can't say that anymore. At this point, I'm just-- Yeah, that would be like me not pitching a Roth ARE conversion.

It ain't happening. That's true. All right. Thanks, everyone. We'll see you in a couple of weeks. See you, everyone. you