A Greenleaf Trust Newsletter

september 2011

volume 20, issue 9

Does a Balanced Budget Amendment Make Sense?

William D. Johnston President, Greenleaf Trust

Limited Safety in Numbers

5

The “Pro-Rata Rule” and Your IRA

6

Wealth is in the Eye of the Beholder

8

15 Things Every Employee Should Know About Their Retirement Plan

10

Have You Seen Our New Website? 11 Greenleaf Trust 3rd Quarter Investment Seminars

11

Last month I promised that we would devote some time to examining the concept of a balanced budget amendment, and the economic impact of enacting one. As always, what appears as an economic concept tool has many historical and political aspects, as well as calculation issues. Let’s start with the historical and move to the political. Balanced budget amendments have been a part of Constitutional debates since the Articles of Confederation granted the Continental Congress the power to “Borrow money, or emit bills on the credit of the United States, transmitting every half-year to the states an account of the sums of money borrowed or emitted.” It was this model that eventually created Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 of the Constitution, which grants to Congress the power to “Borrow money on the credit of the United States.” Our country’s early history was full of debate about the necessity to borrow money. In 1798, Thomas Jefferson lamented that the need to borrow money to pay for war expenses would in the future enable more wars. Was it the deficit or war that he lamented? Probably both — however, when the purchase of the Louisiana territory became a possibility, he quickly embraced the deficit necessary to finance the purchase. This political conflict in the debate over deficits is a constant. Ideology is always tested in the harsh light of reality. It was true in the 1700s, and it is true today. Our country was founded on principles designed to protect citizens from overreaching government. Our Founding Fathers had the dual responsibility of establishing government for the collective good while simultaneously fearing granting powers that could be abused. The principle of a balanced budget is easy to cling to, and is often used in symmetry with arguments aligned with individual and small business budgets. “We must live within our income,” “you can’t spend what you

  page 2

Balanced Budget, continued

“…the reality — based upon actual evidence — is that we have had five Republican Presidents and four Democratic Presidents, as well as various party control advantages across both houses of Congress, during this 45year deficit accumulation legacy. Neither party can lay claim to greater fiscal responsibility than the other.”

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

don’t have,” “We are mortgaging our children’s future,” are only some of the parallels those in favor of balanced budgets draw from. During and after the ratification, on July 9th, 1868, of Section 4 of the 14th Amendment allowing for the validity of public debt for pensions, bounties, services, the suppression of insurrection or rebellion, many legislators have proposed one or more forms of balanced budget reforms. As referenced in earlier Perspectives issues, the deficits early in our country’s history were to pay for wars (Jefferson was perhaps correct to some degree). Second to war costs were deficits assumed to repair recessionary cycles in our economy. After the great depression, we saw expansion in federal government programs that reached into non-defense programs such as farm subsidies, social security, federal highways and infrastructure, transportation (aviation, rail) as well as regulation of services such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, FDIC and Federal Reserve System. For the most part, payment for such expanded programs was derived from revenue offsets in the form of use taxes and regulatory fees, and federal budgets through the 1950s were generally more balanced than not — the exceptions continued to be in times of war and recession. What triggered the current expansion of our gross deficit is the combination of the following: 1. In 40 of the 45 years from 1965 through 2010, we spent more than we took in. The five years of annual surpluses were nowhere near enough to reduce the compounding impact of repeated deficits. 2. During that same 45-year period, we had seven recessions and four wars. In five of the seven recessions we had recoveries that were sequentially weaker than the previous recovery, further limiting the opportunity to pay down the deficits created to jumpstart our economic recoveries. 3. Expansion of entitlement benefits and expansion of entitlement eligibility. Each political party will step forward to blame the other for our current condition, but the reality — based upon actual evidence — is that we have had five Republican Presidents and four Democratic Presidents, as well as various party control advantages across both houses of Congress, during this 45-year deficit accumulation legacy. Neither party can lay claim to greater fiscal responsibility than the other. If it is economically essential to change to a balanced federal budget in 2012, why was it unimportant to do so in the previous 45 years? The answer is more political than fiscal, yet the subject of national deficit deserves serious attention. Economics is not a science and comes colored with opinions. Consensus estimates are an average of a wide range of forecasts. Additionally, almost all data can be arranged around a set of assumptions, and it is not surprising

p e r s p e c t i v e s . s e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . w w w. g r e e n l e a f t ru st. c o m

that most people don’t arrive at an opinion based upon what data reveals as true, but rather by sets of data that reinforce the opinions they already hold — thus, the old adage “Don’t confuse me with the facts.” The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) is intended to be an impartial resource for Congress to validate current and pending legislative cost impact. Arguments for and against their impartiality aside, and criticisms of their forecasts notwithstanding, they are in a seat closest to legislative costs and budget scoring. According to current demographics, entitlements extended under current law, inflation and GDP forecasts, the CBO estimates that by 2025 Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will exceed in annual costs all of the projected federal income for that year. You read it correct. There would be no income for defense, transportation, education, research, infrastructure, aid to cities, federal revenue sharing, foreign affairs, international aid, disaster relief, etc. Recent Wall Street Journal/NBC polls reveal that 80% of those surveyed are concerned about the deficit, yet — and herein lies a major portion of the problem — 78% oppose any change in Medicare and 69% oppose any change in Medicaid, while 73% disapprove of any eligibility change to Social Security benefits. Those are the polling numbers that all of our elected officials go to work with every day. Through 2010 and even through the deficit ceiling negotiations of 2011, legislators knew that entitlements are our demise and that those who elect them will kick them out of office if they tamper with the programs as currently described. How did we get to such an intractable conflict of goals and resources? It is easy to blame political pandering to special interests, political expediency, poor forecasting, lack of fiscal responsibility, lack of honesty and poor leadership. All of those are true, and that partly explains why our executive and legislative branches are held in such disregard. Actual facts show us that the problem has been created over time by some obvious and inverse numbers. From time to time I’ve counseled clients who own businesses to become experts at cost accounting. If you can’t be one, then hire one. Without great cost accounting knowledge, volume cannot be your friend. If you are in the restaurant business and you don’t know what a plate of food costs to serve your customer, stop serving it until you do. Some ideologues in Congress and those campaigning for their party’s presidential nomination will shout that we don’t have a revenue problem in Washington, we have a spending problem. The statement implies we can control our destiny by simply spending less, and they further suggest that a balanced budget on an annual basis is the tool to do so. There are at least two,

pag e 3  

“…the CBO estimates that by 2025 Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will exceed in annual costs all of the projected federal income for that year.”

  page 4

Balanced Budget, continued

“The elephant in the room that must be dealt with, and cannot be dealt with by a balanced budget for the current fiscal year, is entitlements.”

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

and probably more, significant issues with this tactic. For the last 45 years, our federal revenue has grown by an average rate of 2.9%, while expenses have grown at 3.1%. It would be reasonable to view this disparity and assume that the gap (only 0.2%) is small and, therefore, easily balanced. For fiscal 2011, the difference in expenses and revenue results in a deficit of 1.2 trillion dollars. If we subtracted all monies spent for tarp and bailouts actually expended in 2011, the deficit difference would still be 817 billion dollars. The real deficit growth issue is not current year discretionary spending, although we could certainly find some waste, fraud and irresponsible spending there. The elephant in the room that must be dealt with, and cannot be dealt with by a balanced budget for the current fiscal year, is entitlements. Over the same 45-year period, entitlement costs grew by 6.9% annually, or 4.0% above annual revenue increases. That problem alone would not cause our 2025 looming slowdown. Combined with costs of entitlements is the demographic shift created by actual population change with respect to age and size, but also due to the expansion of those covered due to legislative action. This ratio of expenses to revenue would be similar to a business owner finding that his price increases have remained constant at 2.9% while his costs have soared 100% compounded by a significant growth in customer demand through his own marketing. It would be the recipe for his company’s demise. Over the same period of time, while costs have outdistanced income by 100% for an ever increasingly larger portion of our federal budget, entitlement eligibility has also soared. In 1965, one in fifty Americans were on Medicare or Medicaid — today, one in six of our population receives these benefits. For those who claim this is due to population growth, our population has grown by a factor of 1.6 over the duration of 45 years, while our entitlement population has grown by a factor of 12. The reality is we not only have an aging population and declining workforce, with costs of delivery increasing at rates twice that of revenue, but we have also expanded significantly who becomes eligible for those increasingly costly benefits. This is a problem which requires urgent action to reverse, but was created over four decades and must be cured over reasonable periods of time. To suggest that it can be cured by a balanced budget is disingenuous. The danger lies not in action, but in ill-conceived action. Conversely those who assume we can grow or tax our way to victory are equally misguided. The solutions will involve presenting entitlement-eligible Americans head on with education about the severity of the issue and what is required to fix the problem. In next month’s issue we will explore some viable solutions for entitlement reform.

p e r s p e c t i v e s . s e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . w w w. g r e e n l e a f t ru st. c o m

pag e 5  

Limited Safety in Numbers The month of August certainly turned after such short-term spikes, there begin to exist some noticeable risks into a circus ride for investors in the within these traditional safe havens. equity market. As of this writing, there were ten days during the month Some inherent risks to each of the assets mentioned could also intensify where the Dow Jones Industrial their downward price movement Average (Dow) experienced daily should the investors renew their moves in excess of 200 points. Six demand for riskier assets. It is of those days the Dow experienced important to note that the Swiss franc moves in excess of 400 points. On is a relatively minor currency, and August 9th, the Dow experienced a 625-point increase only to be followed not a global liquidity pool. In response to recent price movements, the Swiss by a 500-point drop the next day. National Bank has already taken steps As the ride got going early in the to rein in the price of its currency month on speculation about Greece, our debt ceiling, and the US economy, by lowering its interest rates to near zero. As a major holder of both investors began to flock away from gold and US debt, China’s foreign risky assets toward those that were reserve diversification actions could deemed “safe.” During the month of August, we saw dramatic and, in some negatively impact the price of both of these assets. cases, historic appreciation in the The positive price movements and price of gold, US Treasuries, and the heightened risk metrics within these Swiss franc. “safe” assets led to our recent decision The price of the ten-year to reduce exposure to them in client US Treasury note has risen over portfolios. This was accomplished by 6% since the beginning of August, slightly reducing exposure to client causing its yield to drop over one holdings in the Permanent Portfolio, percent during that timeframe to which is being used as a low2.27%. At one point, the yield was correlated hedge to the equity market. below levels last seen during the The fund has appreciated over 7.5% depth of the financial crisis in early year-to-date, largely because 60% of 2009. Remember, as bond prices rise its holdings are in gold, US Treasuries, their respective yields fall. The Swiss and Swiss francs. In comparison the franc rose 15% in August to record market, as measured by the S&P 1500, highs against the US dollar and euro. has declined nearly 4% in 2011. So, Most remarkably, the price of gold in effect we are hedging our hedge skyrocketed upward 26% during the as the vulnerability of the prices of month, to nearly $2,000 an ounce. gold, US Treasuries, and the Swiss This added to its two-year 88% climb franc will eventually be noticed by upward from $955 an ounce. investors. As these price levels were attained

Michael F. Odar, CFA Executive Vice President Director, Wealth Management Division

“As the ride got going early in the month on speculation about Greece, our debt ceiling, and the US economy, investors began to flock away from risky assets toward those that were deemed “safe.””

  page 6

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

The “Pro-Rata Rule” and Your IRA

Kevin E. Jawahir, CTFA Trust Relationship Officer

“If the qualified retirement plan in which you participated allowed after-tax contributions, it would not be unusual to have both pre-tax and post-tax dollars within the account.”

There are numerous financial decisions to be made upon entering retirement. One of the most overlooked, yet important, items to consider is the money within your employer’s qualified retirement plan (“account”), often in the form of a 401(k) plan account. Generally, three main options should be considered—cash it out, leave the assets within your employer’s plan, or rollover the assets into an Individual Retirement Account (“IRA”). First, in most cases, cashing out your 401(k) is not the best option, as you will likely be faced with a significant tax bill. The entire amount of the distribution will most likely be taxed, and the combined federal and state taxes could significantly increase one’s marginal tax rate. A 10% penalty for early withdrawal may apply if the distribution is made before age 59½. For example, if you were to cash out a $250,000 401(k) the net amount received could be only $137,500 (assuming a marginal tax rate of 35% plus a 10% penalty for withdrawal prior to age 59½). Second, you may consider leaving the funds within the

company plan. This decision should be made after reviewing the fee structure and investment options. The third option, and most common, is to rollover the account to an IRA. The majority of the time this option is recommended as it may allow you to lower investment expenses and to gain access to a wider variety of investment vehicles. If the decision is made to rollover the assets, it is recommended that a “direct rollover” be utilized. This means the assets are transferred directly from the qualified retirement plan to the custodian or trustee of the IRA in order to prevent any negative tax consequences (i.e. State or Federal withholding ). Prior to initiating the rollover to an IRA, it is particularly important to determine the nature of the contributions made into your account. If the qualified retirement plan in which you participated allowed after-tax contributions, it would not be unusual to have both pre-tax and post-tax dollars within the account. Given that post-tax monies have already been taxed, one

p e r s p e c t i v e s . s e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . w w w. g r e e n l e a f t ru st. c o m

does not want to pay taxes again. Employers, or plan service providers, keep record of the pretax and post-tax contributions, and will provide a detailed report to you upon retirement. Be certain to provide this information to the trustee or custodian when completing a rollover to your IRA, as it will impact tax calculations when withdrawals are subsequently made from your IRA. After-tax contributions may be rolled to an IRA. Alternatively, they can be taken out of your account before completing the rollover. It should be noted that withdrawal of the after-tax portion must be completed before rolling over the pre-tax portion. Once the rollover is completed, both the pre-tax and post-tax monies that were rolled into the IRA are now subject to the “prorata rule.” This rule necessitates that each distribution from the IRA contain a proportionate share of the pre-tax and post-tax money (one may not choose to withdraw the after-tax assets first). The after-tax contributions are considered the basis. For example,

a $200,000 qualified retirement plan containing $10,000 of posttax contributions was rolled over into an IRA. Subsequently, a $20,000 withdrawal is made from the IRA. The pro-rata rule would require that $19,000 of the withdrawal is subject to income taxation. The portion of the distribution that is a return of after-tax contributions is $1,000 [($10,000 / $200,000) * $20,000]. If you have multiple IRAs, all IRAs are considered one account when computing withdrawal amounts. Although you can select which IRA to take a distribution from, the calculation (pro-rating ) of the taxable amount of the distribution and the return of after-tax contributions must consider assets across all of the IRAs. The rolling over of qualified retirement plan assets is a complicated proposition with many potential pitfalls. If you were born before 1936, there may be additional rules and regulations that apply. Ultimately, it is in your best interest to fully disclose all information and to consult with your tax and investment advisors before making a final decision.

pag e 7  

“This rule necessitates that each distribution from the IRA contain a proportionate share of the pretax and post-tax money.”

  page 8

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

Wealth is in the Eye of the Beholder

Nicole E. Asher, CFP™, CHFC Wealth Management Advisor

“Children have no true idea of what wealth is, and wealth means different things to different people.”

son can vouch for that. As I just The old adage says that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” and the mentioned, in high school he felt same can be said of wealth. Earlier uncomfortable because he felt this summer I had two young boys “too rich” but if you were to ask him now, he would say we are at my home who are part of a poor — compared to his college volunteer organization to which I peers. Children have no true idea belong. It was a hot day, and they of what wealth is, and wealth had come over to go swimming means different things to different in my pool. As I was preparing to people. To some, having $1,000 take them home, one of the boys in the bank makes them feel rich, asked me, “Are you rich?” I was a while to others this feeling might bit surprised by the question, and only come if they have $1,000,000 I quickly responded, “No, I’m not in the bank. rich.” But in his eyes, I certainly We Americans live in one of am, because I have a pool! the most affluent societies in the If you were to ask my children, world. During recent economic they would resoundingly reply “We are not rich!” Everyone seems times it might not feel this way, to have things that they don’t have but it’s true. We are some of — mopeds, faster computers, cooler the worlds “richest” people — whatever that means. What we shoes — the list goes on. I love to carry as pocket money is more remind my oldest son that, when than what some people earn in he was in high school, he didn’t a month, or even a year. It is want anyone to see him getting important that we teach our into my car when I picked him up children that it is a wonderful at school. You might be thinking privilege to live in such an affluent that he was embarrassed because society. The average American is I drove a clunker, but it was the five times better off financially opposite — my car was too nice! than two out of every three people Children who are raised in in the world. How do we teach wealth often don’t realize it until they meet someone who is “richer” them to appreciate what they have? They see poverty on television, or or “poorer” than they are. My

p e r s p e c t i v e s . s e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . w w w. g r e e n l e a f t ru st. c o m

may see a community devastated by a hurricane, but do they feel fortunate for what they have? Are they even aware that poverty exists right in their backyard? Merriam-Webster defines “rich” as having abundant possessions, and especially material wealth. There are many synonyms for rich: affluent, bloated, comfortable, easy, fat, filthy rich, flush, gilded, in clover, in the money, independent, loaded, made of money, moneyed, opulent, plush, propertied, prosperous, rolling in it, swimming, upscale, uptown, wealthy, well provided for, wellheeled, well-off, well-to-do, worth a million, silk-stocking, in the chips. These synonyms make me laugh! As I worked on this article, my son was preparing to head back to college and move into a house with two roommates. When he compares himself to them, he feels impoverished. One of his roommates drives a Mercedes. The other roommate has two cars — a 2010 Chevy Avalanche truck and a brand new Chevy Camaro. So I reminded him that being “rich” is relative. Rich is what you make of

it. I asked him these questions: • Can you eat when you’re hungry? • Can you go to the doctor when you’re sick? • Do you have a jacket when it’s cold? • Do you have a bed when you’re tired? • Can you wash your clothes when they are dirty? I told him that if he could answer “yes” to these questions, then he is rich. As a society, we are rich as compared to those struggling with famine in Africa, but destitute if we compare ourselves to Bill Gates. There will always be someone who is richer than you and always someone who is poorer. We need to keep the value of money in perspective, and not use it as a measure of self-worth. You can be “rich” in many ways — rich with friends, knowledge, kindness, etc. If he uses money as a scorecard, he will always be disappointed. There are other things in his life that make him rich, and they aren’t monetary. As B. C. Forbes once said, “Real riches are the riches possessed inside.”

pag e 9  

“I told him that if he could answer “yes” to these questions, then he is rich.”

  page 10

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

15 Things Every Employee Should Know About Their Retirement Plan Lorey L. Matties Participant Services Coordinator

“When it comes to knowing about and understanding their company’s retirement plan, many employees are in the dark.”

When it comes to knowing about and understanding their company’s retirement plan, many employees are in the dark. They have little knowledge of the plan, which often impacts their perception of this important benefit. Having a basic working knowledge of a retirement plan provides for better awareness, appreciation and participation with this significant benefit. Here are 15 things every employee should know: 1) When can I join the plan? 2) Can I transfer money from a previous employer’s retirement plan or individual retirement account (IRA)? 3) Is there a maximum amount that I can deposit to the plan every year? 4) Does the plan allow me to make additional contributions when I’m age 50 or older? 5) Does the company “match” my deposits and if so, what is the match amount and when will it be deposited to my account? 6) Does the company make a “profit sharing” contribution and if so, what is the amount and when will it be deposited to my account? 7) Are employer contributions subject to a vesting schedule and if so, what is it? 8) What are the investment options available to me? 9) What educational tools are available to help me with my investment strategy? 10) How often can I reallocate the money in my account between investment options? 11) Can I access my account via the internet or telephone system and if so, how? 12) How often will I get a statement that reflects the current status of my account? 13) Where is my beneficiary designation kept? 14) What happens to my money if I stop working for this company? 15) Who do I contact if I have questions about the plan? At Greenleaf Trust, we believe that retirement education is a key employee benefit. Our Participant Services Coordinators are committed to providing your plan participants with the basic knowledge and understanding that is needed to secure a financially secure retirement.

p e r s p e c t i v e s . s e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . w w w. g r e e n l e a f t ru st. c o m

pag e 1 1  

www.HaveYouSeenOurNewSite.com In keeping with Greenleaf Trust’s commitment to continuous improvement, we are pleased to announce the August 31 launch of our redesigned website: greenleaftrust.com. In visiting the new site, you will notice the emphasis we have placed on improving your (the user’s) experience. We have simplified navigation to our key services and offerings, added new content and imagery and improved the site’s aesthetic. Redesigning and launching a website as extensive as ours is no simple endeavor. Look and feel are important as they represent the important “first impression” a site makes on the visitor. In the same sense that a retail store benefits from an appealing window display, a website is also conscious of the branding image its home page conveys. While first impressions are important, they pale in nearly every sense to far more critical

requirements such as how robustly the site functions; how clearly it presents critical information; how easily and quickly the site can be updated and programmed; how securely it protects sensitive data; how well its “information architecture” enhances the user experience; and how accurately the site represents the values of the company itself. Our marketing and IT teams,

with valuable input from our entire organization, have taken every step to ensure that all of the aforementioned measurements and considerations coalesced into a pleasing and useful website for you. We hope that as you use our new site, you will be pleased with our efforts. I welcome your feedback and suggestions as to how further enhancements might improve your online experience.

Greenleaf Trust 3rd Quarter Investment Seminars Mark Your Calendar! • Monday, September 19, 8:00 a.m.–9:30 a.m. • The Bank of Holland, Holland • Wednesday, September 28, 6:00 p.m.–7:30 p.m. • City Opera House, Traverse City • Thursday, September 29, 11:30 a.m.–1:00 p.m. • Bay Harbor Yacht Club, Bay Harbor

Please visit www.greenleaftrust.com for more information.

  page 12

211 south rose street, kalamazoo, mi 49007  269.388.9800

Stock Market Pulse

% Change Since Index 8/31/11 12/31/2010 S&P 1500........................................ 281.66................... -1.93% DJIA............................................ 11,613.53.................... 2.06% NASDAQ..................................... 2,579.46.................. -2.29% S&P 500........................................1,218.89...................-1.77% S&P 400.........................................875.00...................-2.72% S&P 600......................................... 396.70...................-3.90% NYSE Composite......................... 7,528.39...................-5.47% Dow Jones Utilities......................... 435.06.................. 10.70%

P/E Multiples

8/31/11

S&P 1500................................. 13.4 DJIA........................................ 12.4 NASDAQ................................. 15.0 S&P 500.................................... 13.1 S&P 400.................................. 16.2 S&P 600.................................. 16.3

Barclays Aggregate Bond............... 109.50.................... 5.66%

Key Rates

Current Valuations

Fed Funds Rate.......... 0% to 0.25% T Bill 90 Days....................... 0.11% T Bond 30 Yr........................ 3.59% Prime Rate............................3.25%

S&P 1500...................... 281.66.................. 13.4.................2.09% S&P 500......................1,218.89...................13.1................. 2.19% DJIA.......................... 11,613.53..................12.4................. 2.58% Dow Jones Utilities....... 435.06.................. NA.................4.08%

Index

Aggregate

P/E

Div. Yield

Spread Between 30 Year Government Yields and Market Dividend Yields: 1.50% h ol l an d o f f i ce : Matthew D. Siel

m a i n o ffice: 211 South Rose Street Kalamazoo, MI 49007 office: 269.388.9800 toll free: 800.416.4555 e-mail: [email protected]

Vice President Business Development Officer

bi r mingh am o ff ic e: Mark W. Jannott, CTFA

t r aver se ci t y o f f i ce : John F. Welch, CFP,® CTFA

Senior Vice President Investment & Estate Planning

34977 Woodward Ave., Suite 200 Birmingham, MI 48009 office: 248.530.6200 cell: 248.417.5527

150 Central Avenue Holland, MI 49423 office: 616.494.9020 cell: 616.540.2093

Senior Vice President

130 South Union Street Traverse City, MI 49684 office: 231.922.1428 cell: 231.642.1175

p e to s ke y o f f i ce : John F. Welch, CFP,® CTFA Senior Vice President

406 Bay Street Petoskey, MI 49770 office: 231.439.5016 cell: 231.642.1175

g ra n d ra p i d s o f f i ce Matthew D. Siel

Vice President Business Development Officer

The Bank of Holland 51 Ionia Avenue SW Grand Rapids, MI 49503 office: 616.494.9020 cell: 616.540.2093

www.greenleaftrust.com This newsletter is prepared by Greenleaf Trust and is intended as general information. The contents of this newsletter should not be acted upon without seeking professional advice. Before applying information in this newsletter to your own personal or business situation, please contact Greenleaf Trust. We will be happy to assist you.