How to Avoid the “Middle-Class Trap”

Want To Reach FI Sooner? Join more than 18,000 others and get new tips and strategies from Can I Retire Yet? every week. Subscription is free. Unsubscribe anytime:

I recently listened to an episode of the BiggerPockets Money Podcast titled The Middle-Class Trap That Could Keep You from FIRE (How to Escape It). The hosts Mindy Jensen and Scott Trench defined the “middle-class trap” as follows:

money in a mouse trap symbolizing the middle-class trap

You do everything you are “supposed” to do financially. You buy a home and max out your retirement accounts. You’re building wealth, but your net worth is trapped in home equity and investments that can’t be harvested without penalty. So, despite having a reasonably high net worth, you lack the freedom to change your lifestyle. You are “trapped.” 

They then proposed solutions to avoid or escape this “middle-class trap.”

Listening made me ask two questions:

  1. Is “the middle-class trap” a real problem?
  2. If so, what are the solutions?

Quick Background

The fact that I’m writing this post probably tells you that I disagree with at least some of their conclusions. If I agreed this was an important problem and felt they nailed the solutions, I would share the episode in my monthly “Best-of” post and move forward.

I rarely write these posts rebutting other people’s opinions and advice. There is a ton of garbage personal finance content published every day. Most of it deserves to be ignored.

When I write these posts, it is because I respect the source of the content and think the topic is important. Thus, it deserves a rebuttal. 

That was true when I published my disagreement with Vanguard’s take on the FIRE movement. That is the case here as well.

Mindy and Scott created the episode based on popular demand from podcast listeners. So this is a concern for many people and it is important to address that feeling.

Retirement Account Trap

Let’s start with the idea that retirement accounts are “a trap.” Neither Mindy nor Scott pushed back against this idea. Instead, they focused on alternative uses for these dollars, which included:

  • Paying off a mortgage to lower future ongoing expenses,
  • Investing instead in a taxable brokerage account,
  • If using retirement accounts, at least use a Roth option so you can access the principal (contribution amounts) penalty-free.

Are Tax-Deferred Retirement Accounts a Trap?

I would argue that these accounts are not a “trap” and that there is nothing wrong with the standard advice to prioritize them when saving towards FIRE. There are several reasons for this.

You’re Not Actually Trapped

Part of the definition of the “middle-class trap” is a feeling of being trapped, unable to access money saved and invested in retirement accounts until you reach age 59 1/2. 

Just because you feel something doesn’t mean it is true. You have several options to get money from a retirement account penalty-free.

Let’s start with a provision applicable to tax-deferred Qualified and IRA-based plans. You can take money penalty-free by establishing a series of substantially equal periodic payments (SEPP) from either of these account types.

Qualified, but not IRA, plans allow you to start taking penalty-free distributions at age 55 if you separate from service during or after the year you reach age 55.

IRA, but not qualified, plans allow you to take penalty-free distributions to pay for qualified higher education expenses, health insurance premiums while unemployed, and up to $10,000 for qualified first-time home buyers.

If you use a Roth IRA, as noted in the episode, you can withdraw contributions from the account at any time with no penalty.

The Worst Case Isn’t That Bad

Assume a worst-case scenario. You have all of your dollars tied up in tax-deferred retirement accounts. It doesn’t make sense for you to set up SEPP distributions. None of the other provisions outlined above apply to you. You still are not trapped. 

You pay a 10% “penalty” or additional tax on early withdrawals. This still may not be a bad deal.

Imagine you deferred taxes that would have been paid at a 22% marginal tax rate. If you later need money because you don’t have other income to cover your expenses, you may now be in a lower, say 12% marginal rate. 

So even if every dollar you withdraw is taxed at that 12% marginal rate + the 10% early withdrawal penalty, you are paying the same 22% you would have had you not used the retirement account.

Remember, if this is your only income, it won’t all be taxed at your marginal rate. Some of those dollars that would have been taxed at 22% in the year earned will be taxed at the 10% marginal rate + the 10% penalty = 20%. Your first dollars in a given year would fall under the standard deduction, and the 10% penalty would be the only tax they would be subject to.

So even after paying a 10% penalty for an early withdrawal, you may come out ahead using retirement accounts. The higher your marginal tax rate when saving and the lower your living expenses when taking withdrawals, the more likely you will end up even or ahead, despite paying the 10% penalty for an early withdrawal.

Related: Early Retirement Tax Planning 101

In general, people overestimate taxes in retirement. If you spend a lot of time worrying about high taxes in retirement, check out these posts about the favorable taxation of income in semi-retirement and traditional retirement

Use It Or Lose It

Tax-advantaged accounts have contribution limits and deadlines for making those contributions. Once you miss taking advantage of them there is no going back.

If you decide not to utilize your retirement accounts in 2025 and then in 2027 come to regret it, there is no undoing the earlier decision. That is an opportunity missed.

If you decide to utilize your retirement account in 2025, and then in 2027 you regret it because you need those funds before age 59 1/2, you can still get them. As noted above, you may actually come out ahead even after paying the penalty.

Thus the impact of a sub-optimal decision is asymmetrical and favors using the tax-advantaged account if in doubt.

Tax Drag and Increased Health Care Premiums

People on the path to FIRE often fall into one of two camps.

  1. They don’t actually want to retire. They want to work less and find more life balance, leave more stressful but higher-paid jobs for lower-paying but also lower-stress and more meaningful work, or try their hand at entrepreneurship without the risks typically associated with it.
  2. Others do want to be done working, but they aren’t financially able to do so yet.

In both scenarios, these individuals or households may be able to make lifestyle changes, but they will still earn income out of want or need. After leaving the full-time workforce, they also may have to buy their health insurance on an exchange.

Taxable accounts produce income in the form of interest and dividends that you may not need if you’re still earning income. Whether you need this income or will reinvest it makes no difference to the IRS. It will be taxed. This is not true of tax-advantaged accounts which provide a tax shelter.

This creates tax drag that lowers your returns on taxable accounts over time. If buying health insurance through an exchange, this excess taxable income will also decrease your Premium Tax Credits, causing you to pay higher health insurance premiums.

Related: Maximize ACA Subsidies and Minimize Health Insurance Costs

I have nearly half of my savings in taxable investments and personally deal with this issue. I have several financial planning clients who have achieved financial independence and I help manage this scenario. 

In contrast, I’ve never encountered someone who couldn’t do anything they wanted because their money was trapped in retirement accounts once they understood their options to access those funds.

Trap or Advantage?

The feeling of being unable to access money from retirement accounts was described as part of the “middle-class trap.” I would reframe this inaccessibility as an advantage.

Even if you were a good saver early in life and are on the path to early retirement, you still have to plan and save for traditional retirement. Having these dollars grow tax-free for decades is a good thing. The penalty for taking them early is a reminder to consider your options before giving up this advantage.

Tax-advantaged accounts also provide protection against liability that taxable accounts do not. ERISA provides qualified plans with legal protections. IRA accounts also have some protection that varies based on state law.

Work-sponsored retirement plans also tend to have limited investment options. While some may think this is another disadvantage, it is more likely an advantage for most investors. This is especially true for someone who bought into the “middle-class trap” and may be impatient and frustrated with their trajectory.

Investors are susceptible to taking risks they don’t fully understand or can’t afford to take. The “trap” of a retirement account that limits them to more vanilla investment options may be the medicine they need to stay the course.

Is Home Equity a “Trap”?

The other piece of the “middle-class trap” is the “home equity trap.” I agree with the premise housing is a major obstacle for many who want to achieve financial independence quickly.

Housing is the largest expense for most households. If you want to develop a high savings rate, as required to achieve financial independence quickly, optimizing housing costs is vital.

This has always been true. However, this has become much harder in the past few years, due to a combination of factors.

  1. Inflation in home prices and secondary costs of home ownership (insurance, property taxes, maintenance and renovation costs, etc.)
  2. Rising interest rates.

Home equity increases your net worth. However, owning a home can trap you into a particular lifestyle because you must support the ongoing expenses associated with home ownership. 

I appreciated both hosts acknowledging this is a real challenge. However, I was surprised by the proposed solutions to the home equity trap they offered on the podcast.

Proposed Home Equity Solutions

Scott’s first suggestion was to pay off the mortgage quickly, eliminating the need to make future mortgage payments. Thus, you drastically lower your future spending needs. He argues, “You’re going to be freer if you pay off the mortgage” due to lower ongoing monthly liabilities.

Mindy’s counter suggestion was to keep the mortgage, but bypass tax-advantaged retirement accounts and instead invest in a taxable brokerage account. She argues that you will likely come out ahead by investing those dollars and later using the proceeds to pay your expenses, including the ongoing mortgage. Saving in a taxable account provides access to your money without restriction or penalty.

Both of these ideas have some validity. However, neither solves the problem. Instead, they’re kind of like moving chairs around on the deck of the Titanic. You’ve done something, but the ship is still going down.

What Have We Solved?

Paying off the mortgage requires applying substantial resources towards that goal. By definition, those resources then can’t be directed towards other investments.

Once you pay your mortgage, you will have lower ongoing expenses. However, you will also have no assets from which to pay the expenses you do have, including ongoing costs of home ownership like property taxes, insurance, repairs, and maintenance. Are you significantly more free?

Keeping the mortgage and investing in a taxable account may work out to your advantage. You would anticipate over long enough periods that you could earn a higher rate of return investing than the rate you are paying on a mortgage, particularly with many people who took out or refinanced mortgages at low rates coming out of the pandemic.

However, there is a trade-off. Investing adds an element of risk compared to the guarantee of a mortgage payoff. 

Even if that risk pays off, eventually you will need to use your portfolio to cover living expenses. You would then have to invest more conservatively and thus lose the potential delta between investment returns and mortgage rates. The only alternative would be to take considerable risk by continuing to hold volatile investments when you need them to be there to meet spending needs.

In addition to risk, having a mortgage means you must generate the income to pay it each month after making lifestyle changes. As noted above, the income required to meet this obligation can decrease your Premium Tax Credits. This results in paying higher health insurance premiums.

The Only Home Equity Solution

Most people buy the biggest, nicest, most expensive house they can afford. They allow what they can afford to be defined by what someone will lend them. Avoiding the home equity part of “the middle-class trap” requires doing something different. The more flexibility you desire in lifestyle, the more creative you may need to get.

To be fair, Mindy and Scott know far more about real estate than I do. They each understand the solution to the home equity trap. Scott did come back to this at the very end of the podcast and I got a sense they were trying not to come off heavy handed in the episode.

I know Scott knows a solution. He utilized “house hacking” to create lifestyle flexibility early in his adult life. This was a foundational idea in his outstanding book Set for Life.

I know Mindy knows this. Her husband Carl has written about their strategy of taking advantage of “live-in flips” to help them achieve financial independence.

I know this. Kim and I used geoarbitrage when we moved to a small town where my healthcare salary was both higher and went further than living in a higher-cost city early in our adult lives. 

We downsized when we relocated to a higher-cost mountain town after achieving financial independence. There were trade-offs associated with downsizing. We made these decisions because they enabled the lifestyle change we desired.

I appreciate Mindy and Scott not following the tired script that many personal finance educators use of saying, “Just do what I did.” There is no single way to avoid being trapped by housing costs. What works for one person may not work for another due to different skill sets, family situations, geographical areas, etc.

However, you have to do something differently than everyone else to create a lifestyle that looks different from everyone else’s. 

Those on the path to financial independence need to understand this. It is important for those of us helping them to be clear and honest in communicating that.

Reframing the “Middle-Class Trap”

The “middle-class trap” is an understandable feeling. Applying the principles of FIRE enables achieving financial independence reliably in 10-20 years.

This sounds fast compared to a standard 40-50 years career many people work between finishing school or training and traditional retirement age. Still, it is a long time in the grand scheme of things!

Don’t get caught up in the idea of the “middle-class trap.” Don’t get impatient and look for shortcuts. Instead, focus on applying proven principles while creating a path to financial independence that you can enjoy. 

Finally, don’t get caught up in the idea that financial independence is an all-or-nothing proposition that can lead to “feeling trapped.” Appreciate and enjoy the growing freedom you are accumulating along the path to financial independence.

Use that growing freedom to make incremental improvements in your lifestyle. You’re not trapped!

Related: The Stages of Financial Independence

* * *

Valuable Resources

  • The Best Retirement Calculators can help you perform detailed retirement simulations including modeling withdrawal strategies, federal and state income taxes, healthcare expenses, and more. Can I Retire Yet? partners with two of the best.
  • Monitor Your Investment Portfolio
    • Sign up for a free Empower account to gain access to track your asset allocation, investment performance, individual account balances, net worth, cash flow, and investment expenses.
  • Our Books

* * *

[Chris Mamula used principles of traditional retirement planning, combined with creative lifestyle design, to retire from a career as a physical therapist at age 41. After poor experiences with the financial industry early in his professional life, he educated himself on investing and tax planning. After achieving financial independence, Chris began writing about wealth building, DIY investing, financial planning, early retirement, and lifestyle design at Can I Retire Yet? He is also the primary author of the book Choose FI: Your Blueprint to Financial Independence. Chris also does financial planning with individuals and couples at Abundo Wealth, a low-cost, advice-only financial planning firm with the mission of making quality financial advice available to populations for whom it was previously inaccessible. Chris has been featured on MarketWatch, Morningstar, U.S. News & World Report, and Business Insider. He has spoken at events including the Bogleheads and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants annual conferences. Blog inquiries can be sent to chris@caniretireyet.com. Financial planning inquiries can be sent to chris@abundowealth.com]

* * *

Links on this site, like the Amazon, Boldin, Pralana, and Personal Capital links are also affiliate links. As an affiliate we earn from qualifying purchases. If you click on one of these links and buy from the affiliated company, then we receive some compensation. The income helps to keep this blog going. Affiliate links do not increase your cost, and we only use them for products or services that we're familiar with and that we feel may deliver value to you. By contrast, we have limited control over most of the display ads on this site. Though we do attempt to block objectionable content. Buyer beware.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

16 Comments

  1. Two items are not mentioned (unless I missed them) that seem potentially critical to these decisions. First, many contributions to employer sponsored retirement accounts (401k, etc) are matched by the employer for the first 3% and up to 6% of the employee’s contribution. That’s “free” money that one would miss out on if not participating. Is that not a dumb thing to skip? Secondly, no mention of the reverse mortgage option. That topic itself is worth a full newsletter. I know there are significant expenses tied to reverse mortgages but it is still a viable option I would think. You can tap a huge chunk of your equity and do what you want, certainly supplementing your retirement income is an option. The expense of the reverse mortgage and the interest on the loan is never paid by the recipient except on death and/or the sale of the home. Why is that not something to consider? Yes, the expense is high but you do not come out of pocket for it and if you don’t ever have to pay it back until death or the sale of the home, that is okay for many people.

    1. Paul,

      Thanks for reading and taking time to comment. Great points that each deserve a response.

      RE: 401(k) match. I agree with you 100%. There are few hard and fast rules in personal finance, but this one is close. The only way I would recommend passing up the free money of an employer match is if someone has CC debt and is paying interest at exorbitant rates or if they are confident they won’t be in the job long enough for the match to vest. I suppose I take that as such a given, I overlooked mentioning it, but I absolutely should have.

      RE: reverse mortgages. I’ve had writing about this topic on my to-do list for quite a while. Your comment spurred me to bump it up the list. This is potentially a valid strategy for traditional retirees. That said, this strategy really doesn’t apply in this scenario of people achieving FIRE. I have written about the potential benefits of home ownership, with the option to use a reverse mortgage being one of them, as well as a number of others that would apply to people who feel stuck in “the middle-class trap.” Here is a link.

      Best wishes,
      Chris

      1. Thanks, Chris. I appreciate your reply. The link you included help with not only your elaboration but there were additional links on some reverse mortgage strategies to supplement retirement income, renovate a home to accommodate aging in place, and other good thoughts. I find it interesting that I know some very good financial planners who are not well-versed in reverse mortgages. People that our house rich, having a couple million dollars of equity in their home but maybe not enough to comfortable retire with their investment portfolio. The fact that you can access a big chunk of that equity and the loan expense (closing and interest rate accumulating) is never out of pocket to the homeowner. The loan is only payable at death or moving out of the home. Then the house can be sold to pay off the o/s. And the growing outstanding loan will likely be offset by the appreciation in the house. I got a quote for one on my home and the expenses are high. A $24,000 Mortgage Insurance Premium, a $6000 origination fee (I got the impression that is negotiable, and about $6000 in other expenses. Now you are not out of pocket for that, it comes out of your lump sum payment. And again, only your heirs will ultimately lose out on that. Again, I find very few planners who have a lot of expertise in some high end strategies and investments know much about HECM’s. I personally will shop HECM’s and compare to HELOC’s which may have a lower interest rate but you monthly at least have to pay the interest, some require some principal repayment monthly as well. I keep thinking I am missing a big negative when I see so few people talking about it. Thanks again.

    2. A little bit of pushback here, if you’ll indulge me…

      On a personal note, I am finding myself in almost the exact situation that the podcasters speak of, so I find all of these discussions extremely helpful! In the original podcast’s defense (around the 13:25 mark on YT), they actually do mention keeping the IRA contributions, but only up to the employer’s match, and not necessarily always maxing it out (an important distinction).

      First, being house rich and cash poor is definitely a thing. I think we’re mostly all in agreement on this part, but I think if these problems aren’t avoided, they can exacerbate the retirement account aspect.

      For me, I think there is very much validity to their argument about over-contributing to deferred-type accounts. Despite them painting with a very broad brush and dismissing “finance influencers” categorically, when you get down to the heart of it, I agree that in SOME instances retirement-related accounts are, at best, at a conflicted interest with FIRE, and at worst, they can be directly at odds with it (especially the RE part).

      Surely there is a balance. Surely there ought to be nuance and not just “pedal to the metal deferred savings.” Again, just my opinion, but maxing out every possible 401k, roth, HSA, 529 college, etc.—in combination with the house rich/cash poor dynamic, creates a recipe where you can easily just not have the liquidity on hand to have the freedom you were originally pursuing. Any time you are paying an early withdrawal penalty, that indicates a miscalculation (or unforeseen circumstance) at some point in your planning. Maybe technically not “trapped,” but it definitely feels bad (ask me how I know this…), and it’s sub-optimal to say the least.

      I don’t think anyone in their planning phase would sit down and intentionally plan to come up short and have to pay penalties. I think all the BiggerPockets podcast was trying to do in this instance is to just give a fair warning that your optimal allocation may not be all-in on these deferred type of accounts. I’m grateful for this exchange in general, and I think it’s a subject that should be addressed more often.

      1. I appreciate the pushback Echo. It is welcome here!

        As noted in the post, I think they, you, and I all agree that housing costs are a problem. And as noted in my post, but kind of ignored in their podcast, if you want a different lifestyle and to not feel trapped you have to find a way and be willing to make different choices with housing than most people.

        You make a great point that housing choices impact the “where to invest” part of the “trap.” Rather than an either/or of retirement accounts vs. taxable accounts, lowering housing costs may enable you to do both. What they address in the podcast was not having enough savings to do so, requiring people to make choices of taxable or tax-advantaged.

        All that said, people in this situation should think very long and hard before passing up the tax advantages of tax-deferred retirement accounts (and HSAs). There are exceptions, but for most super-savers, who by definition live well below their incomes (i.e. how they are able to save so much), are deferring every dollar at higher marginal tax rates to later pay them spread out over a lower effective tax rate even factoring in early WD penalties. For anyone really worried about early WD penalties, a Roth can avoid the penalty on contributions if you need to take money and provide a tax shelter if you don’t.

        You’d be surprised how many people start down the path certain they want to retire, and end up earning money in “retirement. Ask me how I know this ;). In seriousness, in addition to this applying to me, most of my clients are pursuing some form of FIRE, and very few end up retiring fully and not earning any money.

        I think if there is a “trap”, it is self-imposed because folks get stuck in this idea that you have to hit a magical FI number to make changes to your lifestyle. If you front load retirement accounts and pay down your home, you can earn less and earn more tax efficiently by downshifting while freeing up time and energy for other things. My goal with this post, and my writing more generally, is to help people appreciate this.

        Best,
        Chris

  2. Outstanding article, Chris! Great points all around. The other thing this brought up for me is why people feel a sense of being “trapped” to begin with. Feeling trapped sort of implies there is something one is trying to escape. Quite a bit of it in my conversations with folks seems to come back to the prospect of working decades in a dissatisfying job that earns above average pay. And that often is a result of seeing two options: my current job or no job. I’ve found that a more expansive view of career options, job/company switches, semi-retirements, moves to part-time, advocacy for different job responsibilities, or even not accepting promotions to stay in more enjoyable individual contributor roles can eliminate that sense that a trap even exists at all.

    1. Thanks for the feedback Jeremy. I agree 100% and that was what I was hoping to convey in the conclusion. You stated what I was thinking perfectly!

      Cheers!
      Chris

  3. Thanks Chris. I feel like the only real trap is not a high enough savings rate for not enough time. The FI community is great at figuring out the rest. As an example, the FI Tax Guy had an interesting approach of even having your emergency savings in your pre-tax(IRA/401K). Then, if you need cash, you sell VTAX during a down market from your brokerage and rebuy in your IRA using your emergency fund money market. The advantage to this approach is that your money market generates ordinary dividends or interest and your VTAX would be capital gains and mostly qualified dividends. I had never considered using this approach but it seems pretty novel.

    1. dap,

      Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I hadn’t read that from the FI Tax Guy, but would be interested if you would share a link. He has some interesting and well thought out ideas.

      Cheers!
      Chris

  4. Who else immediately pictured Admiral Ackbar at the first mention of “trap”?
    Good article; always appreciate the nuance.
    Really like Paul’s comment above. The employer contribution should not be overlooked, and I’d love to read a more in depth analysis of reverse mortgages.

  5. “There is a ton of garbage personal finance content published every day. Most of it deserves to be ignored.”

    Ain’t that the truth. Most if not all of the FIRE podcasters and YouTubers are trying to re-career themselves as influencers, trying to lure in an audience that wants to be influenced, to be part of the imaginary so-called “FI community”. They’re trying to grow businesses and brands. One of the two individuals you named, I find especially odious and uninformed. (I’ll be diplomatic and not say which.) Trying to comment on any of their content, no matter how politely, results in instantly being blocked.

  6. Maybe by “trapped” some folks really feel more like a mid-firelife crisis? LOL

    By that I mean if a slow-and-steady approach to get to FIRE involves a 20-30-ish year plan (because, daycare, diapers, home prices, student loans, yada yada) necessitates it, maybe a decent chunk of your readers are somewhere in the middle of that slog and feeling burnt-out.

    Speaking for a friend, of course.

    1. Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment Penny. I get the idea of the slog and feeling burnt out. See my response to Echo and also take a minute to read the comment left here by Jeremy, one of my fellow financial planners who also works with a lot of clients in this situation. A lot of the “trap” is self-imposed by rigid definitions of needing to be financially independent to retire completely vs. using your accruing wealth to incrementally improve your lifestyle.

      Best wishes!
      Chris