Author: Nathan Kangpan

That’s according to recent research.

I don’t see that number as just a financial statistic. It’s clearly a design problem.

We have two young kids. I think a lot about how we should structure our trust to ensure their futures are protected. Not just from probate and unscrupulous advisors. But also from themselves.

I think back to when I was 18 or 25. Would I have had the self control or even financial knowledge then to handle a sudden inheritance? Absolutely not.

It’s not just age though.

The worst time to transfer assets is upon death. Emotions are high. There may be negative associations with the sudden windfall. The urge to spend it to relieve those feelings is real.

What I’m personally including in our trust is what the researchers recommend.

Phased distributions. They’ll get their full inheritance, just not all at once.

The goal isn’t to protect the money from them. It’s to protect them from receiving it before they’re ready. There’s a difference.

Liked this post?

• Read my letter on affording private K-12 school
• Follow me on LinkedIn for twice weekly posts just like this one
• Check out my newsletter for twice-monthly deep dives on navigating the financial and emotional tradeoffs that come from career success

Research Source: Thompson, C. & James, R. N., III. (2026). Inheritance dissipation and the case for time-phased estate planning: An empirical assessment from HRS data. Financial Services Review, 34(1), 24-42.

For educational purposes only. Not investment, tax, or legal advice.

The hardest part of leaving a C-level career wasn’t losing the salary. Income from my portfolio had already replaced that. It was the morning I realized I didn’t know how to introduce myself anymore.

I’d spent nearly two decades building skills, reputation, and relationships in the marketing world. Almost my entire network knew me from that perspective. Even my wife has only known the “senior corporate guy” version of my professional life.

Here’s what that first year actually looks like, both from living it and from sitting across from people navigating it now.

The phone rings a lot less. The steady white noise of a million Slack notifications disappears (this part wasn’t so bad).

You’ll spend real time wondering if you made a mistake. Not occasionally. Regularly.

You’ll pivot your idea for the second act more times than you expected. The boutique consultancy becomes something else. The advisory practice gets repositioned. Each pivot feels like failure until it doesn’t.

And then, without being able to pinpoint exactly when, you stop identifying with the old title entirely. Someone asks what you do and the corporate version doesn’t even come to mind.

Nobody warned me the identity piece would be the hardest part of financial independence.

Liked this post?

• Read my letter on leaving a C-level career
• Follow me on LinkedIn for twice weekly posts just like this one
• Check out my newsletter for twice-monthly deep dives on navigating the financial and emotional tradeoffs that come from career success

When I left my C-level job in 2024, I didn’t have a business plan. I had a conviction.

I was 38. Income from my investment portfolio had already replaced my salary. I’d spent years building something most financial advisors told me wasn’t realistic. A life funded by cashflows from investments, not a passive index fund I’d spend down at 65.

All along the way I had been looking for an advisor who understood what I was building. Someone who could help me go further. Private markets, real estate, infrastructure. The way large endowments invest to fund their mission in perpetuity, but for individual investors.

I couldn’t find one.

Every advisor was oriented around a 60/40 portfolio and a retirement at 65.

So I decided to build what I had been looking for. Something for people like me.

I now work with people who want to replace a paycheck with income from their portfolio. Not someday, on an arbitrary retirement timeline, but intentionally and as soon as their portfolio makes it possible.

What I love about what I’m doing now: I sit down with people and show them how to cut years off the timeline they had in their head through the same style of investing and financial planning that made it a reality for me.

If you’ve had similar experiences with financial advisors trying to stick you into cookie-cutter formulas, I’d genuinely like to hear about it.

Liked this post?

• Check out my letter on leaving a C-level career
• Follow me on LinkedIn for twice weekly posts just like this one
• Check out my newsletter for twice-monthly deep dives on navigating the financial and emotional tradeoffs that come from career success

The optimal time to exercise your options and the right time to exercise your options are often different things. Here was the deciding factor for a director at a F500 company.

Using Options to Realize Your Dreams

The situation:

• Mid 30s couple with two young children
• Approaching mid-six figure income but majority of net worth locked in unexercised company options
• Owns their current home

The dream:
Upgrade to a seven-figure forever home at some vague point in the future, but unsure when or if they could afford to do it.

The strategy:
Shifted timeline from vague future to 18 months by realigning financial focus on making this a reality:

• Accounting for current home equity value
• Creating targeted savings augmentation strategy using higher, after-tax yielding instruments than a typical HYSA
• Exercising a portion of their options

The “objective” answer to the optimal time to exercise options involves lots of academic calculations and hyper-specific, unknowable assumptions.

The practical answer?

Sometimes it’s as simple as looking at whether exercising your options allows you to live the life that you want to live now.

I built a custom model for this client to determine how much we should exercise now vs. how much we should leave on the table to preserve future upside. We then exercised our target portion and locked in nearly six figures of their down payment – putting them solidly, and definitively on track to their dream home by this time next year.

What Other Situations Does it Make Sense to Exercise Options Early?

There many other situations where exercising your options earlier may make more sense than holding them including:

• When you’re switching jobs and the options expire when your employment does
• When you need immediate cashflow for a major life event
• When you feel your net worth may be too concentrated in the position and you want to diversify your risk

Financial tools should serve the life you’re designing, not the other way around. The academic optimal is often the enemy of the intentional.

Originally Shared on LinkedIn. Follow me there to get regular content like this.

Liked this post?

• Check out our letter on intentional spending
• Learn about this commonly missed 30-day tax window for equity comp
• Reach out to us for a complimentary consultation to discuss your equity compensation plan and strategy

Disclosures: Kangpan & Co. is a registered investment advisor. All content is for educational purposes only and is not financial advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This is an actual client case study. Results and recommendations are unique to each client situation.

I speak with a lot of high-earners who feel financially squeezed by private school. This is what we talk about together.

When high earners have vague feelings of financial uncertainty, it’s not usually an issue of whether a specific item is affordable today.

It’s more a question of long-term financial clarity. What implicit or explicit sacrifices are you making down the line because of how you want to support your family today?

Paying for private school is one of the most common versions of this conversation. Three kids, $30K per year each.

Although it technically fits in the yearly budget, there’s a creeping fear that paying tuition now is quietly stealing from retirement later.

For the people in this situation, people who started saving aggressively in their late 20s and early 30s, that fear can be exaggerated.

When you actually model it out, the nest egg they’ve already built is doing more work than they think.

Here’s a quick hypothetical example.

• A couple, both around 40 in a high-cost-of-living area
• They earn $500k but feel squeezed between taxes, mortgage, and daily expenses
• $2M already saved across retirement and investment accounts
• They have three kids they want to put through K-12 private school that costs $30k per year per child

Even if this couple stopped contributing to retirement for the next 25 years, that $2M they have now could grow to more than $12M by retirement at 65 assuming historical market returns on a moderately aggressive allocation between now and then.

$12M in assets could equate to $480,000 in annual retirement spending using the simplified 4% rule.

The wealth management industry has done an excellent job scaring high earners into maximizing retirement contributions at all costs. Some of that fear is legitimate. But for people who started early and saved aggressively, the marginal retirement contribution can end up being a nice-to-have, not a necessity.

One of the most valuable things I do for clients is helping them see that they already have more financial flexibility than they’re giving themselves credit for.

The clarity that comes from understanding short, medium, and long-term tradeoffs changes how people make decisions. It changes how they think about their careers. It changes whether they take the sabbatical, fund the private school, or finally make the move they’ve been deferring.

The numbers are usually better than the fear.

Originally Shared on LinkedIn. Follow me there to get regular content like this.

Liked this post?

• Check out our note on using 529 plans to pay for private K-12 education
• Learn about how wealth managers hide additional fees
• Reach out to us for a complimentary consultation to discuss your private school plans

Disclosures: Kangpan & Co. is a registered investment advisor. All content is for educational purposes only and is not financial advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Here’s how 1.0% turns into a $29,000 blind spot

This is part of a series deconstructing a Portfolio Efficiency Audit we recently completed for a new client. For a $2.9M portfolio, these combined deficiencies can represent an annual opportunity cost in the low-to-mid five figures. We consistently see these issues across clients who have managed their own portfolios and those who have switched to us from other advisors.

The Problem:
Everyone has seen the headlines that active portfolio managers can’t beat a passive index. But most clients we work with have never seen their portfolio’s performance lined up against these passive benchmarks before coming to us. Especially those working with other advisors (three guesses why an advisor might like to obscure this data).

The Math:
Here’s some illustrative numbers to show how a $2.9M portfolio underperforming benchmarks isn’t just a rounding error:

• at 0.5% it’s $14,500 a year in lost opportunity
• at 1.0% it’s $29,000 a year
• at 1.5% it’s $43,500 a year

At 1.0% a year you’re looking at $290,000 over the next ten years – before taking into account any growth.

The Strategy:
The first step of our audit is a cold, hard look at reality. We benchmark our clients’ legacy portfolios against objective global benchmarks to identify where there may be major performance gaps.

S&P recently found 88.3% of active managers underperformed the S&P 500 over the last 15 years. In large-cap stocks, the “market return” is often the smartest move.

Conversely, that same study found 40.7% of US Muni Managers beat their index in that timeframe. This is where careful selection of active managers may pay off.

We look at the portfolio as a whole and individual asset classes.

An effective portfolio manager knows where to accept the indexed market return and where active management actually adds value.

Originally Shared on LinkedIn. Follow me there to get regular content like this.

If you liked this post:

• Learn about how some wealth managers hide additional fees

Disclosures: Kangpan & Co. is a registered investment advisor. All content is for educational purposes only and is not financial advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Based on actual $2.9m portfolio audit completed for a recent client; all math in this post is illustrative to protect client privacy. Research referenced via S&P’s SPIVA (June 30, 2025).

In many states you can use 529 funds for K-12 private school tuition. And by routing payments through a 529 first you can capture a state tax deduction on spending you were going to do anyway.

I’ve noticed so many parents paying private school tuition are leaving free money on the table every year. And it’s all because of a simple sequencing mistake.

Here’s what I mean.

Let’s say you live in Pennsylvania and have two kids in K-12 private school. Tuition is $30,000 per year per kid.

You’re probably writing a check directly from your bank account. Straightforward. Simple. And quietly costing you $1,228 per year in state tax savings you didn’t have to give up.

Here’s a better approach.

The federal limit for using 529 funds for K-12 expenses was bumped up to $20,000 per student per year as of 2026.

So instead of paying tuition directly, first deposit the funds into each child’s 529 Plan. Then pay the tuition from the 529. That’s it.

PA allows you to deduct 529 contributions from your state taxes, and because there’s no minimum holding period before using the funds for qualified K-12 expenses, you’ve effectively turned a routine tuition payment into a state tax deduction.

Here’s the simple math.

• $20,000 per child (the federal limit) × 3.07% PA state tax rate = $614 back per child
• Two kids = $1,228 per year. Every year. For spending you were going to do anyway.

Not life-changing money. But $1,228 in annual savings that compounds over a decade of private school tuition is worth knowing about — especially when capturing it only takes a few steps.

Note, every state has different rules. Some don’t allow K-12 deductions at all. Some have contribution limits that affect the math. Check your state’s specific rules or ask an advisor. If you’re a high earner in a high-tax state, your numbers could look even better than the Pennsylvania example above. The higher your marginal state rate the more this matters.

This is one of those optimizations that looks small in isolation but is exactly the kind of thing that adds up when you’re navigating the squeeze years — private school, mortgage, family life, and trying not to compromise what you’re building for the future.

If you’re navigating the squeeze years I’d be curious what financial questions are keeping you up at night.

Originally shared on Linkedin. Get more content like this:

• Follow me on LinkedIn where I post observations like this twice a week

• Subscribe to my Substack for longer pieces on income investing and building a life funded by portfolio income, subscribe to my newsletter. No paywalls.

Disclosures: For educational purposes only. Not investment advice.