The $10 Million Retirement: Why Wealth Alone Doesn’t Guarantee Financial Security

You may log in to your 401(k), IRA, or other financial accounts and see a balance you never imagined having. Perhaps it’s $2 million, $5 million, or even $10 million. Yet, despite accumulating more wealth than you ever expected, you may still find yourself wondering one simple question:

"Do I have enough?"

It’s a question I’ve heard from people across nearly every level of wealth, including those with tens of millions of dollars.

Interestingly, the amount of wealth someone has accumulated doesn’t always correspond with how financially secure they feel.

According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute’s 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey, published April 21, 2026, only 64% of Americans surveyed felt confident they would have enough money to live comfortably throughout retirement. Confidence among workers fell to 61%, while confidence among retirees declined to 73%. These findings reflect the broader population, but the underlying concerns surrounding retirement security can extend to affluent families as well.

Source: EBRI, 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey

I’m always amazed by the amount of inaccurate or incomplete financial advice available online, particularly from individuals who aren’t fiduciary financial advisors or trained financial planners. Much of the information available is high-level, lacks important context, and provides little in the way of actionable advice.

My goal in this article is different. I want to answer that important question of whether you have enough wealth to retire, explain what actually goes into determining that answer, and share five practical strategies that could materially improve your retirement outcome.

For those approaching retirement with substantial wealth, these decisions can mean the difference between simply having enough money and making the most of everything you’ve spent decades building.

How Much Money Do You Actually Need to Retire?

Let’s start with the original question: Do you have enough?

Throughout my career, I’ve worked with clients who have tens of millions of dollars in assets and spend as little as $60,000 annually on living expenses. I’ve also met individuals with only a couple million dollars in investments who somehow spend $500,000 or more annually.

It’s not difficult to figure out which of these individuals is in a more financially sustainable position.

The person spending $500,000 annually with only $2 million in investable assets faces a serious problem. Without significant additional income or a dramatic reduction in spending, their wealth is unlikely to sustain their lifestyle for very long.

Meanwhile, the individual with $20 million who spends $60,000 annually could potentially live comfortably for the remainder of their life, assuming their assets are appropriately managed.

But here’s where retirement planning becomes more interesting.

That second individual may be so concerned with preserving their wealth that they never fully enjoy it. They may postpone traveling, helping their children, purchasing a vacation home, or pursuing other meaningful goals, even though they have more than enough money to do so.

And depending on their estate, family circumstances, and future wealth growth, they could ultimately pass away leaving a substantial portion of their wealth subject to estate taxes that might have been reduced through proper planning.

Under the federal estate and gift tax rules effective in 2026, the basic exclusion amount is $15 million per individual, with a top federal estate tax rate of 40%. Married couples may be able to preserve the equivalent of $30 million in federal exclusions through appropriate planning, including portability when applicable. Some states impose their own estate or inheritance taxes.

Source: IRS, 2026 Estate Tax Rules

So, you could have one individual who runs out of money because they spend too much, and another who spends so little that they never enjoy the wealth they’ve accumulated, potentially leaving behind unnecessary taxes and missed opportunities.

Both represent failures of retirement planning, although for entirely different reasons.

Successful retirement planning isn’t necessarily about dying with the largest possible portfolio. It’s about having enough money to live the life you want, maintaining financial security throughout retirement, and ensuring your remaining wealth is transferred according to your wishes.

The 4% Rule: Still One of the Best Places to Start

There’s a lot of criticism online surrounding the 4% rule, and frankly, I think much of it misses the point.

The 4% rule is an excellent starting point for determining whether retirement is even remotely feasible. It isn’t a comprehensive retirement plan, and it certainly isn’t a guarantee, but it’s an extremely useful preliminary calculation.

Here’s how it works.

Take your total investable assets and multiply that figure by 4%.

These figures represent gross portfolio withdrawals before applicable income taxes and investment costs. They also exclude additional income sources such as Social Security, pensions, or rental income.

For example, if you’ve accumulated $5 million in investable assets and your annual spending needs are approximately $150,000, you’re looking at a starting withdrawal rate of just 3%.

That’s a reasonably encouraging starting point.

On the other hand, if you’re spending $350,000 annually from that same $5 million portfolio, your starting withdrawal rate is 7%. That should immediately raise concerns about the long-term sustainability of your retirement.

The underlying research is worth understanding.

In 1994, financial planner William Bengen published research examining historical retirement withdrawal rates, which ultimately helped popularize the 4% rule. The traditional framework assumes an initial withdrawal of 4% of the starting portfolio, with the dollar amount adjusted for inflation in subsequent years.

More recently, Morningstar has revisited sustainable withdrawal rates using forward-looking capital market assumptions rather than relying exclusively on historical returns.

In its retirement income research discussed in February 2026, Morningstar estimated a 3.9% safe starting withdrawal rate, assuming a 30-year retirement, relatively consistent inflation-adjusted withdrawals, and a 90% probability of having funds remaining at the end of that period.

Morningstar also found that retirees willing to make adjustments to their spending during retirement could potentially support higher initial withdrawal rates under certain strategies.

Source: Morningstar, February 18, 2026, Retirement Income Research

So, does this mean 4% is the perfect withdrawal rate?

Of course not.

Someone retiring at 55 may need their portfolio to last 40 years or longer. Someone retiring at 75 may have a much shorter planning horizon. An individual with guaranteed pension income, substantial real estate holdings, or significant future liquidity events may have additional financial flexibility.

Your investment allocation also matters. So do taxes, inflation, market performance, and whether you’re willing to temporarily reduce spending during difficult market environments.

But here’s my point.

If your spending needs are comfortably below 4% of your investable assets, you may have a reasonable foundation from which to begin serious retirement planning.

I want to emphasize the word begin.

Passing the 4% test does not mean you should immediately submit your resignation and retire.

It means the real work can begin.

Why Having $10 Million Doesn’t Mean You Have a Retirement Plan

This is where comprehensive financial planning comes into play.

At Wealthstone, we’re fortunate to have two CFP® professionals, and our approach to retirement planning goes far beyond simply calculating a withdrawal rate.

When we begin working with a prospective retirement planning client, we want to understand essentially every aspect of their financial life.

That includes their current spending, future lifestyle expectations, financial goals, assets, liabilities, investment allocation, insurance coverage, Social Security benefits, tax returns, estate planning documents, and much more.

We also need to understand how their assets are structured.

Consider two hypothetical families, both worth $10 million.

The first family has $8 million in traditional IRAs and 401(k) accounts, with another $2 million in taxable investments.

The second family has $3 million in traditional retirement accounts, $2 million in Roth accounts, and $5 million in taxable investments with varying cost bases.

Although their total investable wealth is identical, their future income tax exposure, required minimum distributions, withdrawal flexibility, and potential inheritance outcomes could be substantially different.

For the first family, much of their wealth represents income that hasn’t yet been taxed. As they begin withdrawing from those accounts, the taxable portions of those distributions will generally be subject to ordinary income taxes.

The second family may have considerably more flexibility in determining where their retirement income comes from, when taxes are recognized, and how their assets are ultimately passed down.

This is why looking exclusively at the total account balance can be misleading.

We then need to examine what happens under different scenarios.

What if you retire immediately and the stock market declines 30% during your first year?

What happens if inflation remains elevated for another decade?

What if you or your spouse live into your late 90s?

What if your health care expenses rise substantially, or you require long-term care?

Or, on the other hand, what if your investments perform exceptionally well, leaving you with far more wealth than you’ll realistically spend?

Research published by Fidelity on July 21, 2026, estimated that a 65-year-old retiring in 2026 could spend approximately $185,500 on health care and medical expenses throughout retirement, an increase of 7.5% from the prior year’s estimate. Importantly, that estimate does not include long-term care.

Source: Fidelity, July 21, 2026, Retiree Health Care Cost Estimate

For affluent retirees, health care and longevity planning can be even more complicated because Medicare premiums can increase with income, and long-term care preferences may involve substantial private-pay expenses.

A comprehensive retirement plan should analyze these circumstances, along with multiple potential market environments, rather than simply assuming a constant annual investment return.

Through detailed financial modeling, stress testing, and scenario analysis, we can develop a much better understanding of the range of potential retirement outcomes and identify adjustments that could improve them.

No financial planner can predict the future with certainty, but there is an enormous difference between entering retirement with assumptions and entering retirement with a thoughtfully constructed plan.

Can You Build Your Own Retirement Plan?

Of course. In theory, you can do almost anything yourself.

But there’s an important distinction between being able to do something and being able to do it exceptionally well.

To properly construct a comprehensive retirement plan, you need a fairly deep understanding of investments, income taxes, estate planning, Social Security, Medicare, insurance, retirement distribution strategies, and the interaction between all these different areas.

For affluent families, the planning can become considerably more complicated.

You may have concentrated stock positions, deferred compensation, stock options, privately held businesses, real estate partnerships, trusts, charitable structures, and investments with different tax treatments.

One decision can have consequences across several other areas of your financial life.

I’ve spent considerable time testing artificial intelligence tools on complex financial planning and investment scenarios. They’re becoming increasingly capable, and I believe they’ll continue to transform our industry. However, I’ve also seen them provide inaccurate answers in situations involving sophisticated tax planning, investment structures, and estate strategies.

That’s why I wouldn’t rely on an AI-generated retirement plan without having its assumptions and conclusions independently reviewed.

There’s also research supporting the value of professional advice.

In December 2025, Vanguard published research examining why investors seek financial advice and how they measure its value. Based on a survey of more than 13,400 investors conducted in July 2025, Vanguard identified four important areas where professional advice can create value: financial planning, portfolio management, emotional support, and time savings.

Interestingly, peace of mind was the most frequently cited reason investors sought advice.

Source: Vanguard, December 11, 2025, Four Ways Financial Advice Delivers True Value

Vanguard’s broader Advisor’s Alpha research also emphasizes the importance of behavioral coaching, disciplined portfolio management, and tax-efficient planning.

This doesn’t mean every advisor provides exceptional value, or that hiring an advisor automatically improves investment returns. The value depends on the quality of the advice, services provided, fees charged, and the client’s circumstances.

But I do believe that for someone approaching retirement with $5 million, $10 million, or more, the potential financial consequences of poor planning can be far greater than the cost of obtaining qualified professional advice.

Here’s an analogy I often think about.

I’m reasonably confident that with enough time, research, and patience, I could remodel my entire backyard myself. I could probably figure out how to build a pool, install a hot tub, and do most of the other work.

I might even save some money.

But how much of my time would that require? How many mistakes would I make along the way? And what would those mistakes ultimately cost me?

At some point, hiring an experienced professional becomes the more rational decision.

Financial planning is similar, except the stakes can be substantially higher.

When you’re younger, you generally have more time to recover from investment mistakes. If you’re still earning substantial employment income, an investment setback may be manageable.

But when you’re within five years of retirement, or already retired, the consequences can be much more difficult to reverse.

You may no longer have decades of employment income to replenish your assets. You may be withdrawing money from your portfolio during market downturns. And certain tax or estate planning decisions may become increasingly difficult, or even impossible, to undo.

The years immediately preceding and following retirement deserve particularly careful attention.

Five Strategies That Could Materially Improve Your Retirement

Now that we’ve addressed whether you may have enough money to retire, let’s discuss something equally important.

What can you do today to improve your retirement outcome?

Here are five areas I believe affluent pre-retirees and retirees should carefully evaluate.

1. Don’t Automatically Rush to Pay Off Your Mortgage

I meet many individuals approaching retirement who become determined to eliminate their mortgage as quickly as possible.

I understand the appeal.

Having a paid-off home provides peace of mind, reduces monthly expenses, and can make retirement feel more financially secure.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean aggressively paying down your mortgage is the best financial decision.

Consider someone with a 30-year fixed mortgage at 4.5%.

If they have $500,000 in excess liquidity, they might be tempted to immediately apply it toward their mortgage balance.

Before making that decision, I’d want to understand what that money could otherwise be doing.

Perhaps it could remain invested in a diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds. Perhaps some of it would be better allocated toward future retirement spending, Roth conversion taxes, or other financial goals.

Historically, balanced portfolios have delivered positive long-term returns, although with meaningful volatility and periods of loss.

J.P. Morgan’s investment research, using data through December 31, 2025, examined how a hypothetical 60% stock and 40% bond portfolio performed relative to cash following major economic and geopolitical shocks since 1990. Across the periods studied, the balanced portfolio outperformed cash more than 70% of the time over the following year and in all the examined three-year periods.

Source: J.P. Morgan, Investment Principles, Data Through December 31, 2025

That doesn’t prove a balanced portfolio will outperform the savings from paying off a 4.5% mortgage. The mortgage payoff provides a much more predictable reduction in interest expense, while investment returns are uncertain and subject to market losses.

However, it does demonstrate why maintaining long-term investments deserves consideration instead of automatically using available cash to eliminate low-cost debt.

Let’s use a hypothetical example.

Assume you have $500,000 available and are comparing a 4.5% borrowing cost against an investment portfolio earning an assumed 7% annualized return.

The difference is 2.5 percentage points annually before accounting for taxes, investment expenses, and risk.

Over long periods, that difference can become substantial.

But here’s where the analysis gets more complicated.

Mortgage interest may also be deductible, depending on when the loan originated, the amount of qualifying debt, and whether you itemize deductions.

Under current federal rules, the general acquisition debt limit is $750,000 for qualifying mortgages originating after December 15, 2017, with a higher $1 million limit generally applying to certain older qualifying mortgages.

Source: IRS Publication 936, Home Mortgage Interest Deduction

For someone who receives a meaningful mortgage interest deduction, the effective after-tax borrowing cost may be lower than the stated mortgage rate.

For someone taking the standard deduction or whose mortgage interest isn’t fully deductible, that tax benefit may be minimal or nonexistent.

Another consideration is liquidity.

Once you’ve used $500,000 to pay down your mortgage, those dollars are tied up in your home. Accessing the equity again may require selling the property, obtaining new financing, or establishing a home equity line of credit, none of which should be assumed to be available on favorable terms during retirement.

My recommendation is simple: Before aggressively paying down a low-interest mortgage, have someone evaluate the decision within your broader retirement plan.

There are absolutely circumstances where eliminating mortgage debt is the better choice, especially when the mortgage rate is high, investment risk is undesirable, or the payment creates significant retirement cash flow pressure.

But don’t assume paying off a mortgage is always the financially optimal decision simply because retirement is approaching.

2. Seriously Consider Roth Conversions Before Retirement

This is one of my favorite areas of retirement planning because the potential tax benefits can be substantial.

Many affluent retirees have spent decades accumulating money in traditional 401(k) plans, IRAs, and other tax-deferred retirement accounts.

During their working years, those contributions may have reduced their taxable income, which was certainly valuable.

However, the money in these accounts hasn’t necessarily escaped taxation. In many cases, the taxes have simply been deferred.

Eventually, distributions from traditional retirement accounts are generally subject to ordinary income taxation to the extent they represent pretax funds.

And at a certain age, the IRS requires account owners to begin taking required minimum distributions, commonly called RMDs.

Under current law, the RMD starting age is generally 73 for those born between 1951 and 1959 and 75 for those born in 1960 or later.

The problem is that these distributions aren’t necessarily based on how much money you actually need.

You could have more than enough taxable investments to fund your retirement lifestyle, yet still be required to withdraw substantial sums from traditional retirement accounts.

Those withdrawals can increase taxable income, potentially push you into higher tax brackets, affect the taxation of Social Security benefits, and increase Medicare premiums through income-related adjustments.

For 2026, the IRS continues to confirm that Roth IRAs aren’t subject to lifetime RMDs for the original owner. Designated Roth workplace accounts also generally avoid lifetime RMDs under current rules.

Source: IRS, Retirement Plan and IRA RMD FAQs

This is where Roth conversions can become particularly attractive.

A Roth conversion generally involves moving funds from a traditional retirement account into a Roth IRA, recognizing applicable taxable income in the conversion year.

Once those assets are in the Roth IRA, future qualified distributions can be received free of federal income taxes, subject to the applicable requirements.

Let’s say you retire at age 60 after earning $600,000 annually during your final working years.

Your employment income suddenly falls substantially, and you don’t anticipate beginning Social Security benefits for several more years.

You may now have a period during which your taxable income is considerably lower than it was during your working years.

That could create an attractive opportunity to begin converting portions of your traditional retirement accounts into Roth accounts at potentially lower marginal tax rates than those you might face later.

Rather than waiting until RMDs begin, you could potentially complete a series of conversions across several years.

For a family with several million dollars in traditional retirement assets, properly structured conversions may materially reduce lifetime taxes and improve the after-tax wealth ultimately transferred to heirs.

Why does this matter for inheritance?

Under the SECURE Act’s inherited IRA rules, many nonspouse beneficiaries must fully distribute inherited retirement accounts within 10 years following the original owner’s death, although important exceptions and annual distribution requirements apply.

For adult children in their peak earning years, inheriting a substantial traditional IRA can create a significant additional income tax burden.

Inherited Roth accounts can also be subject to the 10-year distribution requirement, but qualified withdrawals are generally free of federal income tax.

Source: IRS Publication 590-B, IRA Distributions

However, Roth conversions require careful planning.

Converting too much in a single year can create unnecessary taxes, increase Medicare premiums, and potentially result in a worse financial outcome than leaving those funds in traditional accounts.

You must also consider state income taxes, anticipated future tax rates, available cash to pay the conversion taxes, and the eventual beneficiaries.

The objective isn’t to convert every possible dollar into a Roth IRA.

The objective is to determine how much you should convert, in which years, and at what tax cost to maximize your family’s lifetime after-tax wealth.

Depending on the size of the retirement accounts and the family’s circumstances, the difference between an optimized strategy and an inefficient one can potentially reach hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars over a lifetime.

That’s why Roth conversion analysis is something I believe every affluent pre-retiree should consider.

3. Don’t Keep All Your Eggs in One Basket

I meet an incredible number of affluent investors who have accumulated most of their wealth in a single stock.

Sometimes it’s because they worked for a major technology company and received stock options or restricted stock units over many years.

Other times, they made a particularly successful investment years ago and simply never sold.

And I understand why.

Imagine buying a stock for $50,000 and watching it grow into a $5 million position.

Why would you want to sell something that has performed so incredibly well?

The problem is that the very investment that created your wealth can also become the investment that puts your retirement at risk.

I’ve worked with and met many individuals who experienced the global financial crisis, the technology bubble, and other major market downturns.

Some had accumulated extraordinary wealth in concentrated stock positions. During the good years, their investment success gave them an enormous amount of confidence.

But when markets turned, many discovered just how much risk they had actually been taking.

And unfortunately, some experienced losses that permanently changed their retirement plans.

Vanguard’s research on market volatility illustrates the importance of maintaining a disciplined and diversified investment strategy. In a June 2025 analysis, Vanguard noted that US equities had spent approximately 30% of trading days in correction territory since 1980, based on its historical market analysis.

Source: Vanguard, Staying the Course Wins Again, 2025

Diversification doesn’t eliminate losses or guarantee better returns. However, it can reduce dependence on the performance of any single company or investment.

This is particularly important when you’re approaching retirement.

During your working years, you might have the ability to continue saving and recovering from investment losses. Once retired, a substantial decline in your concentrated stock position could force you to sell investments at unfavorable prices to meet living expenses.

In my book, Secrets From a Wealth Advisor: 4-Stage Methodology, How to Diversify Concentrated Stock Tax Efficiently, I discuss strategies designed to help investors address this exact problem.

One of the most common objections I hear from concentrated stock owners is that they don’t want to diversify because selling their shares would trigger an enormous capital gains tax bill.

That’s a legitimate concern, particularly for individuals living in high-tax states such as California.

But the choice isn’t necessarily between keeping all your shares or selling everything and paying the maximum possible tax.

Depending on the investment, tax basis, investor qualifications, and financial objectives, there may be opportunities to combine staged diversification, tax-loss harvesting, charitable planning, and other specialized investment and tax strategies.

Some strategies may defer capital gains recognition, while others may offset or potentially eliminate certain gains when their requirements are satisfied. Each comes with limitations, costs, risks, or trade-offs that need to be evaluated.

At Wealthstone, concentrated stock diversification is one of our primary areas of focus, and we’ve developed a comprehensive approach that incorporates investment, tax, and estate planning considerations.

Here’s the way I look at it.

If you’ve accumulated $5 million, $10 million, or $20 million from one successful investment, you’ve already achieved something extraordinary.

At some point, preserving that success may become more important than trying to double or triple it again.

You don’t necessarily have to sell every share, and you certainly don’t have to abandon an investment you believe in.

But you should have a deliberate plan for reducing the risk that one company could derail your retirement.

4. Stop Being Tax Inefficient With Your Investments

Here’s something that continues to surprise me.

I’ll meet investors with several million dollars in assets who have spent years focusing on investment performance but have given very little thought to how much of those returns they’re actually keeping after taxes.

It’s entirely possible to have a well-performing investment portfolio that’s structured inefficiently from a tax perspective.

Consider someone with $2 million sitting in a taxable money market fund earning 3.5%.

That produces approximately $70,000 annually in interest income.

For an affluent household in a high federal income tax bracket, potentially subject to the 3.8% net investment income tax and substantial state income taxes, a significant percentage of that income could be lost to taxes.

Now compare that with a municipal bond portfolio.

Interest on qualifying municipal bonds is generally exempt from federal income taxation. Depending on the investor’s state of residence and the underlying bond holdings, some interest may also qualify for a state income tax exemption.

That can make municipal bonds particularly attractive to certain high-income investors.

But here’s the important distinction.

A municipal bond yielding 3% isn’t automatically better than a taxable bond yielding 4%.

You must evaluate the after-tax yield, credit risk, duration, liquidity, and other investment characteristics before determining which investment is actually more attractive.

For example, consider a hypothetical investor in the 37% federal marginal income tax bracket who is also subject to the 3.8% net investment income tax.

Ignoring state taxes and assuming the municipal interest is exempt from both federal income tax and NIIT, a 3% tax-exempt yield has a taxable-equivalent yield of approximately 5.07%.

That’s calculated by dividing the 3% tax-exempt yield by one minus the combined 40.8% marginal federal tax rate.

Suddenly, that 3% municipal bond yield looks considerably more attractive than it might at first glance.

Of course, not every investor pays the same taxes, and municipal bonds carry their own risks. Certain private activity bond interest may also have alternative minimum tax implications.

Another important consideration is asset location.

Asset allocation determines which investments you own.

Asset location determines which accounts should hold those investments.

For example, it may make sense to hold certain investments that generate substantial ordinary income inside tax-deferred retirement accounts, while using taxable brokerage accounts for investments with more favorable long-term capital gains treatment.

However, that decision also depends on future tax rates, withdrawal plans, growth expectations, and estate planning considerations.

The point is that two investors can own nearly identical portfolios, experience similar market performance, and end up with meaningfully different after-tax results simply because of how their investments are structured.

Vanguard’s December 2025 research specifically identifies tax-efficient account selection, Roth conversions, and tax-loss harvesting among the financial planning services that can contribute to the value of professional advice.

Source: Vanguard, How to Talk About the Value of Advice, December 2025

When you’re managing millions of dollars, even relatively small improvements in after-tax returns can become substantial over time.

A hypothetical improvement of 0.50 percentage points annually, compounded over 20 years on a $5 million portfolio, could translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional wealth, depending on the underlying investment returns.

That isn’t a promised benefit from tax planning, but it illustrates why seemingly small efficiencies deserve attention.

Don’t simply focus on how much your investments earn. Focus on how much you actually get to keep.

5. Make Sure You Have a Proper Estate Plan

Of all the mistakes affluent families can make, failing to establish a comprehensive estate plan may be one of the most consequential.

I’ve seen situations where an individual’s parents begin deteriorating, sometimes from serious illness or cognitive decline, and the family suddenly realizes that very little planning was completed beforehand.

Unfortunately, by that point, it may be too late for certain decisions to be made.

If someone no longer possesses the necessary legal capacity, they may be unable to execute a new trust, power of attorney, or other estate planning documents.

Their family could then face court proceedings, restrictions on managing assets, disputes between heirs, or unnecessary financial and legal expenses.

And the financial consequences aren’t necessarily the worst part.

I’ve seen how poorly coordinated estate matters can create tension between family members. Disagreements over money, property, and responsibilities can permanently damage relationships.

Sometimes that cost is far greater than any estate tax.

A properly structured estate plan should address more than just who receives your assets when you die.

It should also establish who has authority to make financial decisions if you become incapacitated, how your health care preferences will be respected, how your estate will be administered, and how wealth should be managed for future generations.

For affluent families, additional considerations may include minimizing estate taxes, coordinating beneficiary designations, charitable planning, transferring interests in privately held businesses, and protecting assets for children and grandchildren.

Certain trust structures can also provide varying degrees of protection against beneficiaries' creditors, lawsuits, and divorce-related claims, depending on applicable state law and how the trusts are drafted and administered.

Another important issue is determining whether your estate plan still reflects your current circumstances.

An estate plan created when you had $1 million in assets may no longer be appropriate after your wealth grows to $10 million.

Likewise, changes in marriage, children, business ownership, state residence, and tax legislation can all create reasons to revisit existing documents.

The tax rules themselves are also changing.

The legislation signed into law on July 4, 2025, increased the federal estate and gift tax basic exclusion amount to $15 million per individual for 2026, with inflation adjustments scheduled for subsequent years.

Source: IRS, Estate Tax FAQs

For married couples with significant wealth, proper planning may preserve available exclusions, coordinate asset ownership, and help ensure assets transfer in the intended manner.

However, reducing estate taxes is only one aspect of effective planning.

For many families, the greater priority is ensuring their surviving spouse and children are protected, decisions can be made efficiently, and the wealth they’ve accumulated doesn’t become a source of conflict.

Estate plans do require an investment of time and money.

But compared with the potential financial and personal consequences of not having one, I believe comprehensive estate planning should be a priority for every affluent household.

And perhaps most importantly, it should be completed while you still have the capacity, time, and flexibility to make those decisions thoughtfully.

The Bottom Line: Retirement Planning Is About More Than Having Enough

Let’s return to the question we started with.

"Do I have enough?"

The truth is, that question is only the beginning.

The 4% rule can provide a useful starting point. If your current assets and expected spending produce a reasonably sustainable withdrawal rate, that’s encouraging.

But it doesn’t tell you whether your investments are appropriately structured, whether you’re paying more taxes than necessary, whether your estate plan is suitable, or whether you’re taking risks that could materially affect your future.

And it certainly doesn’t tell you whether you’re making the most of the wealth you’ve spent a lifetime accumulating.

For someone with $10 million in assets, the challenge may not be earning enough additional money.

It may be determining how to efficiently convert that wealth into decades of financial security, meaningful experiences, and a lasting legacy.

I believe one of the biggest mistakes affluent retirees make is focusing almost exclusively on growing their portfolios while overlooking the many planning decisions that influence how much of their wealth they’ll actually enjoy and preserve.

The right retirement plan should give you the confidence to spend money when it makes sense, preserve wealth when necessary, manage risk appropriately, and make informed decisions based on your entire financial situation.

And for some individuals, that process may reveal something unexpected.

They may already have more than enough money to retire comfortably and accomplish their goals.

They simply haven’t had someone show them what their wealth can realistically support.

That’s the value I believe truly comprehensive retirement planning should provide.

After all, the objective shouldn’t be to spend your entire life accumulating wealth only to spend your retirement worrying about whether you have enough.

It should be to build a thoughtful plan that allows you to enjoy the wealth you’ve created, with confidence in the decisions you’re making along the way.

Zak Gardezy, CFP®

Zak Gardezy is the Founder & Managing Partner of Wealthstone Private Wealth Management, an independent, fiduciary registered investment adviser with offices in San Ramon, California and Scottsdale, Arizona. In-person meetings are by appointment only.