The limbo-like state of domestic partnerships

(Image credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

published 13 July 2015

Here are three of the smartest pieces of financial advice and analysis we found this week:

Domestic partnerships in limbo?

"A national right to marry calls into question the fate of domestic partner benefits," said Tara Siegel Bernard at The New York Times. Some large employers — including Delta, IBM, and Corning — rescinded domestic partner benefits in states that legalized same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court's recent decision, replacing them with spousal benefits. Some couples are worried that other firms will follow suit now that same-sex marriage is legal throughout the U.S. Domestic partner benefits can be complex to administer, as workers may be taxed on the benefits' value, which companies have to calculate and withhold from paychecks. Roughly two-thirds of Fortune 500 companies offer the benefits to employees with same-sex partners.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Where you live might determine how you invest, said Barry Ritholtz at Bloomberg View. Data from OpenFolio, a website that allows investors to compare their portfolios to those of other users, shows investors often have a bias toward local industries. West Coast portfolios, near the tech hubs of Silicon Valley, are overweighed with technology by about 9.5 percent. Investors in the Northeast are overexposed to finance by 9 percent, and Midwesterners to industrial companies by 11.8 percent. The biggest home bias? Southerners have 13.7 percent more energy holdings than the rest of the country. This looks to be a regional version of "home country bias," which affects most investors and increases a portfolio's risk and volatility. The best course is to try to correct for the bias, so you don't get a "drag on performance."

There's yet more evidence that expensive portfolio managers stack up poorly against cheaper index funds, said Jonnelle Marte at The Washington Post. A new study by investment-research firm Morningstar found that actively managed funds lost out to passive funds "in nearly every asset class" between 2004 and 2014. There was only one category where active management paid off: U.S. mid-cap stocks. Despite the mounting evidence that passive investing is a better bet than actively managed funds, financial advisers typically recommend using both, with index funds making up the bulk of a portfolio and active funds used for niche markets "where the wits and instincts" of a smart portfolio manager might still boost returns.