Wealth Formula Podcast

At some point in a successful career, taxes quietly become your largest expense. Not housing. Not lifestyle. Not investing losses. Taxes. And unlike most expenses, they grow automatically as your income rises — unless you deliberately structure around them. You know that my favorite means of tax mitigation is through investing in real assets like real estate and operating businesses. That approach has been the backbone of my own strategy for years — taking active income and redirecting it into assets that generate cash flow while providing meaningful tax advantages. I've also recently explained how you can use Wealth Accelerator in conjunction with charitable pledges to potentially create a future stream of retirement income — essentially at no net cost — while also establishing a death benefit. It's a powerful framework when structured properly. That said, there are also more traditional tools in the tax code that are important to understand. They may not be flashy, but when layered together they can meaningfully reduce lifetime tax burden. I wanted to put together a simple overview — not exhaustive — just a practical framework for thinking about what's available. Let's start with the basics. A Roth IRA remains one of the most elegant structures in the tax system. You contribute after-tax dollars, but the growth is tax-free, and withdrawals are tax-free. That's incredibly powerful compounding over decades. The challenge is that most high earners exceed the income limits for direct contributions. Fortunately, the tax code provides a workaround. The Backdoor Roth is simply the process of contributing to a non-deductible traditional IRA and then converting those funds into Roth status. It's not massive in annual dollar amount, but over a long horizon it's meaningful — especially when tax-free growth is involved. For those with access through certain employer retirement plans, the opportunity expands further through what's commonly called the Mega Backdoor Roth. Some plans allow substantial after-tax contributions followed by immediate conversion into Roth treatment. Instead of moving a few thousand dollars per year into tax-free territory, you may be able to move tens of thousands. It's one of the most underutilized opportunities I see among high earners. From there, we move into more aggressive tax mitigation territory with Defined Benefit or Cash Balance plans. These structures were designed for business owners and high-income professionals and allow very large deductible contributions — often well into six figures annually, depending on age and income profile. They require actuarial design and administration, so they aren't simple, but they can significantly reduce taxable income during peak earning years while accelerating retirement accumulation. Many people assume pensions are relics of another era, but in reality, they've evolved. Structured properly, modern private plan approaches can create predictable future income streams while providing current tax advantages. For the right profile, this dimension of planning is often overlooked. Finally, charitable strategies sit at the intersection of planning and purpose. Whether through donor-advised funds, charitable remainder trusts, gifting appreciated assets, or more advanced leveraged structures, thoughtful design can reduce current taxes, avoid capital gains, support meaningful causes, and improve estate outcomes. In some cases, the real economic cost of giving is far lower than most people expect once tax effects are considered. The big picture is this: No single strategy solves the tax problem. But when retirement positioning, Roth strategies, defined benefit structures, charitable planning, and real asset investing are layered together, they form a system — one that can materially change long-term wealth outcomes. High earners don't just earn more. They structure more. This week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast reviews these concepts in detail with an expert in the field.

For most of my career, I've been focused on two things: Operating businesses and Multifamily real estate. The strategy has been pretty simple. Take money generated from higher-risk, active businesses… and move it into more stable, long-term assets like apartment buildings. That shift—from risk to stability—is how I've tried to build durability over time. Now, to be fair, the sharp rise in interest rates a few years ago put a dent in that model. But zooming out, it's still worked well for me overall. So I'm sticking with it. That said, there are other ways to think about real estate. In some cases, the real opportunity is when you combine real estate with an operating business. We've done that before in the Wealth Formula Investor Club with self-storage, and the results were excellent. Storage is operationally simple, relatively boring—and that's exactly why it works. But there's another category that sits at the opposite end of the spectrum. Hotels. They're sexier. They're more volatile. And yes—they're riskier. But the upside can be dramatically higher. One of my closest friends here in Montecito has quietly built a fortune doing boutique hotels over the past few years. He started with a no-frills hotel in Texas serving the oil drilling industry. Over time, he combined his operational experience with his talent as a designer—and eventually created some of the highest-rated boutique hotels in the world. He's absolutely crushing it. Of course, most of us aren't world-class designers or architects. I'm certainly not. Still, his success made me curious. Hotels have been on my radar for a while now—not because I understand the business, but because I don't. When I asked him how he learned the hotel industry, his answer was honest: "I figured it out on the fly—starting with my first acquisition and a great broker." That's usually how real learning happens. So this week on the Wealth Formula Podcast, I brought on an expert in hospitality investing to educate both of us. We cover the basics: How hotel investing actually works Where the real risks are (and where they aren't) How returns differ from multifamily And what someone should understand before ever touching their first hotel deal If you've ever thought about buying or investing in hotels—but didn't know where to start—welcome to the club. You don't have to jump in tomorrow. But you do have to start somewhere. This episode is a good starting point.

This week's episode of Wealth Formula features an interview with Claudia Sahm, and I want to share a quick takeaway before you listen — because she's often misunderstood in the headlines. First, a quick explanation of the Sahm Rule, in plain English. The rule looks at unemployment and asks a very simple question: Has the unemployment rate started rising meaningfully from its recent low? Specifically, if the three-month average unemployment rate rises by 0.5% or more above its lowest level over the past year, the Sahm Rule is triggered. Historically, that has happened early in every U.S. recession since World War II. That's why it gets cited so much. And to be clear — it's cited a lot. The Sahm Rule is tracked by the Federal Reserve, Treasury economists, Wall Street banks, macro funds, and economic research shops globally. When it triggers, it shows up everywhere. That's not by accident. Claudia built one of the cleanest early-warning indicators we have. But here's the part that often gets lost. The Sahm Rule is not a market-timing tool and it's not a prediction machine. Claudia emphasized this repeatedly. It was designed as a policy signal — a way to say, "Hey, if unemployment is rising this fast, waiting too long to respond makes things worse." In other words, it's a call to action for policymakers, not a command for investors to panic. What makes this cycle unusual — and why talking to Claudia directly was so helpful — is what's actually driving the data. We're not seeing mass layoffs. Layoffs remain low by historical standards. What we're seeing instead is very weak hiring. Companies aren't firing people — they're just not expanding. That distinction matters. And this is where I think the big picture comes in — not just for understanding the economy, but for investing in general. When you step back, the big picture includes a government with massive debt loads that needs interest rates to come down over time. It includes fiscal pressures that make prolonged high rates politically and economically painful. And it includes the reality that if the current Fed leadership won't ease fast enough, future leadership will. History tells us that governments eventually get the monetary conditions they need — even if it takes time, even if it takes new appointments, and even if it takes a shift toward a more dovish Federal Reserve. That doesn't mean reckless money printing tomorrow. But it does mean that structurally high rates are unlikely to be permanent. And when you combine that with investing, the question becomes less about this month's headline and more about what's positioned to benefit when the environment normalizes. That's why I continue to focus on real assets that are already deeply discounted — things like multifamily real estate — assets that were repriced brutally during the rate shock, but still sit at the center of a growing, rent-dependent economy. This conversation with Claudia reinforced something I've been talking about for a long time: The biggest investing mistakes usually happen when people zoom in too far and forget to zoom back out. I've made this mistake myself. If you want a thoughtful, non-sensational, data-driven discussion about where we actually are in this cycle — and what the indicators really mean — I think you'll get a lot out of this episode.

One of the biggest risks people face when trying to understand the economy, investing, or personal finance isn't a lack of information. It's the illusion of being informed—while quietly limiting the sources that shape your thinking. We live in a world where information is everywhere. Podcasts, X threads, YouTube clips, newsletters, reels. But abundance doesn't equal diversity. In fact, the algorithms behind social media are designed to do the opposite: they show you more of what you already agree with. Over time, your worldview narrows—not because you chose it to, but because it was curated for you. I noticed this years ago when I started listening to alternative asset podcasts. At first, it felt refreshing—new ideas, new language, new opportunities outside the mainstream. But after a while, something became obvious. Many of these shows were operating inside an echo chamber. Different hosts. Same conclusions. Same narratives. Same villains. Same heroes. It was as if they were all listening to one another and simply regurgitating the same ideas, reinforcing them in a closed loop until they felt like truth. And to be fair—knowing many of these hosts personally—that's often the business model. Audience reinforcement is rewarded. Dissent is not. Ever since then, I've made a conscious effort to study people I don't naturally agree with. Not because I want to adopt their views—but because I want to stress-test my own. This matters more now than ever because social media accelerates groupthink at scale. When an idea gains traction online, disagreement quickly becomes social friction. It's easier to conform, retweet, and nod along than to pause and ask, "What if this is wrong?" I once had a conversation with Robert Kiyosaki where he told me he actually gets worried when everyone in the room agrees about the economy. When viewpoints converge too neatly, it's usually a sign that critical thinking has been replaced by consensus comfort—and that's exactly where blindsides are born. If your goal is to get closer to the truth, you must seek out opinions that challenge your own. That includes people you disagree with—especially people you disagree with. Truth doesn't emerge from unanimity. It emerges from tension. And that applies to me as well. Don't let me—or anyone else—be your sole source of information. No matter how much you trust someone, outsourcing your thinking is always a risk. I can tell you from personal experience that in economics and personal finance, narrow perspectives lead to surprises you only recognize in hindsight. Those are the moments people regret most—not because they lacked intelligence, but because they lacked perspective. Financial education is critical. But a real curriculum doesn't just confirm what you already believe. It exposes you to competing frameworks, conflicting data, and uncomfortable questions—and forces you to think for yourself. That's how you build conviction that actually holds up when the world changes. This week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast examines this groupthink problem on a broader scale throughout society with an author who wrote a bestseller on our inherent appetite for misinformation. It's a fascinating conversation that will surely get you thinking about the way you view the world.

The Wealth Formula Podcast is one of the longest-running personal finance podcasts still standing. For more than a decade, I've shown up every single week to talk about investing, markets, and the forces shaping the economy. What's interesting is how much my own thinking has evolved over that time. Early on, I was more rigid. I was—and still am—a real estate guy. But back then, I didn't give much thought to ideas outside that lane. I was dogmatic, and I didn't always challenge my own beliefs. Time has a way of doing that for you. I've now lived through multiple market cycles. I've watched the stock market melt up to valuations that felt absurd—and then keep going. I've seen gold go from flat for a decade to parabolic over a year. I've seen interest rates sit near zero for a decade and then snap higher at the fastest pace in modern history. And I've learned, sometimes the hard way, that diversification is about survival and that every asset class has its day. One lesson I learned that I am thinking a lot about these days is: ignore major technological shifts at your own peril. Back in 2014, I first started hearing people talk seriously about Bitcoin. At the time, I dismissed it. I listened to the critics, was convinced it was a scam, and didn't take the time to truly understand it. That was a mistake—not because everyone should have bought Bitcoin, but because I ignored a structural change happening right in front of me. Bitcoin went from a cypherpunk expression of freedom to the largest ETF owned by BlackRock. Today, the dominant story is artificial intelligence. And whether you love stocks, hate stocks, prefer real estate, or focus exclusively on cash flow, you cannot afford to ignore AI. This isn't a fad. It's a general-purpose technology—on the scale of electricity, the internet, or the industrial revolution itself. That doesn't mean it's easy to invest in. It's hard to look at headline names trading at massive valuations and feel good about buying them today. But investing in AI isn't about chasing a single company. It's about understanding second- and third-order effects: energy demand, data centers, productivity gains, labor displacement, capital flows, and how blockchain and decentralized systems intersect with all of it. What experience has taught me is this: you don't need to be first to invest—but you do need to be early in understanding. If you wait until something feels obvious, most of the opportunity is already gone. This week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is focused squarely on AI and blockchain—what's real, what's noise, and where the long-term implications may lie. Listen to this episode. You'll come away smarter. And years from now, you may look back and realize this was one of those moments where paying attention really mattered.

We all love winners. We love hearing about the big wins and the perfect track records. It feels good. It feels safe. It instills us with a sense of trust. But I've been in business long enough to know that virtually all individuals who are long-term winners have had profound moments of failure from which they learned invaluable lessons. Those are the people I really want to hear from. They have the kind of knowledge we all need as we navigate through life. It's called wisdom. Surgeons have a saying: "If you've never had a complication, you haven't done enough surgery." In my surgeon days, I had a handful of complications. Let me tell you—they are no fun. You stay up at night replaying things in your mind, trying to figure out how you could have done things differently—how you could have had a better outcome. Even when unavoidable, those complications teach you something you'll never get from textbooks. It's been no different for me when it comes to business and investing. But I take comfort in knowing that even the greatest investors of all time had their moments of failure and rose from the ashes stronger and wiser. Warren Buffett. Ray Dalio. Every big winner has a story of failure. And while it may be cliché to say that we learn best from mistakes, I truly believe it. The good news is that those mistakes don't have to be our own. Learning from other people's mistakes can be just as effective. This week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is with Russell Gray—a guy many of you already know from his podcasting and radio career. Russ lived through 2008 up close. He took a beating, and he talks openly about what went wrong. But that period also changed the way he sees the world—in a good way. It changed how he thinks about risk, leverage, and what actually matters when things stop going up. That mindset is a big reason he's been successful since then. It's a conversation worth your time.

We all love winners. We love hearing about the big wins and the perfect track records. It feels good. It feels safe. It instills us with a sense of trust. But I've been in business long enough to know that virtually all individuals who are long-term winners have had profound moments of failure from which they learned invaluable lessons. Those are the people I really want to hear from. They have the kind of knowledge we all need as we navigate through life. It's called wisdom. Surgeons have a saying: "If you've never had a complication, you haven't done enough surgery." In my surgeon days, I had a handful of complications. Let me tell you—they are no fun. You stay up at night replaying things in your mind, trying to figure out how you could have done things differently—how you could have had a better outcome. Even when unavoidable, those complications teach you something you'll never get from textbooks. It's been no different for me when it comes to business and investing. But I take comfort in knowing that even the greatest investors of all time had their moments of failure and rose from the ashes stronger and wiser. Warren Buffett. Ray Dalio. Every big winner has a story of failure. And while it may be cliché to say that we learn best from mistakes, I truly believe it. The good news is that those mistakes don't have to be our own. Learning from other people's mistakes can be just as effective. This week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is with Russell Gray—a guy many of you already know from his podcasting and radio career. Russ lived through 2008 up close. He took a beating, and he talks openly about what went wrong. But that period also changed the way he sees the world—in a good way. It changed how he thinks about risk, leverage, and what actually matters when things stop going up. That mindset is a big reason he's been successful since then. It's a conversation worth your time.

First off — Happy New Year. To kick off the year, this week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is a solo one from me. I spend the episode walking through my outlook for 2026 and sharing a few predictions for how I think this cycle is going to play out. Lately, I keep hearing the same question phrased in different ways. The economy feels tight, but markets are holding up. Growth is coming in stronger than expected, inflation is easing, and yet a lot of the signals people usually rely on just don't seem to be lining up. That disconnect is really the starting point for this episode. Rather than reacting to headlines or making short-term calls, I wanted to step back and talk through the mechanics of what's actually driving this environment — and why it looks so different from the cycles most of us learned about. A lot of it comes down to debt, policy constraints, how capital moves today, and the growing influence of technology. When you start looking at those pieces together, some of the things that feel confusing begin to make a lot more sense. This isn't meant to be alarmist or overly optimistic. It's simply an attempt to frame the environment clearly so you can think about it more intelligently — especially if you're deploying capital or deciding whether it makes sense to sit on the sidelines. If you've felt like the economy and the markets aren't really speaking the same language right now, I think you'll find this episode useful.

It's been another interesting year in the world of personal finance and macroeconomics. As we look ahead to 2026… well, who really knows what's coming? I'll be sharing my own take—and making a few predictions—in an upcoming episode. What's hard to ignore is just how unusual this moment in history is. We're coming off COVID. We went through a rapid rise in interest rates, and now a pullback. Tariffs are back in the conversation. There are a lot of moving parts, and as usual, the consensus hasn't exactly nailed it. Almost every expert was convinced tariffs would push inflation higher. I expected at least a temporary bump—some transient inflation while markets adjusted. Then the CPI report came out at 2.7%. That's a lot closer to the Fed's 2% target, and nearly half a percentage point lower than expectations. Clearly, something else is going on. At the same time, GDP came in at around 4.3% growth. That's real strength. Inflation is coming down, growth is strong, and while the labor market is still a little murky, there's no question there's underlying momentum in the system. Investors haven't quite felt it yet. It's been a sticky environment. But my sense is that we're getting closer to a shift—more liquidity, more money in the system, and markets that may start moving meaningfully again. Of course, we'll see how it all plays out. For this episode, my producer Phil pulled together some of the highlights from the show in 2025—a look back at the conversations and ideas that stood out in a year when the data kept surprising just about everyone. I hope you enjoy it. And again, happy holidays. Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year.

For years, gold was the asset nobody wanted to talk about. It sat there quietly while stocks and real estate continued to rip. Gold was for pessimists. For doomsayers and perma-bears. And then suddenly… gold didn't just wake up. It launched. As of mid-December 2025, spot gold is trading around $4,300–$4,400 an ounce, depending on the market, marking a gain of roughly 60% over the past year and pushing decisively into record territory. The obvious question is: why now? The short answer is that gold isn't reacting to one thing. It's responding to a stacking of pressures that have been quietly building for years and are now impossible to ignore. Start with central banks. For the better part of the last decade, central banks were net sellers or indifferent holders of gold. That changed dramatically after 2022. According to the World Gold Council, central banks have been buying gold at more than double the pace of the pre-COVID years, and 2025 continues that trend, with hundreds of tonnes added to reserves year-to-date. These aren't hedge funds chasing momentum. These are monetary authorities making deliberate, strategic decisions about what they trust to hold value. Why would central banks suddenly want more gold? Because geopolitics has re-entered the chat. We now live in a world where reserves can be frozen, payment systems can be weaponized, and "risk-free" assets depend heavily on political alignment. The World Bank has been explicit that rising geopolitical tensions and global uncertainty are key drivers of gold's surge this year. When trust in the global order erodes, gold benefits. At the same time, the U.S. dollar devaluation thesis is no longer fringe thinking. It is reality. Gold is priced in dollars, and when real yields fall and the dollar weakens, gold historically performs well. That dynamic is playing out again. Reuters has repeatedly pointed to a softer dollar and declining Treasury yields as near-term tailwinds for gold's rally . Bank of America's research echoes this relationship, emphasizing gold's inverse correlation to the dollar and the growing desire among nations to diversify away from dollar-centric reserves . In other words, gold isn't just going up because people are scared. It's going up because confidence in fiat discipline is eroding, slowly but persistently. So…Is gold still a buy or did we miss it? The truth is, both answers can be correct. Yes, gold is expensive relative to where it was a year ago. You don't go up 60% without pulling future returns forward. But what makes this cycle different is that many of the buyers driving demand are price-insensitive. Central banks don't care if gold is up 20% or down 10% in a quarter. They care about long-term reserve integrity. That's why major institutions aren't dismissing the move as a blow-off. Goldman Sachs has cited sustained central-bank demand and the potential for further ETF inflows as supportive of higher prices. J.P. Morgan continues to frame gold as a beneficiary of geopolitical instability and monetary uncertainty, and Bank of America is projecting prices as high as $5,000 an ounce into 2026. Of course, nothing goes up in a straight line. A shift toward tighter monetary policy or a sudden easing of global tensions could cool enthusiasm. Understand though, that gold's breakout isn't just about gold. There is a larger message that should be taken away from all of this. Hard money has come back into favor. Gold is the original hard asset. It's scarce, politically neutral, and has thousands of years of monetary credibility. But it's also heavy, difficult to move, and awkward in a digital world. Bitcoin exists on the same philosophical axis. Both gold and Bitcoin are reactions to the same problem: expanding debt, monetary dilution, and declining confidence in centralized control. Gold is the conservative expression of that view. Bitcoin is the aggressive one. Today, Bitcoin trades around $86,000, still volatile, still controversial, still misunderstood. But if gold's surge is signaling a regime shift toward hard assets, then Bitcoin may simply be earlier in that adoption curve. In other words, gold may be leading the parade. And if history is any guide, when institutions start moving into the oldest form of sound money, they eventually begin exploring the newest. That's the signal worth paying attention to. So this week, I interview Dana Samuelson, an old friend of the show and an expert in everything gold and hard money. Learn more about Dana Samuelson: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dana-samuelson-64793056/