Some pension plans have overpaid retirees for years — now they’re demanding their money back.

For retirees, it can mean owing tens of thousands of dollars. And with little warning, their pension checks are being slashed to cover their debt.

In April 2011, New Jersey resident Carol Montague received a letter from American Water Works Co.’s pension plan saying it had overpaid her for more than five years and wanted its money back — plus interest. Montague, now 67, was told she owed roughly $45,000.

Two weeks later, Montague’s pension benefits dropped from $1,246 to around $325 a month, or half what she should have been paid all along. The plan takes out roughly $300 a month in order to pay itself back.

Once Montague’s health care premium is deducted, her monthly pension check shrinks to less than $25. She gets another $1,200 a month from Social Security, but it’s not enough. So, in addition to her part-time job as a school crossing guard, she is working as a salesperson at Macy’s.

So far, Montague has repaid almost $9,000 — calculations show that she won’t repay her debt in full until 2024.

Share your story: Are you worried about your pension?

American Water said Montague signed a document verifying the correct pension amount and that they are legally allowed to collect any overpayment, with interest, to protect the viability of the pension fund. Montague acknowledges she made a mistake, but didn’t think she needed to confirm that her benefits matched the amount in the letter she had signed almost a year before she retired.

“I put it away in a steel box. I never looked at it again. It was stupid on my part,” she said. “But it took (almost) six years for them to find out they overpaid me?”

With the help of the Mid-Atlantic Pension Counseling Project, a government-sponsored program, she has appealed to the pension plan to waive the interest, as well as ease some of the overpayment burden. But the plan has refused.

As pensions face increased financial scrutiny — and shrinking funds — pension counseling programs are seeing even more cases like Montague’s.

This year, nearly 600 retired metal workers and their spouses are facing these so-called recoupment demands from the Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 73 Pension Fund, based outside of Chicago.

Related: Will your congressman retire richer than you?

In a letter sent to the pension recipients in May, the fund said a 2010 audit found that certain pensions were calculated incorrectly from 1974 to 2004, resulting in more than $5 million in overpayments, according to an IRS filing. The fund is now demanding that the retirees pay back decades worth of mistakes, including interest based on the plan’s rates of return.

In July, the pension fund reduced hundreds of checks to the proper payment amount and then again, to make up for the overpayments, often by as much as 25%.

Since the pension fund is forecasting that many of the retirees will die before their debts are repaid, it is asking many of them to make large upfront payments.

It’s unclear why the pension fund, which did not respond to requests for comment, waited several years to make the adjustments.

Carole Grant, 75, was told by the sheet metal worker’s plan that she owed almost $61,000 (roughly half of which was interest) for nearly 20 years of overpayments on the spousal benefits she received from her deceased husband’s pension. Her monthly benefit of $394 should have actually been $249, the pension fund said.

Related: Are you saving enough for retirement?

As a result, she’s been asked to make an upfront payment of $54,000 and her check has been reduced to $187 a month. While she has other sources of income, she doesn’t think she should have to turn over her retirement savings.

“I don’t feel that I should be penalized for the mistakes that they made,” she said.

Karen Ferguson, director of the Pension Rights Center, a Washington D.C.-based advocacy group, said that, in most cases, retirees have no idea they are being overpaid since “the way a benefit is figured in a typical pension plan is impossible for an ordinary person to fathom.”

She called the sheet metal workers case the “most egregious” she’s seen, underscoring the need for federal regulations, such as imposing a statute of limitations and limiting how dramatically a pension check can be reduced. She also said many retirees don’t realize that plans rarely take legal actions to recover the lump sums.

Money 101: Planning for retirement

While some of the retired sheet metal workers have been able to get their debts forgiven or reduced by filing “hardship waivers,” many have had appeals denied, said Tim Kelly, an attorney representing some of the retirees.

One of his clients, 63-year-old Ed Cochran, has received a disability pension since 1995 and was told he owes the fund nearly $100,000, $42,464 of which is interest. His monthly checks had included an excess $262 a month.

Cochran paid years’ worth of income taxes and child support based on the amounts he received. And he’s heard of many retirees in worse financial shape than him.

“There are so many other older retirees who didn’t plan for rainy days,” Cochran said. “This is all they have.”

Have you received a recoupment demand? Visit the Pension Rights Center website for advice or for pension counseling referrals.

CNNMoney (New York) First published October 24, 2013: 6:59 AM ET

If you’re looking forward to retirement, you’re not alone. Countless workers dream of leaving their jobs behind and enjoying the freedom of unstructured days. But before you pull the trigger on retirement, be sure to tackle the following moves so you don’t come to regret your decision later on.

Hopefully, you spent much of your working years socking away money in an IRA or 401(k). If you’re thinking of retiring, now’s the time to assess your balance and see what it actually means in terms of usable day-to-day cash. It’s easy enough to look at, say, a $500,000 IRA balance and think, “Wow, that’s a lot of money.” But if we apply a 4% yearly withdrawal rate, which has long been the standard, that $500,000 translates into just $20,000 of annual income, give or take some adjustments for inflation.

Of course, that figure doesn’t account for other income sources you might have at your disposal, like rental income or earnings from a part-time job. It also doesn’t factor in Social Security. The point, however, is to look past the figure you see on your retirement plan statement and determine how much income it’ll actually give you in practice.

Maybe you’re used to following a budget and tracking your spending diligently. While that’s certainly a positive habit to celebrate, once you stop working, your expenses are likely to change — for better and for worse. While you might save money on things like commuting and transportation (retiring might allow you to downsize from a two-vehicle household to a single vehicle, thereby saving money on maintenance and insurance costs), you might spend more money on things like leisure, since you’ll have additional free time on your hands.

Before you retire, create a new budget that details the expenses you expect to encounter once your career comes to a close. You’ll probably have to tweak that budget as you go along, but having one in place will give you a good sense of whether your nest egg will suffice during your golden years, or whether you’ll need to save more money before making your retirement official.

We all know that healthcare can be expensive at any stage of life, but you may be shocked to learn that the average 65-year-old man today will spend $189,687 on medical care throughout retirement, while the average 65-year-old woman will spend $214,565. Ouch. Worse yet, these figures don’t account for long-term care — something 70% of seniors 65 and over are statistically likely to need.

The good news, however, is that the more you educate yourself on what senior healthcare costs might look like, the better equipped you’ll be to manage and keep them to a minimum. Along these lines, it pays to look into long-term care insurance, which can help defray some of the astronomical costs seniors face when they inevitably wind up needing nursing home or assisted living care.

If you’re like most seniors, Social Security will come to provide a large portion of your retirement income. But while your benefits themselves are calculated based on how much you earn during your career, the age at which you first file for them can cause that number to go up, go down, or stay the same. That’s why it’s important to create a strategy for claiming benefits rather than go in blind.

For example, if you file for benefits at your full retirement age, which is either 66, 67, or 66 and a certain number of months, you’ll get the full monthly benefit you’re entitled to based on your work history. If you delay past full retirement age, your benefits will get a boost. And if you file before full retirement age, you’ll face a reduction in benefits, but you’ll also get your money sooner. There’s no right or wrong answer when it comes to choosing a filing age, but what you should do is know your full retirement age and understand the consequences of claiming benefits at various points in time.

Though the idea of having all the free time in the world might seem appealing, once you find yourself in that situation, the reality might hit you hard. The truth is that it’s difficult to go from a full-time work schedule to a total lack of structure, which explains why so many retirees ultimately fall victim to depression.

If you’d rather avoid that fate, come up with a plan for spending your newfound free time, and make sure it aligns with your budget and income. You might think you’ll go golfing twice a week and travel once a month, but if your savings can’t support that lifestyle, you’ll need to come up with a different plan.

Related links:

• Motley Fool Issues Rare Triple-Buy Alert

• This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997

• 7 of 8 People Are Clueless About This Trillion-Dollar Market

Retirement can be an exciting and fulfilling period of life, provided you prepare for it. Make these key moves before calling it quits on the work front, and with any luck, you’ll wind up making the most of your golden years.

CNNMoney (New York) First published September 17, 2018: 9:39 AM ET

It’s better than nothing.

Lawmakers have decided not to touch a tax deduction for teachers who spend their own money on school supplies — effectively splitting the difference between competing proposals.

Currently, teachers can deduct up to $250 for classroom materials from their taxable income. It applies to both those who take the standard deduction, and to those who itemize.

That deduction won’t change if the House and Senate pass their compromise tax bill in its current form. Votes are expected next week.

Last month, the House passed a bill that would have eliminated the deduction. The Senate bill, meanwhile, would have doubled it to $500.

The tax break for educators helps offset the hundreds of dollars many teachers spend out-of-pocket each school year for supplies like paper, scissors and posters.

Teachers surveyed by education publishing company Scholastic in 2016 personally spent an average of $530 in the past year. Teachers who worked at high-poverty schools spent an average of $672.

Related: Grad students have been spared under the GOP tax plan

Sonia Smith, president of the Chesterfield Education Association in Virginia, said increasing the deduction to $500 would have been helpful.

“That’s closer to what most of my colleagues spend,” said Smith, who is a high school English teacher. “And I can tell you for an elementary school teacher, it’s far more.”

Smith said teachers have to spend their own money to decorate their classrooms, and to buy standard items like pencils, pens and highlighters.

Related: Will Obamacare survive the tax cut?

The deduction’s burden on the federal budget is limited. According to the Treasury Department, the deduction cut federal tax revenue by an estimated $200 million in the 2017 fiscal year.

Despite the tax break’s survival, the National Education Association maintains its opposition to the bill.

“Clearly, Congress heard the outcry from educators and parents when House Republicans tried to eliminate the $250 deduction for school supplies,” Lily Eskelsen García, the group’s president, said in a statement. “But the overall GOP tax bill is full of giveaways to corporations and the wealthy. It’s outrageous that working families will now have to pay that bill.”

CNNMoney (New York) First published December 15, 2017: 7:49 PM ET

Global trade tensions have put automakers under pressure. But Volkswagen says new emission tests in Europe pose the biggest threat to its business.

“We cannot rest on our laurels because great challenges lie ahead of us in the coming quarters — especially regarding the transition to the new … test procedure,” CEO Herbert Diess said in a statement Wednesday.

The tests presents a “titanic task” and “the biggest [sales] volume and earnings risk,” the CEO said, according to a presentation prepared for reporters. Diess warned that factories could be closed temporarily, and some new models could be delayed.

Volkswagen (VLKAF) isn’t alone. Other automakers in Europe are struggling to prepare for the tests, which were introduced in late 2017. Industry groups have reported that testing bottlenecks are causing delays in certification.

The new test, called the Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), measures fuel consumption and emissions of CO2 and pollutants in conditions that simulate real-world driving scenarios.

It’s billed as a major improvement on the previous test, which was designed in the 1980s and failed to detect Volkswagen’s rigging of its diesel emissions.

The new tests are performed in independent labs and a single examination can take days to set up. Test facilities are running at 100% capacity and operating 24 hours a day, but that’s not enough to avoid delays, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association.

“Neither manufacturers nor approval authorities have had sufficient time to prepare adequately,” the association said in a statement. “The process of obtaining European Union approval has slowed down, resulting in planned [car] production being stopped or delayed.”

Related: What’s next for Fiat Chrysler?

All new car models sold across the 28 member states in the European Union must be certified by September. Even after regulators approve a model, vehicles can be randomly tested as they roll off the factory floor.

Auto production is already suffering.

The British Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders reported this week that domestic production of cars for the UK market dropped 47% in June. It said the new emission tests were contributing to the slowdown.

Mike Hawes, CEO of the industry group, said the tests were one factor that had contributed to a “perfect storm” for automakers, which are also worried about the impact of Brexit.

Volkswagen said Wednesday that it delivered 5.5 million cars in the first half of 2018, an increase of 7% over the previous year.

Sales increased 3.5% to €119.4 billion ($139.5 billion) and operating profit rose nearly 10% to €9.8 billion ($11.5 billion). The company took a €1.6 billion ($1.9 billion) charge related to the diesel scandal.

Volkswagen warned that its financial performance could be volatile in the second half of the year because of the emission tests. Shares in the automaker dropped 3%.

CNNMoney (London) First published August 1, 2018: 9:38 AM ET

The hotel industry is using free tuition to try to lure — and keep — workers.

The American Hotel and Lodging Association is rolling out a pilot program this month that offers an online associate’s degree at no cost to workers and an online bachelor’s degree at a subsidized cost.

The goal is to attract and retain good employees.

“We’ve had eight years of growth and job creation, but at the same time we have a labor shortage,” said Katherine Lugar, president and CEO of the industry group.

There are currently more than 700,000 job openings in the hospitality sector, according to government data.

So far ten hotel brands and management companies have come on board — including New Castle Hotels and Resorts, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts and Red Roof Inns.

Related: Hospitals offer big bonuses, free housing and tuition to recruit nurses

It’s up to the companies to pay the cost of the degrees. But the American Hotel and Lodging Association has partnered with Pearson to make the process easier. The education company negotiates with schools for lower prices, said Jim Homer who heads Pearson’s AcceleratED Pathways program. They also vet the degree programs, making sure they are at accredited, nonprofit colleges.

The funding and eligibility requirements for the benefit will vary by company. Not all will offer a bachelor’s degree options, but those that do will subsidize the cost. For example, a worker with no previous college credits may end up paying about $24,000 for the bachelor’s degree, Homer said. An associate’s degree would be free to the employee.

The average student pays about $10,000 each year in tuition in fees (without room and board) at an in-state public college when pursuing a bachelor’s degree, according to The College Board. A two-year degree costs $3,520 a year, on average.

Related: Student loan payments are the new employee perk

At Wyndham, all employees at its managed properties will be eligible after 12 months of employment. The company will cover the full cost of tuition, fees, and books needed to finish an associate’s degree. It may extend the program to bachelor’s degrees in the future, said Becky Walnoha, Senior Vice President of Human Resources at Wyndham Managed Hotels.

While Wyndham previously offered a tuition reimbursement benefit, the new program will pay the money up front.

At New Castle, six employees are expected to qualify for the pilot program at first, said Gerry Chase, the president and COO at New Castle Hotels and Resorts.

“They have to qualify to be selected. They have to be someone who shows initiative and we could see in management in the future. But they won’t be required to stay with the company,” he said.

The industry association said many managers and executives have worked their way up from entry level positions — which don’t often require college degrees. It puts the industry in a unique position to provide a pathway to higher education.

CNNMoney (New York) First published March 9, 2018: 9:22 AM ET

In its frenzied rush to write a tax bill that could win enough votes, the Senate inadvertently weakened a powerful tool for promoting innovation.

The research and development tax credit allows companies to write off a portion of their spending on experimentation for new and better products. It’s been particularly popular with drug companies and the software industry since first being enacted in 1981.

After the credit was made permanent in 2015, the Treasury Department estimated it would cost $148 billion between 2017 and 2026, making it one of the largest tax breaks in the revenue code.

The credit survived in both the House and the Senate tax bills, which eliminated several tax breaks in order to justify lowering the corporate tax rate to 20%. And it would have continued to help corporations lower their taxes even further, but for a last-minute decision by the Senate to keep the alternative minimum tax (AMT) instead of repealing it, as conservatives have long sought.

The AMT serves as a backstop that prevents corporations from taking so many credits and deductions that they pay no tax at all. Currently, companies calculate their “regular” corporate tax rate — which tops out at 35%, minus any exemptions — and pay either that or a 20% rate on an “alternative” income formulation, whichever is higher. The Treasury’s most recent published analysis of the corporate AMT, from 2002, found that it applied to only about 13,000 businesses.

The AMT was repealed in the House’s version. But when the bill finally passed the Senate in the early hours of Saturday morning, the AMT remained in place. If it’s not removed, that could render the R&D credit moot, since more companies will have to pay a minimum tax under the AMT that can’t be lowered further by most credits or deductions.

Related: 13 ways the tax bills would affect people

“With the current proposed changes, there’s going to be more middle market companies that are going to be subject to the AMT, and would lose the ability to get R&D credits,” says Charles Goulding, CEO of a Long Island-based tax consultancy that specializes in research credits.

The snafu highlights the challenge of balancing a drive to lower overall rates with the desire to use the tax code as a carrot that rewards socially and economically beneficial behavior, like investing in research. When companies aren’t paying much in taxes in the first place, it’s more difficult to offer them incentives.

Of course, companies would still get a very large tax cut, freeing up money that could be used for research and development. But studies suggest that making it cheaper to invest in research than pay out larger dividends to shareholders, for example, leads them to innovate more than they might otherwise.

The R&D situation is less of a problem for small companies — those making less than $50 million in the past three years can still apply the R&D tax credit against the AMT. Currently, 73% of businesses who claim the R&D tax credit fall under the $50 million threshold, according to the U.S. Treasury.

But it’s still a problem for large companies, like Google (GOOG) and Intel (INTC), which account for the vast majority of the value of the credits. Caught off guard, they mobilized over the weekend to try to get the AMT taken out of the final bill.

“Retaining the AMT in reform is even more harmful than it is in its present form,” wrote the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a blog post on Monday morning. “This cannot be the intended impact from a Congress who has worked for years to enact a more globally competitive tax code.”

Related: Here’s what’s in the Senate tax bill

The AMT dust up isn’t the only way in which tax reform could hurt scientific research, however. The House and Senate bills also require research expenses to be amortized over several years, rather than deducted immediately, which draws out the benefit for those who claim the credit.

“While it is true that to some extent this is a timing issue, it is in fact a significant detriment to small companies who need the money sooner,” says Steven Miller, national director of tax at the consultancy Alliantgroup.

Tax reform could have repercussions for publicly funded research as well. Federal science funding has been declining as a share of GDP since the 1970s, and took a particularly hard hit during the recession. President Trump’s proposed “skinny budget” from the spring, which didn’t go anywhere, would have further slashed budgets for research supported by the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health.

Adding $1 trillion to the deficit won’t brighten the picture for federal science funding, says Joe Kennedy, a fellow with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a D.C.-based think tank that has pushed for the R&D tax credit to be expanded.

“I think a much much better bill could’ve been passed,” Kennedy said. “Corporate reform is so important. But is it worth introducing all these other flaws?”

CNNMoney (New York) First published December 5, 2017: 10:08 AM ET

A sharp decline in the number of international student visas has many of America’s colleges and universities on edge — and some say the Trump administration’s tough stance on immigration might be partly to blame.

The number of F-1 visas issued to foreign students seeking to attend college and other types of academic institutions in the United States decreased by 17% in the year that ended September 30, 2017, according to recent State Department data.

“The current administration’s ‘America First’ mantra is causing [international students] a great deal of anxiety and fear,” said Earl Johnson, vice president of enrollment and student services at the University of Tulsa in Oklahoma. “Also, the cost of college tuition, on average, has gone up 40% in the last 10 years. It’s weighing on them.”

That’s bad news for schools that have large international student populations. Nearly 20% of the University of Tulsa’s 4,400 enrolled students hail from overseas.

Johnson said his school has experienced declines in international enrollment for a few years now and it is starting to hurt revenue. The university has even placed a school official in China to recruit more students from overseas.

F-1 visa approvals were trending higher for nearly a decade when they peaked at more than 600,000 in 2015. But they have dropped off dramatically since.

The United States issued a total of 393,573 F-1 visas in fiscal 2017, down from 471,728 in 2016. The government did not release the total number of F-1 visa applications it receives in a given year or how many applications were rejected.

The biggest decline in visa approvals in 2017 was seen among students from Asian countries, particularly those from China and India which typically account for the largest number of F-1 visas.

Related: College tuition is still getting more expensive

A number of factors could be driving the declines, said Allan Goodman, president of the nonprofit Institute of International Education.

While students are evaluating the cost of studying in the US versus somewhere else, they are also tuning in to the political rhetoric on immigration. “Inevitably, it does lead them to ask, ‘Will I be welcome here?” said Goodman.

But there are other factors that are also playing a role, he said. In China specifically, a 2014 change in visa policy allows Chinese students to obtain an F-1 visa for a five-year period instead of one, freeing them from having to renew their visa each year. That change alone could contribute to the recent declines, said Goodman.

Worldwide competition for international students is also heating up, he said. The United States used to account for almost half of all international students worldwide. Now about 24% of all international students come here, said Goodman.

Instead, they are going to countries like Canada, Germany and Australia, which are making it easier for international students to stay in the country after they graduate and become part of the workforce.

Related: Despite DACA uncertainty, these Dreamers are still determined to go to college

Meanwhile in the United States, the government’s tougher stance on its popular H-1B foreign work visa, a common visa pathway for highly-skilled foreign workers, is making it harder for new graduates to remain in the country and could be deterring overseas students from applying to American colleges.

While neither the law nor any regulations regarding foreign student visas have changed, the State Department said it has revised its guidance to US consulates that review and approve the applications. The agency said it now emphasizes that the consulates “must refuse” any applicants if they are “not satisfied that the applicant’s present intent is to depart the United States at the conclusion of his or her study.”

“We believe that studying in the U.S. continues to provide the best educational opportunities in the world, introduces international students to networks that provide benefits and advantages well after their studies conclude, and gives graduates a life-long connection to the U.S,” a State Department official said.

“Having international students benefits the United States in many areas, in science and technology, even the number of Nobel laureates we produce,” said Goodman.

And international students add diversity to the classroom, he added. “Most Americans don’t study abroad. At the very least, they get a sense of the outside world from the eight to 10 different nationalities in their classroom,” he said.

“It’s a fairly uncertain time for all higher education institutions in the US,” Johnson said. “Right now we feel the glass is half full. We are seeing a greater number of started applications from students overseas, but we have to wait and see how many complete their applications for the fall.”

CNNMoney (New York) First published March 12, 2018: 7:33 PM ET

I have made five years of income-based student loan payments under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness plan during my residency and fellowship. But now I owe close to $450,000 even though I only borrowed $320,000. I would like to continue paying under this plan, but the interest would explode. I am starting a new job at a non-profit hospital with a $356,000 salary. What do I do? — Anonymous

Choosing the best student loan repayment plan can feel like gambling with your future.

Those with big debts, especially doctors and lawyers, may be tempted to lower their payments by enrolling in one of the government’s income-driven plans. Not only does this offer immediate relief, but some plans will forgiven any remaining debt after at least 20 years.

But there’s a catch. It’s possible you’ll pay more over the life of the loan because your payments will be spread out over a longer period of time and you’ll be paying more interest.

“Sometimes we see borrowers so focused on the fact that they could get forgiveness, they don’t realize they may still end up paying back more,” said Betsy Mayotte, the president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors.

The overall goal is to pay the least amount over time, she said.

How much you end up paying overall can depend on some unknowns, like your future income, future job, and how many children you might have one day.

It can get confusing because there’s not just one income-driven plan. If you have federal loans, there are seven different variations. Plus, some people who work in public service will get their debt wiped away after 10 years of payments.

Ask yourself these three questions before deciding what student loan repayment plan to select

If you’re in a low-paying job, you might have to lower your payments in order to be able to make them. Depending on your income, your monthly payment could be as low as $0 on some plans.

That may sound great while you’re struggling financially, but you might not be paying enough to cover the interest. That means your balance will keep getting bigger.

Income-driven plans can make sense if you have either a lot of debt, a low income, several children — or some combination.

Many are based on your discretionary income, which considers your pay, your family size, and the state you live in.

Related: Is anyone actually getting public service loan forgiveness?

On many plans, your monthly payment will be a percentage of your income. So even though your payments may seem low at first, you’ll owe more as your income goes up.

Mayotte suggests using the government’s online repayment estimator at least once a year, or whenever you get a raise, get married, or have a child. (If you’re married and filing jointly, your spouse’s income will be considered when your monthly payment is calculated.)

It should tell you how much your monthly payments would be, the total amount you’ll pay back over the lifetime of the loan, how long it will take, and if you’ll be eligible for any debt forgiveness.

This can help you figure out if it’s worth increasing your payments. Remember, the longer it takes you to pay off, the more interest you end up paying.

Related: Should he pay off his student debt faster or invest?

If you’re hoping to receive loan forgiveness, use the estimator to crunch your own numbers first. There is a chance that you might be finished paying off your debt before you’re due any forgiveness.

You must pay for at least 20 years on an income-driven plan before you’ll receive forgiveness. If you have loans for graduate school, you’ll have to pay for 25 years.

There’s another thing to consider. The forgiven debt will be taxed if you live in a state with income tax — unless you receive forgiveness from the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program.

Related: Millennials explain why they have nothing saved for retirement

Those who work for a non-profit or the government may be eligible for forgiveness after paying for just 10 years on an income-driven plan.

Even with her new six-figure salary, the doctor who asked the question above could stand to save as much as $299,000 by staying enrolled in an income-driven plan.

But she must work for a qualifying employer all 10 years.

Have a money question for Money Moves? Ask us here to be included in a future column.

CNNMoney (New York) First published April 19, 2018: 11:29 AM ET

Elon Musk thinks he could take Tesla private at $420 a share. But one Tesla investor thinks that’s a bad idea — because the stock could be worth nearly ten times that amount in the most optimistic of scenarios.

Cathie Wood, CEO of money management firm ARK Invest, wrote an open letter to Musk earlier this week saying that Tesla could be valued somewhere between $700 and $4,000 per share in five years.

Wood tweeted out a link for the letter to Elon Musk Wednesday night. Musk responded in less than an hour, telling Wood “thank you for the thoughtful letter.”

In an interview with CNNMoney Thursday, Wood said that Tesla’s investor relations responded quickly to her letter as well and passed it on to the board, but the board has not gotten back to her as of yet.

Tesla (TSLA) shares surged after Musk’s now infamous “funding secured” tweet earlier this month, hitting a peak of $387.46 in the process.

But the stock has since slid back to about $320 due to growing skepticism about Musk’s ability to actually get a deal done.

Going private now would be a mistake

Still, Wood argues that Musk should resist the urge to go private, even if he could pull a deal off.

“Taking Tesla private today at $420 per share would undervalue it greatly, depriving many investors of the opportunity to participate in its success,” she wrote.

Wood argues that Tesla could evolve beyond the relatively low profit business of making electric cars. She envisions a Tesla that is generating fat profit margins from autonomous taxis, drones, energy storage services and a bigger presence in China.

If Tesla is able to do all that, the stock could eventually hit her $4,000 target. But Wood admits it will take time — and patience on the part of shareholders. She realizes that some Tesla shareholders are impatient.

“Because of the short-term investment time horizon of investors in the public markets and inflated valuations in the private markets today, I understand why you may want to take Tesla private, but I must try to dissuade you,” she said.

Tesla is either the largest or second largest holding in three ETFs run by ARK, according to Wood — the ARK Innovation (ARKK), ARK Industrial Innovation (ARKQ) and the ARK Web x.0 (ARKW) funds.

Shorter leash if Tesla went private?

Wood thinks there are other investors out there like her that would be willing to give Musk a chance to make his vision a reality.

“If you do not take Tesla private, you will be surprised and gratified at investor reaction once they realize and understand the scope and ramifications of your long-term vision,” she said, adding “with time, I believe that truth always wins out in the public markets.”

She pointed to Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX) and Salesforce (CRM) as other companies with visionary leaders whose stock prices have soared. Wood also said if Tesla went private, it may have fewer investors, which actually could make life tougher for Musk.

“Please do not let the short-term thinking of professional public equity investors persuade you to take Tesla private,” she said.

“I believe you will be on a much shorter leash in the private markets and will deprive a broad and loyal investor base of one of the most important investment opportunities of their lifetimes,” Wood wrote at the end of the letter.

Wood added in the interview with CNNMoney that she understands many Tesla bears are skeptical of her extremely bullish $4,000 target. But she said that “even if we are half right, the stock could double.”

CNNMoney (New York) First published August 23, 2018: 4:25 PM ET

Investors should be focusing on Tesla’s growing sales and ambitious plans to reinvent the American automotive world.

They should be salivating over its exciting plans for semi trucks for big corporate fleets and its alternative energy initiatives. And they should be reassured by analysts’ predictions that Tesla will report a profit in the fourth quarter and a full year of profitability in 2019.

Instead, they are watching CEO Elon Musk smoke a blunt with Joe Rogan.

They’re looking at an easy punchline for comedians, a man who’s become a walking Page Six item.

They’re seeing rapper Azealia Banks’ bizarre Instagram posts alleging that she was in Musk’s house while he tweeted on acid, reading him tearfully talking to the New York Times about his Ambien use and making baseless accusations about a diver in the Thai cave rescue.

It’s an even bigger problem considering the brain drain that’s now going on at Tesla. Chief accounting officer Dave Morton is leaving Tesla after just a month on the job, citing concerns about “the level of public attention placed on the company.”

And in an email to employees Friday, Musk said chief people officer Gaby Toledano was extending her leave of absence to “spend more time with her family and has decided to continue doing so for personal reasons.”

All of this wackiness is taking its toll on Tesla’s (TSLA) stock. Shares fell about 6% Friday. They are now down more than 15% this year and are more than 30% below the all-time high they hit last year.

The Musk circus is a problem for Wall Street.

“Musk is not going to be conventional. Breaking the mold is part of his PR strategy,” wrote Loup Ventures analyst Gene Munster in a blog post Friday.

Munster added that he suspects Tesla’s board is trying to put controls in place to limit Musk’s outlandish behavior. But he says it’s clear Musk has a different plan. And that’s a big problem.

“At times, Musk appears to be working against himself,” Munster wrote. “At the core, we believe he wants to prove his doubters wrong, but many of his actions strengthen the case against him.”

Musk should delete his Twitter account, stop talking about the Thai rescuer and not use pot in a public setting, Munster said.

He may need to do even more than that. To paraphrase George Washington in the hit musical “Hamilton,” Tesla is a powder keg about to explode and Musk needs another person to help him lighten the load. Tesla has to hire a chief operating officer.

Yes, Musk may be difficult to work with. But another company he runs, SpaceX, has a highly regarded COO in Gwynne Shotwell.

Shotwell has worked at SpaceX since 2002 and was one of the firm’s first employees. She was named president and COO in late 2008. So it’s clearly not impossible to get along with Musk for a long period of time in a professional setting.

And you don’t hear stories about how Musk is sleeping at SpaceX. He’s only doing that at Tesla. Maybe if he had someone like Shotwell to help him out, he’d be able to catch a few more zzzs. Tesla investors would certainly sleep a heck of a lot easier too.

CNNMoney (New York) First published September 8, 2018: 8:22 AM ET