Should Retirees in Their 70s Relocate for Family and a Bigger Mortgage?

Here's a retirement dilemma plenty of families can relate to: you've settled into a comfortable, affordable life, and then your kids end up living somewhere dramatically more expensive. For one couple in their 70s, that somewhere is California — and they're seriously considering uprooting from a low-cost, lower-tax Northwest state to make the move happen, even if it means taking on a larger mortgage.

On the surface, the emotional pull is completely understandable. Being near family in your later years can improve quality of life in ways that spreadsheets simply can't capture. But the financial math here deserves a hard look. Trading a smaller mortgage (or no mortgage at all) in an affordable state for a bigger one in California means taking on more debt at a stage in life when most financial advisors suggest you should be drawing down assets, not piling on new liabilities.

Read more Best CD Rates Today: Earn Up to 4.30% APY This Weekend →

California's cost of living is notoriously high, and that doesn't stop at home prices. Property taxes, state income taxes, and everyday expenses can take a serious bite out of a fixed retirement income. Moving from a lower-tax Northwest state would likely mean a noticeable jump in your annual tax bill alone — something worth modeling out carefully before signing anything.

There's also the question of long-term flexibility. A bigger mortgage in your 70s could limit your financial cushion if unexpected medical costs arise, which statistically become more likely as you age. Some retirees in this situation find middle-ground solutions — like renting in the new location first to test it out, or exploring whether the kids might eventually relocate closer to them.

Ultimately, this is one of those decisions where the right answer isn't purely financial — but the financial side can absolutely torpedo an otherwise good idea if ignored. Continue reading at MarketWatch.com.