Portfolio transitions are rarely straightforward for advisors managing taxable accounts. While the goal may be to reduce fees, optimize risk exposure, or simplify the investment process, the path to get there involves difficult trade‑offs. Realizing capital gains can trigger a tax bill, decreasing investable assets and introducing tax drag. Beyond financial considerations, forcing a client to incur a large tax bill early in a new relationship can be challenging to navigate. Therefore, any portfolio transition in a taxable account should be carefully evaluated.
When evaluating transitions, advisors must consider what is financially optimal and what is emotionally acceptable to the client. Doing this well requires understanding key financial considerations such as embedded taxes in the account, overlap with the target model, opportunities to improve tax efficiency, opportunities to reduce fees, and the client’s overall risk tolerance and aversion to taxes. For a transition to be in the client's best interest, the net benefits should clearly outweigh the immediate tax bill and the resulting drag on portfolio growth.
Today, many advisors handle transitions ad hoc. They rely on spreadsheets, rebalancing overrides, and one‑off client conversations. While duct‑taped processes can accomplish the task, they are rarely scalable or optimized to deliver the best after‑tax outcomes. As a practice grows, managing transitions with manual workflows becomes increasingly challenging.
Advisors with a robust process for modeling scenarios, setting tax budgets, and communicating expected outcomes to clients are positioned to deliver a better client onboarding experience and potentially improve their clients' after‑tax outcomes.
Signs a Client May Be a Good Fit for a Transition
When onboarding a new client, it’s natural to want to align their portfolio with the firm's preferred model. However, forcing a full transition without careful evaluation can cause more harm than good. Realizing gains for a marginal improvement in portfolio construction can create an unnecessary tax bill, reduce the client’s investable assets, and introduce emotional friction at the very start of the advisor‑client relationship.
Instead, advisors should view the decision to transition taxable accounts as a deliberate assessment.
Several factors can signal that a transition is appropriate.
1. Mismatch to Financial Goals
If the portfolio’s current asset allocation or investment structure does not match the client’s updated objectives, time horizon, or income needs, realignment is warranted. For example, a client nearing retirement may need greater income stability and lower equity exposure than a portfolio built for accumulation.
2. Large, Concentrated Positions
Clients who hold a large portion of their portfolio in a single stock, often due to executive compensation, inheritance, or long‑term investment, may face significant idiosyncratic risk. Transitioning these concentrated positions into a more diversified portfolio can reduce risk and better align the client’s investments with their long‑term financial plan.
3. High Fees
If a client’s legacy holdings are materially more expensive than the advisor’s recommended investments, a transition may be justified. High internal expenses reduce net returns and compound over time. Even modest fee reductions can meaningfully improve long‑term outcomes, particularly for clients with longer time horizons.
4. High Turnover or Tax Inefficiency
Clients invested in legacy mutual funds or non‑tax‑managed SMAs may face regular capital gains distributions, even if they are not making active changes to their portfolios. These distributions can create annual tax bills without corresponding improvements in portfolio performance. Transitioning to more tax‑efficient vehicles, such as ETFs or tax‑managed SMAs, may help reduce unnecessary tax drag and improve after‑tax outcomes over time.
Signs a Client May Be Better Off Staying As‑Is (for Now)
Even when a portfolio looks different from the advisor’s target model, a transition is not always the best course of action. There are many cases where leaving a client’s existing holdings in place can deliver a better net outcome.
Acceptable Tracking to Target Model
If the client’s existing portfolio differs in appearance but offers similar exposures to major asset classes, sectors, or risk factors, a full transition may not be necessary. In some cases, the client’s legacy holdings may provide sufficient alignment to the financial plan, even if the underlying funds or securities are different.
High Embedded Gains
If the portfolio has significant unrealized capital gains, the cost of realizing those gains may outweigh the incremental benefits of reallocation. Particularly for clients in higher tax brackets, realizing gains prematurely can create a lasting drag on compounding. In these cases, it may be more prudent to manage around the existing holdings, using inflows, dividends, and tax‑loss harvesting to transition gradually over time.
Low Fee Differential
If the fee savings from switching investments are minimal, the financial benefit of transitioning may not justify the tax bill incurred. In these cases, preserving the client’s existing basis and focusing on future contributions or selective rebalancing may be the better path.
Upcoming Estate Planning Event or Step‑Up in Basis Opportunity
If a client is nearing an estate planning event, such as a planned gifting strategy, terminal illness, or anticipated passing that would trigger a step‑up in basis, it may be advisable to defer realizing gains. Waiting for a step‑up can eliminate embedded gains entirely, allowing heirs or the client to reposition assets without incurring immediate taxes. In these situations, maintaining the current portfolio until the step‑up occurs can be significantly more tax efficient.
Strong Client Tax Sensitivity or Reluctance
Some clients have a strong emotional aversion to paying taxes, even when the financial case for transition is sound. While advisors can educate and coach clients through these decisions, pushing a transition that makes the client uncomfortable may erode trust. When tax sensitivity is high, gradual or deferred transitions may be more appropriate.
How to Structure the Evaluation Process
Portfolio transitions are not binary decisions. They should be evaluated through a structured, data‑driven framework that balances tax costs, investment outcomes, and client preferences.
Advisors who approach the process thoughtfully, by gathering the right information, modeling scenarios, and communicating clearly, are often better positioned to deliver superior after‑tax outcomes and build client trust.
Here is a practical framework for evaluating transition scenarios.
Frame the Client Discussion Early
The transition conversation should start early in the planning process. Advisors should understand a client’s tax sensitivity and explain that any changes to the client's portfolio will be evaluated through a tax and financial planning lens.
Gather Comprehensive Data
A proper transition analysis requires advisors to collect detailed information about the client’s existing financial picture, specifically:
- Full tax-lot level detail for all holdings, including cost basis and acquisition date
- The client’s marginal federal and state tax rates
- Information on upcoming cash needs, liquidity needs, estate planning intentions, and risk preferences
- Any tax budgets that need to be adhered to
This information is typically requested as part of the financial planning process, but advisors may need to ask for more detailed data, particularly tax‑lot level cost basis information.
Define a Capital Gains Budget
Advisors should define a practical capital gains budget with the client. Establishing a budget aligned to the client's tax sensitivity and goals allows the advisor to make progress over time without overwhelming the client with a single large tax bill in the first year.
Model Different Transition Scenarios
Once the optimal financial plan and asset allocation is developed, advisors should model multiple paths to understand the tax implications of a rebalance. A well‑structured transition model helps answer critical questions:
- How much tax will a transition trigger?
- How much will portfolio risk improve?
- How much additional fee savings, diversification, or tax efficiency will be gained?
- How long will it take to complete a phased transition under a given capital gains budget?
How many scenarios is up to the advisor, but it should include a minimum of:
- No Transition: Keep the existing portfolio and accept the tracking error relative to the target model.
- Full Transition: Move fully to the preferred model immediately and quantify the tax cost.
- Partial Transition: Transition incrementally, prioritizing the most impactful changes while managing tax consequences.
Key Metrics to Analyze Across Scenarios
The key metrics advisors should analyze across transition scenarios include:
- Realized Gains: Estimate the total gains triggered and the corresponding federal and state tax bills.
- Tracking Error to Target Portfolio: Quantify how much portfolio deviation remains if a partial transition is pursued.
- Tax Drag: Measure how much of the client’s investable portfolio is reduced by taxes, the difference in return over the client’s investable time horizon, and the impact on probability to achieve desired financial goals.
- Fee Differential: Calculate any annual cost savings from moving into lower-cost structures.
- Diversification Improvement: Identify reductions in concentrated exposures or unintended risk tilts.
- Time Horizon for Full Transition: If phased, estimate the timeline needed to complete the transition based on tax budgets and market assumptions.
Communicate with the Client
Share modeled outcomes in plain language, explaining the trade‑offs involved in each path. Communicating the process, not just the recommendation, provides transparency and helps ensure that there are no surprises for the client.
Document the Decision Framework
For compliance and relationship management, advisors should document the transition plan as part of the financial plan or include it in the client’s investment policy statement.
Executing a Transition Thoughtfully
A thoughtful transition execution process includes clear prioritization, deliberate tax‑lot selection, and disciplined tracking against budgets.
Prioritize Positions to Transition First
Not all legacy holdings carry the same level of risk or cost. Advisors should prioritize positions based on the potential impact to the client’s portfolio and financial plan. Key priorities include:
- Holdings with low embedded gains where transitions can occur with minimal tax impact.
- Positions that significantly misalign with the client’s goals or risk profile.
- Highly concentrated stock positions that create idiosyncratic risk.
- High-fee investments that can be replaced with lower-cost alternatives.
By focusing on the highest‑impact changes first, advisors can deliver the most meaningful improvements for the least tax budget.
Manage Realized Gains Deliberately
Advisors should realize gains carefully by:
- Using specified-lot trading to select higher-cost lots first and minimize realized gains.
- Harvesting losses where available to offset realized gains from transitions.
- Monitoring and adhering to the client’s capital gains budget on an annual basis.
- Balancing tracking error and tax efficiency, recognizing that a phased approach may leave some deviation from the target model temporarily, but can optimize after-tax outcomes.
Use Estate Planning and Charitable Contributions
Transitioning concentrated or highly appreciated holdings does not always require realizing gains. Estate planning strategies and charitable giving can remove embedded gains tax‑efficiently.
Advisors should look for opportunities to:
- Gift appreciated securities to qualified charities, donor-advised funds (DAFs), or family foundations. Clients receive a charitable deduction for the full fair market value and avoid capital gains taxes.
- Contribute appreciated securities to estate planning trusts, such as Intentionally Defective Grantor Trusts (IDGTs) or Spousal Lifetime Access Trusts (SLATs). These trusts can remove appreciation from the taxable estate and shift future growth to heirs without triggering immediate capital gains.
- Plan for step-up in basis at death for clients nearing estate transfer events. Highly appreciated securities may receive a full step-up, eliminating the unrealized gains entirely for heirs.
By layering estate planning and charitable giving into the transition process, advisors can help clients meet their personal goals while reducing tax friction and accelerating movement toward the optimal portfolio.
Implement Phased Transitions When Appropriate
Most transitions will need to be handled over multiple tax years. A phased transition allows the advisor to:
- Stay within annual gains budgets.
- Take advantage of market volatility to harvest losses and create offsetting opportunities.
- Align the portfolio more closely with the target model over time without triggering large tax consequences in a single year.
The advisor’s role is to keep the transition on track, continuously evaluating opportunities to move closer to the optimal portfolio within the client’s tax comfort zone.
Monitor Progress Continuously
Transitioning a taxable account is not a one‑time trade; it requires ongoing monitoring. Advisors should consider:
- Regularly reviewing unrealized gains and losses.
- Reassessing transition opportunities as market conditions change.
- Looking for loss-harvesting opportunities that can accelerate transitions without additional tax cost.
- Adjusting transition plans as needed based on client life changes, market movements, or evolving tax policy.
Continuous monitoring helps ensure that opportunities to improve outcomes are not missed simply because the initial plan was static.
Managing Transitions Across a Client Book
Managing transitions well for a single client is challenging. Managing them across an entire book of taxable clients is even harder.
Every client’s transition is unique: different holdings, different embedded gains, different levels of tax sensitivity. As a practice grows, the risk of missed opportunities, inconsistent execution, and client dissatisfaction rises unless the transition process is deliberately structured and continuously monitored.
The Challenge of Scaling Transition Management
Manual workflows such as spreadsheets, calendar reminders, and ad hoc overrides may work when managing a handful of client accounts. They do not scale. Without systematization, transitions can drift off‑track, tax budgets can be accidentally exceeded, and the risk of operational or trade errors increases.
As the number of taxable clients increases, the burden of manually managing transitions can consume advisor and operations team capacity, distracting from proactive planning and client relationship management.
The Importance of Continuous Monitoring
Transitioning a portfolio is not a one‑time task. Markets move and client circumstances evolve. Continuous monitoring allows advisors to opportunistically transition positions if markets decline, perform continuous tax loss harvesting to offset gains, accelerate transitions, and adjust to changes in client circumstances like marginal tax rates or estate planning priorities.
Without continuous monitoring, even a well‑structured initial transition plan can become stale, missing opportunities to improve after‑tax outcomes.
Options for Transition Oversight
As a practice grows, advisors must decide how they will oversee tax‑aware transitions across their client base. Advisors have three primary models to choose from: internal systems, overlay managers, or a hybrid of both.
Each model has trade‑offs in control, scalability, cost, and internal resource requirements. The right choice depends on the firm’s structure, technology, staffing, and client needs.
Internal Systems and Software
Practices that choose to manage transitions internally invest in portfolio management platforms with tax‑lot level capabilities. These tools can identify harvesting opportunities, generate trade suggestions, and track client‑specific capital gains budgets.
Key Benefits:
- Maximum transparency and control over decisions.
- No third-party involved in the client relationship.
- Flexibility to customize to meet specific client circumstances.
Trade-Offs:
- Requires dedicated staff to monitor, approve, and execute trades.
- Risk of inconsistent execution if processes are not well-defined.
- Higher internal time commitment and operational burden.
- Technology resources required to build and maintain systems.
Best for Firms That:
- Have a centralized investment team or CIO function.
- Are already using a portfolio management system with strong tax features.
- Want full control over portfolio decisions and trade execution.
- Have internal operations staff to support tax-aware workflows.
Overlay Managers
Overlay managers are third‑party specialists who take over tax‑aware transition execution. They operate within the advisor’s investment model and use client‑specific tax budgets to manage transitions, rebalance, and harvest losses.
Key Benefits:
- Consistent, daily oversight of tax-aware opportunities.
- No additional internal staffing needed.
- Fast to implement with minimal workflow disruption.
Trade-Offs:
- Less visibility into individual trade decisions.
- May introduce a third-party relationship into the client experience.
- Limited customization for edge-case scenarios.
Best for Firms That:
- Want to scale tax-aware implementation without building internal infrastructure.
- Prefer to focus advisor time on investment strategy, financial planning and relationship management.
- Are managing many taxable accounts with limited internal resources.
Hybrid Approach
The hybrid model combines internal management for select clients with overlay manager support for the broader book. High‑net‑worth or complex households receive personalized oversight, while most clients benefit from consistent, scalable execution through a third‑party provider.
Key Benefits:
- Balances control and scale.
- Allows advisors to focus internal resources where they add the most value.
- Provides consistent transition oversight for the majority of accounts.
Trade-Offs:
- Requires clear client segmentation and internal coordination.
- Advisors must maintain oversight of two different processes.
- Can be complex to implement without disciplined workflows.
Best for Firms That:
- Serve a mix of standard and highly customized client relationships.
- Want to maintain flexibility for their top clients while reducing operational lift.
- Are growing rapidly and need to scale tax management efficiently.
Every Transition is an Opportunity
Executing transitions well requires more than intuition. It demands structured evaluation, careful trade‑off analysis, phased implementation, continuous monitoring, and a scalable oversight model that fits the practice's growth trajectory.
Every client transition is an opportunity to prove that you are not just managing investments; you are managing their financial future with discipline, empathy, and precision.
By treating transitions as an ongoing, tax‑sensitive optimization process rather than an ad hoc event, advisors have the potential to improve after‑tax outcomes, strengthen client trust, and differentiate their practices in a competitive marketplace.
Important Information
This material is intended solely for educational purposes and should not be construed as investment advice, a recommendation, or an offer or solicitation to purchase or sell any securities. The opinions expressed are as of the date(s) indicated and are subject to change without notice. Reliance upon the information herein is at the sole discretion of the reader.
Investing involves risk, principal loss is possible. Unlike mutual funds, ETFs may trade at a premium or discount to their net asset value. Shares are bought and sold at market price not net asset value (NAV). Market price returns are based upon the closing composite market price and do not represent the returns you would receive if you traded shares at other times.
This material does not constitute investment advice and should not be viewed as a current or past recommendation or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. Harbor Capital and its associates do not provide legal or tax advice.
Any tax‑related discussion contained in this material, including any attachments/links, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to any other party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Please consult your independent legal counsel and/or tax professional regarding any legal or tax issues raised in this material.
ETFs are subject to capital gains tax and taxation of dividend income. However, ETFs are structured in such a manner that taxes are generally minimized for the holder of the ETF. An ETF manager accommodates investment inflows and outflows by creating or redeeming “creation units,” which are baskets of assets. As a result, the investor usually is not exposed to capital gains on any individual security in the underlying portfolio. However, capital gains tax may be incurred by the investor after the ETF is sold.
Shares of ETFs may be bought and sold throughout the day on the exchange through any brokerage account. Shares are not individually redeemable from an ETF, however, shares may be redeemed directly from an ETF by Authorized Participants, in very large creation/redemption units.
This material is not legal, tax or accounting advice. Please consult with a qualified professional for this type of advice.
Copyright ©2025 Harbor Capital Advisors, Inc. All rights reserved.
4697356
