The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Financial Planning / Tax Strategies

URL:  http://boards.fool.com/credit-where-credit-is-due-14366021.aspx

Subject:  Credit where credit is due Date:  2/16/2001  5:29 PM
Author:  Bob78164 Number:  46609 of 123001

Today's weekly tax article raises two concerns for me. First, I believe I should have been credited with the idea. See message no. 15194 on this board: http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=10824630&sort=postdate , which I posted on May 1, 1999. Second, my ultimate conclusion, reached with the help of Kaye A. Thomas (KATinChicagoLand) of www.fairmark.com (as you'll know if you follow the thread to its end), is that what I describe as the "Shore sale" DOES NOT WORK because of "recognition" rules in the 1999 act. I have not yet seen any analysis discussing why Kaye's conclusion was incorrect, nor have the pertinent statutes changed, as far as I know.

I am troubled about last week's tax article for a similar reason. Once again, as far as I know the key idea (a single person with a 401(k) and an AGI between $95,000 and $100,000 should make a non-deductible traditional IRA contribution and then convert the IRA to a Roth before the end of the calendar year in order to "evade" the income limits on Roth contributions) was published first on the boards by me. I recall it because it's one of the very few times I've been able to improve on one of Phil Marti's substantive suggestions.

As an isolated incident, I was will