Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (13) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread
Author: Bob78164 Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 121597  
Subject: Credit where credit is due Date: 2/16/2001 5:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 18
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 willing to give Roy the benefit of the doubt over last week's article; after all, who's to say he didn't have the idea independently and before me? But Roy's reaction to the "Shore sale" thread makes clear that he had not considered the concept, or some of its applications, before reading my post. Indeed, my post mentions at least one cautionary note (don't execute a Shore sale if you plan to sell your house in 2002, or if you don't qualify for the 2 out of 5 years test) that is omitted from Roy's discussion.

I usually don't do this, but if you agree with me that I should be publicly credited by TMF for the idea, I'll ask that you rec this post. Thank you for your attention. --Bob
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (13) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread

Announcements

Disclaimer:
In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
Foolanthropy 2014!
By working with young, first-time moms, Nurse-Family Partnership is able to truly change lives – for generations to come.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

Looking at Currency Ratios
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement