Archive > November 2009

Fiduciary Duty and Investment Advisors and Brokers

22 November 2009 » Tags: ,

While most of the talk in Washington centers on health care and Afghanistan, there is a considerable amount of energy focused on financial reform to prevent another “market meltdown” we have seen over the last couple of years.

One piece of the debate is how to regulate advisors, brokers and planners.  Each currently has a different set of rules covering their behavior towards clients.  Brokers are held to a suitability standard which means they need to have a reasonable basis for the recommendation and “know their client.”  Additionally their  advice should be “incidental” to the transaction.   However, Advisors registered with the Securities and Exchange condition are held to a higher “fiduciary” standard that entails the advice be prudent and in the interest of the client.   This topic can be somewhat arcane, but a recent WSJ video does a nice job of pointing out the key differences.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid452319854?bctid=51077511001

Watch for more as congress debates on how best to regulate the advice providers.

Continue reading...

Tags: ,

1st Time Home Buyer Credit Extended and more….

18 November 2009 » Tags:

As expected,  the first time home credit was extended to May 1st, 2010.  The new wrinkle to this stimulus package is help for the existing homeowner, defined as someone who has owned their home for 5 years.   If you fall in this category you will be eligible for up to a $6,500 credit when you purchase a “new” home. Clearly, the idea is to boost the market for other sectors beyond the first time purchases.   Here are the details:

First-time homebuyer credit

The Act extends and modifies the first-time homebuyer tax credit. Specifically, the Act:

  • Extends the first-time homebuyer credit to principal residences purchased before May 1, 2010. The credit is extended to principal residences purchased before July 1, 2010 if a written binding contract is entered into prior to May 1, 2010.
  • Increases the income limits that apply to the credit. For the purchase of a principal residence after November 6, 2009 the credit is reduced if modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) exceeds $125,000 ($225,000 if married filing a joint return) and is completely eliminated if MAGI reaches $145,000 ($245,000 if married filing a joint return).
  • Establishes a new limitation: effective for purchases made after November 6, 2009, the first-time homebuyer credit is not available if the purchase price of a principal residence exceeds $800,000.
  • Expands eligibility (purchases made after November 6, 2009) by allowing some existing homeowners to qualify for the credit when they purchase a new principal residence. Specifically, an individual (and, if married, the individual’s spouse) who has maintained the same principal residence for at least five consecutive years in the eight-year period ending on the date that a subsequent principal residence is purchased, will be considered a first-time homebuyer for purposes of the credit. In such a case, the maximum amount of the credit is $6,500 ($3,250 for a married individual filing separately).

For purposes of the credit, in the case of a purchase of a principal residence after December 31, 2008, a taxpayer may elect to treat the purchase as if it were made on December 31 of the calendar year preceding the purchase for purposes of claiming the credit on the prior year’s tax return. This means qualifying purchases in 2009 can be treated as if they were made on December 31, 2008, and qualifying purchases in 2010 can be treated as if they were made on December 31, 2009.

The Act also imposes additional new limitations on purchases made after November 6, 2009:

  • No credit is allowed unless the taxpayer is 18 years of age as of the date of purchase. A taxpayer who is married is treated as meeting the age requirement if the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s spouse meets the age requirement.
  • The definition of purchase excludes property acquired from a person related to the person acquiring such property or the spouse of the person acquiring the property, if married.
  • No credit is allowed to any taxpayer if the taxpayer is a dependent of another taxpayer.

For tax years ending after November 6, 2009, no credit is allowed unless the taxpayer attaches to the relevant tax return a properly executed copy of the settlement statement used to complete the purchase.

The Act also includes special provisions for members of the uniformed services and others who receive government orders for qualified official extended duty service. These provisions include extended time to claim the credit.

Continue reading...

Tags:

NUA and Roth

17 November 2009 » Tags: ,

A common planning strategy when one has left a company with a large stock position with a low cost basis is to employ Net Unrealized Appreciation (NUA).  This strategy allows for the transfer of the stock from a 401k to a taxable account with the basis in the stock taxed at ordinary income rates and the gain, the net unrealized appreciation, taxed at capital gain rates once the stock is sold.  If you are under 55, you will need to consider the impact of the 10% early withdrawal penalty on the cost basis of the stock.  The additional benefit in this strategy is the flexibility gained in the ability to liquidate the stock position overtime at the beneficial capital gain rates.

However, now according to IRS notice 2009-75 you have an additional choice to consider within the NUA strategy as you can now move the company stock to a Roth IRA.  In this case, the cost basis will be taxed at ordinary income rates, but the Net Unrealized Appreciation will be taxed at capital gain rates at the time of distribution, not when sold as in the above example.  Distributions from these accounts then would be tax free because you already paid ordinary income on the basis and capital gains on the net unrealized appreciation.

Does a Roth NUA strategy make sense?   As a practical matter, probably not.   Many who use the NUA strategy are attracted to the idea of moving money from “tied” up resource to one that allows for more flexibility at a reasonable tax hit.  Nevertheless, the argument can be made that if you have a longer time horizon, or are thinking about the move to a Roth as an estate planning strategy, then the Roth NUA strategy would be something to consider

Continue reading...

Tags: ,