steve@rochester.UUCP (Steve Hammond) (03/01/84)
From: Steve Hammond <steve> I sort of have mixed emtions about IRA's. Most people cannot afford to tie up 2k/year(which is the most effective way of utilizing this deal) for some number of consecutive number of years. I know that I really don't want to. But on the other hand, if one can truelly afford to tie up his assets in this way then he/she doesn't really need to use the IRA as either a tax shelter or a savings for the future. Presumably the person in the latter situation is in the position to explore more creative ventures. Does anyone have any comments on this. I'm certainly not an expert on these things. steve hammond rochester!steve steve@rochester.ARPA
jphalter@ihuxb.UUCP (03/03/84)
What I know about IRA's in 5 lines or less:
1. Consumer Reports did an article last year about IRA's and came out
sounding very positive. You need not tie up your money for 40+ years.
Payback time for an IRA withdrawal is about 8-9 years, meaning you'll
come out ahead by leaving the money in an IRA for 8-9 years AND then
paying the 10% withdrawal penalty + taxes. (This assumes your tax
bracket isn't outrageous in 8-9 years.)
2. $2000 in MY bank account seems like a better deal to me than $700-800
in the IRS's bank account. I, at least, retain control over the money
and it is available for 60 day loans without penalty.
Well...10 lines or less....rmd@hpfcla.UUCP (03/18/84)
I am interested in your comment about being able to take a 60 day loan on an IRA without penalty. This seems to contradict something my brother (a CPA) told me. He said that using your IRA as collateral for a loan would be interpreted by the IRS as grounds for invoking the 10% penalty rule. However, I did not ask him specifically about 60 day loans and it has been about two years since I talked to him about the subject. What was your source of information? Was my brother wrong? Have the rules changed? Rick Dow inhp4!hpfcla!rmd