Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Hi Catch. Based on the style & tenor of the piece, I'd say wsj should have put it under "analysis" and not presented it as hard news. Taxes are so complicated there's a whole racket ... err ... class of tax attorneys who do nothing but tax work. So, I'd hate to have to analyze the fine points here. Am familiar with the concept of double-taxation wherein taxes are paid by the corporation and again by the shareholders. But, keep in mind, with pensions now largely supported by 401K type investments, those "tax-free" 401ks ain't really tax free either - as you're paying corporate taxes indirectly. To the extent your fund house pays taxes on their management fees, and indirectly pass those along to you, you're paying double taxes on a supposedly tax-free investment. Double taxation is probably pretty ingrained in our system. I paid social security taxes during the working years, but now pay a tax on withdrawal of social security benefits up to the 85% maximum. (Up to 85% of your Social Security benefit is taxable at current rates if total income exceeds a certain level.)
Well, the WSJ is pretty stingy about letting folks see their on-line news articles, so if the admission is free maybe it ain't actual "news". Just Murdoch stirring up his "base" yet again.
Not familiar with the COA acronym, but from this list guessed that it probably is not "Canadian Ostrich Association".
Comments
Not familiar with the COA acronym, but from this list guessed that it probably is not "Canadian Ostrich Association".