Obama ashamed of Wall Street January 30, 2009
Posted by Jeff Nabers in : Money, Personal Enjoyment, real estate, Self Directed IRA Solo 401k , add a comment$18,400,000,000.00
18.4 billion dollars. According the NY state comptroller, that’s what was paid out in bonuses on Wall Street last year as the American people lost nearly half of their investment portfolios… about the same amount in bonuses that were paid out in the supposed boom of 2004.
Obama is concerned because he thinks Wall Street’s greed may undermine the government’s plan to rally support for trillions more in “bailout” and “stimulus” packages. Read the whole story here.
How to profit from real estate investments in a soft and declining real estate market January 21, 2009
Posted by Jeff Nabers in : real estate, Self Directed IRA Solo 401k , add a comment
Three years ago real estate investing was hot. Today, many people act as if the opportunity has passed. I contend that the opposite is true. In the past, as a mortgage banker focused on originating mortgages for investment properties, I started listening to and learning from my real estate investor clients and noticed two categories of real estate investors: real investors and blind investors.
Real Investors have the following in common:
- Profiting when they buy. Rather than believing an entire market is hot or cold, a real investor knows that the purchase price is what dictates the return on the investment. You can look in any real estate market to see property values and rental rates. Those are things the investor doesn’t control. The investor does control what he is willing to pay for a property, and that’s how a real investor knows what his return on investment will be before buying the property.
- Investing for income. Real investors buy assets because they produce income. What a property is selling for doesn’t even matter if (more…)
Warning: Don't let administrators act as custodian – Part 3 January 15, 2009
Posted by Jeff Nabers in : Self Directed IRA Solo 401k , 2comments
*** This is Part 3 of a series about the dangers of letting an administrator act as custodian. Make sure you read Part 1 and Part 2 first to make sense of this post. ***
The illegitimate custodian test
Ask “Who should the check be payable to for the rollover contribution or transfer?”
Ask “If my IRA buys real estate and rents it out, to whom should the tenant make the rent checks payable?”
Ask “If my IRA owns real estate that needs repairs, who issues and signs the check to the repairmen?”
These questions will tell you who is actually serving as custodian. For instance, if you live in TX and unregulated company Dotrust is marketing its self-directed IRA services to you, the answer to one or more of the questions above will probably be something like Dotrust of Texas, Inc. If this is the case, ask to see its bank or trust charter – if it is an illegitimate custodian it won’t have one, and it will insist that another bank is technically the custodian. It not only matters who’s the custodian on the paperwork is; but it also matters who is acting as custodian as uncovered by the answers to the 3 questions above.
Why would somebody operate an illegitimate custodian company?
First of all, if it’s a franchise operation, the franchisee might not even know that he or she is part of an illegitimate IRA custodian scheme. Secondly, there can be a lot of profit to be made in an illegitimate IRA custodian scheme. The company can earn interest off of your IRA funds, and it may pass only some (or even none) of that interest earned on to you. It may also be able to earn higher interest rates when it collectively has custody of hundreds of millions of dollars in funds.
Surprised?
You may be thinking “This sounds like a company I’ve run into. But it promotes and and advertises and has been in the business for decades… it can’t be illegitimate, can it????”
Many high-profile schemes have been shut down. The private annuity trust scheme was promoted for over a decade before the IRS shut it down. Additionally, being in business for decades doesn’t guarantee that business is legitimate. Look at Bernie Madoff.
Madoff may be a harsh comparison. Those involved in an illegitimate IRA custodian scheme may not be knowingly harming anyone. They may even be attorneys or CPAs. They may believe they’ve merely created a loophole for themselves with the “stepped transaction” arrangement. They may be good people. But the bottom line is that there are significant risks you take in using their services, and you will pay the consequences if uncovered by the authorities. In my opinion, it never makes sense to use an illegitimate custodian because there are dozens of regulated/legitimate self-directed IRA custodians out there. There should be a balance between risk and reward. There is significant risk of using an unregulated/illegitimate custodian, and it offers no unique reward that isn’t offered by other self-directed IRA custodians.
Confused? If you have a self-directed IRA or are thinking of opening one at a custodian company, perform the illegitimate custodian test as described above.
Subscribe :: 
del.icio.us :: 
Digg this :: 
Stumble it :: 
facebook
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: [What are these icons for?]
Warning: Don't let administrators act as custodian – Part 2 January 13, 2009
Posted by Jeff Nabers in : Self Directed IRA Solo 401k , add a comment
*** This is Part 2 of a series about the dangers of letting an administrator act as custodian. Make sure you read Part 1 first to make sense of this post. ***
Signs that your custodian may not really be a custodian
- They sometimes call themselves an administrator. “Administrator” is an accurate label for any company who provides record keeping services. Being an “administrator” doesn’t require any regulation. These types of companies may expand their services to include asset custody without actually registering as a bank or trust company.
- Their name contains the word “trust” attached to other letters or words. A legitimate custodian usually has the word “bank” or “trust” as a separate word included in its name. In most states, the word “trust” is a restricted word for naming companies – just like the word “bank”. This means that you can’t start a company called “ABC Bank” unless it’s registered as a bank. You also can’t start a company called “XYZ Trust Company” without being a registered trust company. An illegitimate custodian might get around this by calling themselves Trustus rather than Trust Us, Dotrust rather than Do Trust, or Safetrust rather than Safe Trust. You see, if trust is attached to another word instead of used as a separate word, then it sneakily gets around the naming restrictions.
- They have dozens of offices all around the country. Expanding to dozens of cities across the country can (more…)
