"John" <john.corey[at]gmail.com> wrote:

- quote -

I'm single with no kids and in forties

- quote -

OK

- quote -

Yes I'm in college now on part time basis. May go full
time this fall

While there are some protections in a BK I am not sure if that is
important.

Do you have plans to file BK or otherwise expect to be in a BK?

Are you single or married? If married are you expecting a divorce
anytime soon?

My point about the questions is you might be planning for something
that has very low chance of happening in the short term. I am assuming
you expect to go to college sometime soon. If the money really is
needed for college then there is no obvious reason to take it out now
vs. when you have a bill to pay (annual tuition). You can look into the
exemptions for withdrawals for college, etc. You can also do some tax
planning concerning income when you take the money out as it might be
best to be in the lower tax bracket.

If you were doing long term educational planning it might make sense to
take out student loans while in college and leave the funds in the IRA.
You can use the funds when you graduate to pay off the debt. I believe
the interest on the student loans only starts when you graduate or
otherwise leave. If that is correct you can grow the IRA for X more
years. Just pick something that has little chance of going down in
value so it is all there when you finish your education.

John Corey

<<What does fine print say?>
I'm not going to repeat it verbatim - you can read it for yourself.

<<What are you implying? that it really cant be done?>
No, just the opposite - it *can* be done, but there are rules and
limitations. You have to be at least a half-time student to cover room
and board, you can only take out enough each year for that year's
expenses, they have to be "qualified" expenses, it has to be an
"eligible" school, etc.

Read the fine manual!

John Cowart

<BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net> wrote in message
news:yobzmitntm3.fsf[at]panix2.panix.com...
- quote -

There are many other situations though, if one takes the "etc." in the OP's
question seriously. The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection
Act (BAPCPA) of 2005 does not protect against seizures under state law, only
against claims made when bankruptcy has been declared.
http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/...322964,00.html

In fairness, the Rousey v. Jacoway Supreme Court decision would still seem
to be relevant to non-bankruptcy claims against the IRA (to the extent that
the assets are "reasonably necessary" to the debtor), and that would provide
limited protection in the "etc." situations.

Even in bankruptcy, BAPCPA only provides for protection of $1M in many IRAs.
The exception is for rollovers from qualified employer plans (like 401(k)s).
This seems to be an argument for keeping conduit IRAs segregated, even
though for rollover purposes, the separation is no longer required, due to
EGGTRA of 2001.

Conduit IRAs not needed for rollover purposes:
http://www.chase.com/cm/cs?pagename=...law_changes#A4),

Keeping IRAs segregated for extra protection:
- Entrepreneur.com article cited above
- http://www.fpanet.org/journal/articl...p0805-art6.cfm (See
fn 14, 15, and the main text surrounding the footnote references)

--
Mark Freeland
nNeEwTs[at]sonic.net

BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net wrote:

- quote -

I see.... thanks

So.... its debatable then huh?

Ok.... so how can a person protect investments form
such things and make sure they are without a doubt
"protected"?

Is starting a trust the only way to do that?

I want to put what little assets I have in a form that
is completely protected form government seizure. is a
trust the only way?

I'm not wanting to screw anyone.... just trying to
learn something.

I may want to quit work and go back to college full
time..... or start a business..... those kinds of
things. And all I have to my name is abt 60k

"bo peep" <cowartmisc1[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

What does fine print say?

What are you implying? that it really cant be done?

Ignoramus20015 <ignoramus20015[at]NOSPAM.20015.invalid> writes:
- quote -

How about a slightly qualified *mostly* protected?

See:

http://www.financial-planning.com/pu...050414102.html
and
http://www.investopedia.com/articles...Protection.asp

In general, though, yes.

--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

<<my intentions are to use this money for going back to college>
Don't forget to read the fine print -
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p970/ch09.html

John Cowart

"Dave Dodson" <dave_and_darla[at]Juno.com> wrote:

- quote -

Ahh.... I see!

I will certainly check it out

- quote -

This is not about what you asked, but I believe that there is an
exception to the penalty (but not the income taxes) if you take
distributions from an IRA to pay qualified education expenses. Check it
out.

Dave

Ignoramus20015 <ignoramus20015[at]NOSPAM.20015.invalidwrote:

- quote -

OK

Well my intentions are to use this money for going back
to college..... NOT as retirement. I have other monies
for that

So..... would it be best to LEAVE that money in the IRA
and draw it out "as needed"? That way it's "protected?

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:57:16 -0500, me[at]privacy.net <me[at]privacy.net> wrote:
- quote -

Yes, it is fully protected.

i

- quote -

I have abt 50k in an IRA

This money isn't really "retirement" monies. But I had
to roll it over to an IRA. It was money from a company
dissolution.

Lately I've been thinking abt terminating the IRA and
paying the penalty and taxes and using the cash for
other purposes and investments such as college tuition.

However.....seems like I was told that money in an IRA
is better protected form seizure in case of bankruptcy
etc.

Is this true?

Is money in an IRA exempt from bankruptcy seizure, etc?

I'm in Missouri if that helps