I have been dissatisfied with most of the articles that I have read about what I call Rothing, i.e. foregoing a deduction for retirement savings with the prospect of tax-free distributions in the future or taking the tax hit on a deferred account to convert it to a tax-free account. The articles generally have a pro-Roth bias. Suze Orman, for example, swears by Roths. They also tend to not have numbers in them. What I am going to do here is to reflect on the idea of Rothing and discuss what I see as some key numbers. I’m not going to dive deep into technical issues.
Lessons Learned from the Tax Court: The Root of the Issue
Matt Metras, EA
When is a business really a business? As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said in 1964, “I know it when I see it.” The US Tax Court, however, maintains a slightly less subjective standard. The Roots were pretty sure they were running a bona fide business; the IRS, however, didn’t share the sentiment. And since we’re reading about them in a segment called “Lessons Learned,” one should assume it did not go the way the Roots would have liked.
