Business
Moneyline by Neil Downing: IRA assets are protected because they are held in trust
01:00 AM EDT on Monday, July 7, 2008
Q: I am concerned about the protection of my IRA brokerage account . … After the Bear Stearns meltdown, I wonder if my money is insured in the case of a bankruptcy by my broker.
— D.P., Wakefield
A: Money or other assets inside your traditional IRA or a Roth IRA is held in trust, said Marvin Rotenberg, a nationally recognized expert on IRAs and other retirement-savings plans.
Thus, the assets are segregated — held separately from the brokerage’s assets, said Rotenberg, who recently retired as director of individual retirement services for Bank of America.
“So even if the brokerage goes bankrupt, those assets are protected,” Rotenberg told me when I visited him at his office in Boston. A couple of other points:
•Mutual fund shares, stock or other such investments in your IRA are generally subject to market fluctuation. In other words, their value can rise and fall.
•The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) generally restores funds to investors who have assets in the hands of bankrupt and otherwise financially troubled brokerage firms. SIPC’s Web site has more about its limited role in investor protection:
Q: In [the] June 23 article you mentioned traditional IRAs — once you reach a certain age you must withdraw a minimum amount. What about the Roth IRA? Is it necessary there, also? …
— J.V., Narragansett
A: If you own a Roth IRA, you’re not required to make withdrawals, no matter your age, said Robert J. Sclama, who teaches taxation at Bryant University’s program for financial planners.
However, if you inherit a Roth IRA, you are required to withdraw at least a minimum amount from the account each year.
For more about required withdrawals from traditional and Roth IRAs, see IRS Publication 590. To obtain a free copy of the booklet, visit your local IRS office, call the IRS toll-free at (800) 829-3676, or use this IRS Web site:
Q: I have received my rebate check, but I have two children, a 16-year-old and a 19-year-old. The 19-year-old did her taxes but never received her rebate. My husband and I claimed her on our taxes, but we did not receive a rebate check for her. … Could you please shed some light on this? …
— P.M., Cranston
A: Many MoneyLine readers have called or e-mailed with the same complaint. Here’s the deal:
•As a parent, you’re generally eligible for a rebate of $300 for each child you have who was under 17 as of Dec. 31, 2007. You can’t receive a rebate for your 19-year-old daughter because she doesn’t meet that age limit.
•A person can’t qualify for a rebate if he or she was claimed — or could have been claimed — as a dependent on another’s return, said IRS spokeswoman Peggy Riley. You claimed your 19-year-old daughter as a dependent on your return, so she wasn’t able to obtain a rebate on her own. That’s true even though she worked last year and filed a federal income-tax return.
Questions about your money matters? Call us at 1-401-277-7484 and leave a message, or e-mail:
Whether you phone in or e-mail your question, please be sure to include your name, home town and home phone in case we need to reach you. Sorry, no personal replies; as many questions and issues as possible will appear here.
| Topping off the new construction at Hanley Vocational High School in Providence | |
| Newport's political ladies no longer in waiting | |
| ACI women inmate victim impact class |
|
More business stories
Most active surveys
Are you worried about losing your job?
Should radio stations wait until after Thanksgiving to play Christmas music?
What do you think about tolls on Route 95?
Share your experience with premature birth
Should the Patriots consider keeping Matt Cassel, and trading Tom Brady?
Most e-mailed in the last 24 hours
Popular Stories










You must be logged in to contribute. Log in | Register Now!
You are logged in as screenname | Log Out
You are logged in, but do not have a "screen" name. Update Your Profile