Dividend Yield's Importance As A Valuation Metric [View article]
This concept has been around for more than 40 years and something I use for personally choosing which stocks to continue to research. The website is iqtrends.com, started by Geraldine Weiss and continued now by Kelley Wright. The premise is that each stock has their own range of undervalued and overvalued yield RELATIVE to its own history. A number of people on this board think it's fluff because it's a "best fit" range. I think it's a great tool. To each there own.
Look at the sample issue on their website and get their books from the library.
Hidden Cost Of Mutual Funds: Why Dividend Growth Investors Should Go It Alone [View article]
Or, if you really want to be like Chowder and follow 48-50 stocks, you can do folioinvesting.com. I used to use it when it was called foliofn.com and doing a bunch of moving of stocks. Back in the good ole days, it was $199/year in the two trading windows each day. Now it's $290/year. So yes, you can DCA 48 stocks every month for one fee.
Dividend Disasters And What I Learned From Them [View article]
Ahh.. self-reflection on the part we don't want to admit. Kudos to writing the article and making me realize where I have screwed up and more importantly, why.
Example 1: Dot com boom. ELON - bought at 20, went to 120 in SIX WEEKS. Didn't sell until like $8 a share because I was too young and stupid to understand (was still in grad school)
Example 2: Novastar Financial around 2006/7. Sucked in by the ultra high yield and thought all the pundits on the message board were right and just Herb Greenberg was wrong. Lost a killing and licked my wounds from that one.
Example 3: The current one is TEF. I don't put this in the same category as the first 2, but down just the same. I go back to why did I buy? Telecom (steady utility), increasing dividend (at the time) with international exposure and a great kicker of Latin America.
Where have I gone wrong? The debacle of the home country and redemption of ETFs, european mutual funds and the likes having to continually sell as the price pushes downward and the DEBT/interest payments continuing to mount. (I still hold TEF)
What have I learned (and this may not apply to everyone's appetite of investing) with each passing mistake? Go with companies that have dividends. Go with companies that have rising dividends. Go with companies that have manageable debt (VOD over TEF). Go with companies that have moderate payout ratios (TEF over 100%), and Go with companies that beta is less than the market (still testing this one in my mind).
I think the people that really read not only the authors that you mentioned but the comments from those author's articles will save SOOOO much time in investing properly for the long haul. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel when we have so many great wheelmakers showing us openly how they do it.
Capital Or Dividend Growth? A Mid-Life Stock-Strategy Crisis [View article]
Adam:
I'm with DGM and mbkelly on this one. The reason why dividend stocks make sense as a core is because of a continual return ON assets without having the market dictate what the return should be (return OF assets, or as you put it - wealth creation POTENTIAL).
Second, and mbkelly is absolutely right, you can have 0% capital appreciation and have a fantastic revenue stream. Check my comments to Rookie IRA investor about this very topic. With 0% capital appreciation but DRIP a stock that has dividend growth, it becomes an inflation-indexed (or better) annuity where you still have control over the pile. It's my grandmother's comments that hit me like a 2 by 4. She never comments how much she has in assets, she always talks about her cash flow. I am starting now (and we are probably similar in age) to create the growing annuity for later.
Now here is the $64,000 question: How long will it take for the annuity/dividend income stream to become large enough not to work? The assumptions: 0% capital growth, 3.5% starting portfolio yield, 8% annual dividend growth of the portfolio, 30% tax rate on dividends, DRIP/reinvest all dividends.
The answer: 1-2 generations (22-50 years) depending upon your initial investment. My sons, 6 and 3, could be dividend millionaires in their Roth accounts with a one time measly investment of $400 each by the time they are 50 years old. Could care less what the portfolio is actually worth if they can take a million bucks out tax-free every year (and growing).
The Beginning Days Of Dividend Growth Investing [View article]
David Wedell:
The problem you will find with ETFs is the expense ratio. Using something like VTI, which has a ratio of 0.07%(?) doesn't seem like much but leave it for 30 years, and all of a sudden that is a large expense for the privilege of diversification.
Using your AT&T example and a $10 trading fee, you paid the $10 once, you DRIP for free in any # of brokerage firms, and you believe that AT&T will be around for 30 years, paying a dividend every year, and hopefully increasing the dividend year after year (even if 2% for some years), that $10 is pennies compared to what the value will be. If you still must use ETFs, I suppose look at VIG, a preferable small cap dividend growing ETF,or Wisdom Tree ETFs where you can get some pretty obscure things like emerging market small caps.
As for crankyguy's comments, this has been beaten to death in terms of possible dividend cuts. Start with David Fish's list and you elimnated 5600 out of 6000 stocks to have to look at. And look at the tab of frozen and slashed dividends. You will find at least 50% every year is from financials. So if you do like RAS and don't invest in the financial industry, your probability will go way up that you will have more income this year than you did last year.
The way I read it. New COP - still $2.64 annual payout, get 1 share for every share you currently own and goal of 5% div growth.
New 2nd company - $.80 annual payout, 0.5 shares for every share you own now and goal of 5% div growth.
So, 2.64 + (0.80*0.5) = 3.04 new dividend or 4.8% yield now.
Which brings up a good question which I tried to get answered somewhere else. Norman, I know you answered it and it's below your starting threshhold, but here it goes:
When a company like VOD says they plan on growing the dividend 7%/yr for the next 3 years, or COP saying 5% dividend growth, or TGT, which has a current yield now of 2.3ish% on $1.20 dividend, but have stated publicly in mid-August that they plan to grow the annual dividend to $3 by 2017 (giving it a 16-17% div CAGR), how does one interpret the information? Do you take it as fact or just a nice to know but nothing is guaranteed until cash in hand?
Dividend Champions Smackdown XVIII: The Tweed Factor [View article]
David:
The parameters don't change that much over time. Going back to ABT or PG or JNJ, they have been consistent dividend growers of around 8-12% every year. The band of undervalue/overvalue won't change much.
A company like Intel would show a different story. If you use the data back to 1992 (?), the historical #s would be very low. The range becomes more appropriate if you only look once they started increasing the dividend the last 8 years and make the range based on that.
So, yes, it would be me taking the data from Yahoo and giving the results. I guess I interpret it like this since this started because of Norman and his 4% rule. Even if a stock, like a utility, comes down to 4%, that is historically near overvalued because the utilities are traditionally undervalued at 7-8%. The 4% yield as an absolute doesn't work for ALL stocks but should be relative to its own history.
3 Dividend Stocks Selected By Gordon Model [View article]
It's a very simple screening tool and one that works for Norman. So I figured let's just try it out and do a simple screen using Fish's CCC spreadsheet. (Note: I am using the CCC data from 8/31. I did not verify tha the data is correct.) If I understood Norman correctly, I merged all the companies together and using the CCC, it was Column AN (5 yr div growth) Plus Column I (Yield) MINUS Column U (P/E TTM). If the number was positive it stayed, negative got tossed. I also did it for the 1 yr (column AL) and added one twist: What if those 5 yr and 1 yr growth rates were cut in half?
So my screen was this: Div Yield >3% Mkt Cap > 300 million Payout Ratio<80% (if negative, it was also omitted) Tweed Formula with 5 yr div growth >0 (if #VALUE came up, it was omitted) Tweed with 50% 5 yr div growth > 0 Tweed with 1 yr div growth> 0 Tweed with 50% 1 yr div growth > 0
As of 8/31 closing price, an interesting mix of 16 companies and ones many people on this board probably invest in already. Some question marks but for a simple screen it makes analyzing pretty easy. The 16, in no particular order:
If these prices were to drop about 15%, these would have made the screen:
HAS, NOC, ARLP, DCM, RDS-A, RDS-B, NVS
That cutting in half of the div growth makes it pretty rigorous that ABT wouldn't make until about $40 per share. I personally would buy ABT above $40 but just food for thought on the Tweed model.
13 Dividend Stocks With A Quick Payback [View article]
With regards to TGT, if one reads the August 18th conference call (can be found on SA), one of the speakers talks about the growth of the dividend near the end of the call. They said they expect to grow the TTM dividend of $1.10 to $3.00 by 2017. That's a 18% CAGR on the dividend.
Now that it is out there in public and their current EPS can cover that along with their FCF and their history of not only increasing dividends but really growing the dividend the last 2-3 years, do you almost take that statement as fact for the future and plan accordingly? At the current price, reinvesting dividends will make TGT a 6+% YOC stock in 5 years.
Are Dividend-Growth Stocks a Distinct Asset Class? [View article]
Here is why I lost interest in the MPT and why I am now solely in the camp of dividend growing stocks: You can't compete with reinvestment of the dividends. I just wrote a book (let's just call it a first draft) that speaks about this very subject.
Your goal is $100,000 in after-tax dividends (ATD). The scenario: Starting portfolio yield: 3.5% Growth of the portfolio's dividend: 8% Taxes on dividends: 30% (trying to do worst case scenario) Full reinvestment of dividends.
If we start out with an initial investment of $90,000, it will take 27 years to get to $100,000 in ATD. To get to $1 million in ATD will take 35 years. To try and go for growth with that initial $90K and say when my nest egg is X, I'll convert it over to income, you need $4 million to get to the $100,000 ATD mark , and $40 million for the $1 million ATD mark. That would be growth rates of 15.1% CAGR for 27 years and 19.1% CAGR for 35 years, respectively, of your portfolio. I know I am not good enough to do that so I realize start the income stream now and let reinvestment and dividend growth do its magic.
And if you want to start with less, here's what you would need to do:
$7500 initial investment - 35 years to $100K ATD; 41 years to $1M ATD Portfolio growth of 19.6% CAGR for 35 yrs and 23.25% for 41 yrs
$2000 initial investment - 39 years to $100K ATD; 44 years to $1M ATD Portfolio growth of 21.5% CAGR for 39 yrs and 25.3% for 44 yrs
I have more confidence in a stock like ABT or PEP or KMB to continue its streak of increasing its dividend and increasing that future income stream than trying to grow the value of the portfolio 15% a year minimum for that length of time.
Just my 2 cents (fully reinvested) :)
eyetri2 P.S. If anyone wants to read my book, I have no idea how you would contact me, but let me know and I would happy to get it ripeed apart, I mean, critiqued.
I understand what you are trying to ask, but there are a couple of points that I want to highlight.
"all of your stocks went up and you had a 100% gain in fourteen months."
Not all of them have to go up for this to occur. You could have some massive winners with a couple of losers and this happens.
"Wouldn't you sell part of the holdings you believe might be overvalued ..."
Overvalued to whom? To your analysis? You can use a tool like FASTGraphs (Chuck, you can pay me later:) ) to go by historical trends but Mr. Carnevale had a wonderful article not too long ago showing EMC back in the 90s. It was completely disconnected from the reality of the business but people didn't care - it skyrocketed anyway. Just because something is overvalued doesn't mean it can't become more overvalued. The real question is: How good are you disconnecting the emotional aspect of investing to protect your gains and not watch them disappear?
"look for opportunities to methodically try building your wealth,"
This was the point I really wanted to get to. Remember this is the Dividend and Income section, though Richjoy would prefer it is called the Growth and Income section. Is your PRIMARY goal to grow the pile or RECEIVE SOME INCOME from the pile you originally invested? My personal goal is the latter. If I were to sell anything, it would be done with the first purpose of diversification to protect the income stream. My second goal is to increase the overall income (a higher yielding stock than what I sold) of the portfolio with the next purchase (taking the tax consequences out of the conversation for this point). And my third purpose is to see historically that this new company has grown the dividend faster than inflation, and preferably twice inflation.
I don't know if this was your answer, but this is one person's perspective on how the thought process goes.
Dividend Growth Investing And The Reluctant Spouse [View article]
Bob:
I commend the article, but the article is skewed to age and the longevity of your marriage. My wife was in the same boat. And then in November, she says she wants to know the finances. So I gather everything together, sum everything up in 3 pages in terms of accounts, brokerage, life insurance, who to contact, how to dispose of assets, etc. Two months later, she files for divorce. More than just a coincidence.
I don't want my comment to become a pity party. I will write an article when the divorce is final in terms of costs of divorce, split of assets, and my guess of how long this will delay my retirement, not ours (who cares about hers anymore?) I just spoke to one of my patients who just said, "Divorce for women is their new mid-life crisis." OK, so my comment is not the most upbeat, but it is a word of caution for the younger guys who peruse these articles to see if your spouse has never been interested and all of a sudden is, be wary.
A Real Dividend Growth Machine: 2012 Review [View article]
You can always do a 72(t), which allows you to take equal periodic payments from your IRA before the 59.5 age. But there are lots of rules, lots of restrictions, and once you start it, you can't stop it and you can't change it. But yes, it is possible.
What Happens When Non-Spouses Inherit My IRA? [View article]
Bruce:
Thanks for your comments. My article, as most articles here, are to generate discussion. This was also written to enlighten people that the IRA laws are a "labyrinth," as you said. I am not sure where I said, or didn't say, inheritance is not state regulated, but was only talking about the distributions of IRAs and how to calculate the RMD.
I also mentioned in one of the other comments along with the article about using the most strict rules that were written, which was roughly in use as recently as 5 years ago. As MartyFL mentioned, the rules got a little more flexible, such as splitting IRAs after death. I also continually say to find someone who knows and keeps up with the IRA rules irahelp.com.
I know I have helped people shed light on what can be a confusing subject and many have said thanks. I will ask you to write a subsequent article to delve deeper into this subject to help correct some of your concerns about what I have written.
Dividend Yield's Importance As A Valuation Metric [View article]
Look at the sample issue on their website and get their books from the library.
eyetri2
Hidden Cost Of Mutual Funds: Why Dividend Growth Investors Should Go It Alone [View article]
eyetri2
Dividend Disasters And What I Learned From Them [View article]
Example 1: Dot com boom. ELON - bought at 20, went to 120 in SIX WEEKS. Didn't sell until like $8 a share because I was too young and stupid to understand (was still in grad school)
Example 2: Novastar Financial around 2006/7. Sucked in by the ultra high yield and thought all the pundits on the message board were right and just Herb Greenberg was wrong. Lost a killing and licked my wounds from that one.
Example 3: The current one is TEF. I don't put this in the same category as the first 2, but down just the same. I go back to why did I buy? Telecom (steady utility), increasing dividend (at the time) with international exposure and a great kicker of Latin America.
Where have I gone wrong? The debacle of the home country and redemption of ETFs, european mutual funds and the likes having to continually sell as the price pushes downward and the DEBT/interest payments continuing to mount. (I still hold TEF)
What have I learned (and this may not apply to everyone's appetite of investing) with each passing mistake?
Go with companies that have dividends.
Go with companies that have rising dividends.
Go with companies that have manageable debt (VOD over TEF). Go with companies that have moderate payout ratios (TEF over 100%), and
Go with companies that beta is less than the market (still testing this one in my mind).
I think the people that really read not only the authors that you mentioned but the comments from those author's articles will save SOOOO much time in investing properly for the long haul. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel when we have so many great wheelmakers showing us openly how they do it.
My .02 reinvested.
eyetri2
Capital Or Dividend Growth? A Mid-Life Stock-Strategy Crisis [View article]
I'm with DGM and mbkelly on this one. The reason why dividend stocks make sense as a core is because of a continual return ON assets without having the market dictate what the return should be (return OF assets, or as you put it - wealth creation POTENTIAL).
Second, and mbkelly is absolutely right, you can have 0% capital appreciation and have a fantastic revenue stream. Check my comments to Rookie IRA investor about this very topic. With 0% capital appreciation but DRIP a stock that has dividend growth, it becomes an inflation-indexed (or better) annuity where you still have control over the pile. It's my grandmother's comments that hit me like a 2 by 4. She never comments how much she has in assets, she always talks about her cash flow. I am starting now (and we are probably similar in age) to create the growing annuity for later.
Now here is the $64,000 question: How long will it take for the annuity/dividend income stream to become large enough not to work? The assumptions: 0% capital growth, 3.5% starting portfolio yield, 8% annual dividend growth of the portfolio, 30% tax rate on dividends, DRIP/reinvest all dividends.
The answer: 1-2 generations (22-50 years) depending upon your initial investment. My sons, 6 and 3, could be dividend millionaires in their Roth accounts with a one time measly investment of $400 each by the time they are 50 years old. Could care less what the portfolio is actually worth if they can take a million bucks out tax-free every year (and growing).
My .02 reinvested
eyetri2
The Beginning Days Of Dividend Growth Investing [View article]
The problem you will find with ETFs is the expense ratio. Using something like VTI, which has a ratio of 0.07%(?) doesn't seem like much but leave it for 30 years, and all of a sudden that is a large expense for the privilege of diversification.
Using your AT&T example and a $10 trading fee, you paid the $10 once, you DRIP for free in any # of brokerage firms, and you believe that AT&T will be around for 30 years, paying a dividend every year, and hopefully increasing the dividend year after year (even if 2% for some years), that $10 is pennies compared to what the value will be. If you still must use ETFs, I suppose look at VIG, a preferable small cap dividend growing ETF,or Wisdom Tree ETFs where you can get some pretty obscure things like emerging market small caps.
As for crankyguy's comments, this has been beaten to death in terms of possible dividend cuts. Start with David Fish's list and you elimnated 5600 out of 6000 stocks to have to look at. And look at the tab of frozen and slashed dividends. You will find at least 50% every year is from financials. So if you do like RAS and don't invest in the financial industry, your probability will go way up that you will have more income this year than you did last year.
eyetri2
Dividend Growth Stocks Perfect For Retirees - Part 3 [View article]
If you want more info, here's the link:
http://bit.ly/oT8rI4
The way I read it. New COP - still $2.64 annual payout, get 1 share for every share you currently own and goal of 5% div growth.
New 2nd company - $.80 annual payout, 0.5 shares for every share you own now and goal of 5% div growth.
So, 2.64 + (0.80*0.5) = 3.04 new dividend or 4.8% yield now.
Which brings up a good question which I tried to get answered somewhere else. Norman, I know you answered it and it's below your starting threshhold, but here it goes:
When a company like VOD says they plan on growing the dividend 7%/yr for the next 3 years, or COP saying 5% dividend growth, or TGT, which has a current yield now of 2.3ish% on $1.20 dividend, but have stated publicly in mid-August that they plan to grow the annual dividend to $3 by 2017 (giving it a 16-17% div CAGR), how does one interpret the information? Do you take it as fact or just a nice to know but nothing is guaranteed until cash in hand?
eyetri2
Dividend Champions Smackdown XVIII: The Tweed Factor [View article]
The parameters don't change that much over time. Going back to ABT or PG or JNJ, they have been consistent dividend growers of around 8-12% every year. The band of undervalue/overvalue won't change much.
A company like Intel would show a different story. If you use the data back to 1992 (?), the historical #s would be very low. The range becomes more appropriate if you only look once they started increasing the dividend the last 8 years and make the range based on that.
So, yes, it would be me taking the data from Yahoo and giving the results. I guess I interpret it like this since this started because of Norman and his 4% rule. Even if a stock, like a utility, comes down to 4%, that is historically near overvalued because the utilities are traditionally undervalued at 7-8%. The 4% yield as an absolute doesn't work for ALL stocks but should be relative to its own history.
eyetri2
3 Dividend Stocks Selected By Gordon Model [View article]
(Note: I am using the CCC data from 8/31. I did not verify tha the data is correct.)
If I understood Norman correctly, I merged all the companies together and using the CCC, it was Column AN (5 yr div growth) Plus Column I (Yield) MINUS Column U (P/E TTM). If the number was positive it stayed, negative got tossed. I also did it for the 1 yr (column AL) and added one twist: What if those 5 yr and 1 yr growth rates were cut in half?
So my screen was this:
Div Yield >3%
Mkt Cap > 300 million
Payout Ratio<80% (if negative, it was also omitted)
Tweed Formula with 5 yr div growth >0 (if #VALUE came up, it was omitted)
Tweed with 50% 5 yr div growth > 0
Tweed with 1 yr div growth> 0
Tweed with 50% 1 yr div growth > 0
As of 8/31 closing price, an interesting mix of 16 companies and ones many people on this board probably invest in already. Some question marks but for a simple screen it makes analyzing pretty easy. The 16, in no particular order:
TWGP, STRA, EOC, TEF, SBSI, THG, RCI, DRI, RTN, AZN, SWY, RBCAA, COP, LMT, INTC, SXL
If these prices were to drop about 15%, these would have made the screen:
HAS, NOC, ARLP, DCM, RDS-A, RDS-B, NVS
That cutting in half of the div growth makes it pretty rigorous that ABT wouldn't make until about $40 per share. I personally would buy ABT above $40 but just food for thought on the Tweed model.
eyetri2
13 Dividend Stocks With A Quick Payback [View article]
Now that it is out there in public and their current EPS can cover that along with their FCF and their history of not only increasing dividends but really growing the dividend the last 2-3 years, do you almost take that statement as fact for the future and plan accordingly? At the current price, reinvesting dividends will make TGT a 6+% YOC stock in 5 years.
eyetri2
Are Dividend-Growth Stocks a Distinct Asset Class? [View article]
Your goal is $100,000 in after-tax dividends (ATD). The scenario:
Starting portfolio yield: 3.5%
Growth of the portfolio's dividend: 8%
Taxes on dividends: 30% (trying to do worst case scenario)
Full reinvestment of dividends.
If we start out with an initial investment of $90,000, it will take 27 years to get to $100,000 in ATD. To get to $1 million in ATD will take 35 years. To try and go for growth with that initial $90K and say when my nest egg is X, I'll convert it over to income, you need $4 million to get to the $100,000 ATD mark , and $40 million for the $1 million ATD mark. That would be growth rates of 15.1% CAGR for 27 years and 19.1% CAGR for 35 years, respectively, of your portfolio. I know I am not good enough to do that so I realize start the income stream now and let reinvestment and dividend growth do its magic.
And if you want to start with less, here's what you would need to do:
$7500 initial investment - 35 years to $100K ATD; 41 years to $1M ATD
Portfolio growth of 19.6% CAGR for 35 yrs and 23.25% for 41 yrs
$2000 initial investment - 39 years to $100K ATD; 44 years to $1M ATD
Portfolio growth of 21.5% CAGR for 39 yrs and 25.3% for 44 yrs
I have more confidence in a stock like ABT or PEP or KMB to continue its streak of increasing its dividend and increasing that future income stream than trying to grow the value of the portfolio 15% a year minimum for that length of time.
Just my 2 cents (fully reinvested) :)
eyetri2
P.S. If anyone wants to read my book, I have no idea how you would contact me, but let me know and I would happy to get it ripeed apart, I mean, critiqued.
Please Do Not Invest Like This [View article]
I understand what you are trying to ask, but there are a couple of points that I want to highlight.
"all of your stocks went up and you had a 100% gain in fourteen months."
Not all of them have to go up for this to occur. You could have some massive winners with a couple of losers and this happens.
"Wouldn't you sell part of the holdings you believe might be overvalued ..."
Overvalued to whom? To your analysis? You can use a tool like FASTGraphs (Chuck, you can pay me later:) ) to go by historical trends but Mr. Carnevale had a wonderful article not too long ago showing EMC back in the 90s. It was completely disconnected from the reality of the business but people didn't care - it skyrocketed anyway. Just because something is overvalued doesn't mean it can't become more overvalued. The real question is: How good are you disconnecting the emotional aspect of investing to protect your gains and not watch them disappear?
"look for opportunities to methodically try building your wealth,"
This was the point I really wanted to get to. Remember this is the Dividend and Income section, though Richjoy would prefer it is called the Growth and Income section. Is your PRIMARY goal to grow the pile or RECEIVE SOME INCOME from the pile you originally invested? My personal goal is the latter. If I were to sell anything, it would be done with the first purpose of diversification to protect the income stream. My second goal is to increase the overall income (a higher yielding stock than what I sold) of the portfolio with the next purchase (taking the tax consequences out of the conversation for this point). And my third purpose is to see historically that this new company has grown the dividend faster than inflation, and preferably twice inflation.
I don't know if this was your answer, but this is one person's perspective on how the thought process goes.
DD
Dividend Growth Investing And The Reluctant Spouse [View article]
I commend the article, but the article is skewed to age and the longevity of your marriage. My wife was in the same boat. And then in November, she says she wants to know the finances. So I gather everything together, sum everything up in 3 pages in terms of accounts, brokerage, life insurance, who to contact, how to dispose of assets, etc. Two months later, she files for divorce. More than just a coincidence.
I don't want my comment to become a pity party. I will write an article when the divorce is final in terms of costs of divorce, split of assets, and my guess of how long this will delay my retirement, not ours (who cares about hers anymore?) I just spoke to one of my patients who just said, "Divorce for women is their new mid-life crisis." OK, so my comment is not the most upbeat, but it is a word of caution for the younger guys who peruse these articles to see if your spouse has never been interested and all of a sudden is, be wary.
DD
Charlie Munger Built His Fortune By Seeking Income First, Capital Gains Later [View article]
DD
A Real Dividend Growth Machine: 2012 Review [View article]
DD
What Happens When Non-Spouses Inherit My IRA? [View article]
Thanks for your comments. My article, as most articles here, are to generate discussion. This was also written to enlighten people that the IRA laws are a "labyrinth," as you said. I am not sure where I said, or didn't say, inheritance is not state regulated, but was only talking about the distributions of IRAs and how to calculate the RMD.
I also mentioned in one of the other comments along with the article about using the most strict rules that were written, which was roughly in use as recently as 5 years ago. As MartyFL mentioned, the rules got a little more flexible, such as splitting IRAs after death. I also continually say to find someone who knows and keeps up with the IRA rules irahelp.com.
I know I have helped people shed light on what can be a confusing subject and many have said thanks. I will ask you to write a subsequent article to delve deeper into this subject to help correct some of your concerns about what I have written.
DD