Talk:Roth IRA

message: The official IRS document listed at the bottom of this article, Publication 590, Cat. no. 15160x, is titled Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs):  For use in preparing 2011 Returns. — Anita5192 (talk) 20:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arrangement versus account 

message: I removed the paragraph on the step transaction.  The article linked to does not constitute a reliable source, and I cannot find any RS on the internet for this.  A reliable source in this case would be, I would say, a major financial firm like Fidelity or Vanguard, or a personal finance section of a website/newspaper like CNN or USA Today.  The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 00:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, it looks to me like the editor who added this may in fact be the author of the article used as the reference, in which case this is a self-published source.  The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 00:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Caveat" Re Step Transaction 

message: I don't understand this well enough to edit, but editors here should be aware of this piece which criticizes this article, towards the end of page 1:  --JFH (talk) 18:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, I see this has been addressed. --JFH (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, pity the author of the Forbes article didn't see fit to just correct the Wikipedia article.  The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 19:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article mentioned at Forbes.com, possibly inaccurate 

message: The Disadvantages section is not well written. Being tax-deductable and reducing AGI are exactly the same thing; it is redundant and misleading to mention it twice under different bullets. Comparing Roth IRAs to 401(k)s is not a good comparison; the advantages/disadvantages of Roth IRAs should be to traditional IRAs, not 401(k)s. Also, some employer-sponsored retirement plans have the option for Roth-style investing, which makes the comparison even less valid.
I propose that the advantages/disadvantages be presented in a table so that each characteristic can be seen side-by-side and can be easily compared. 
Contracts clause aside not helpful.  If the United States breaches a promise in the tax code, there is precedent for money damages under the Winstar cases.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.59.114.122 (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements for clarity 

message: This is the only place I've ever seen it called an "arrangement". Individual Retirement Arrangement redirects to Account. Google gets almost 27 million results for "account", compared to nearly two million for "arrangement". Admittedly the IRS uses "Arrangement", but almost everyone else (including Wikipedia) doesn't. Ignatzmice•talk 03:09, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia should reflect the wording of the law which introduced the IRA.  I believe this was the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, and that refers to "Individual Retirement Accounts" and "Individual Retirement Annuities" (no mention of "Individual Retirement Arrangements")  The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 16:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:BRD]]: arrangement or account? 

message: I'll be working on a criticism section of the Roth IRA. Here are some sources I plan on using:
* 
* 
* 
* 
Lugevas (talk) 02:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section