I was just looking at my mutual fund family's estimated year-end distributions and they are quite large - like the late 1990s again. Its been a three year bull market and most early 200s losses have been absorbed. I've been gradually migrating to tax-advantaged investments, but not quick enough. Migration itself can trigger more taxes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Perhaps you can decline receiving the distributions. Then you would not have to pay any taxes on them.
The internal assets have already been sold. Its a matter of assigning the gains to the shareholders as required by law.
The fund could be gifted to charity before the date of record. Then the gains would not appear.
Aren't mutual funds REQUIRED to distribute their capital gains?
-- Barry Margolin, snipped-for-privacy@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Generally the rule is that if you decline something that you could have received, it will be taxable whether you actually receive it or not. Stu
Well Barry, that's what happens when an amateur such as I offers what was intended to be a smartass sarcastic reply. My point was that paying a large tax bill is usually the result of having a large income, and is not a basis for complaint. (Before I am jumped upon again, I hasten to add that I favor having the taxes be as minimal as the law requires.)
They are, and I'm sure William knows that. But I still chuckled at his tongue in cheek reply. ChEAr$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA
OR, the OP could take some extra money, put it into an obviously failing business venture, close it up before year's end, and therefore have a writeoff to offset those gains. How about that?
ChEAr$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA
Bingo! Thanks, Harlan. Your wisdom and perceptiveness continue to impress -- especially for one who does not read the NY Times. Bill
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required