Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
New Tax laws for energy efficientcy...
Old 04-06-2009, 10:32 AM   #1
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 595
New Tax laws for energy efficientcy...

I just found out that for 2009 the energy credit tax examption is being upgraded and expanded. I talked this over with my tax person last week, and it looks that for 2009 you will be able to deduct 30% on all home improvements having to do with energy efficientcy.

All manner of things from more home insulation to buying more energy effiecent appliences may qualify. Not sure exactly was is and is not on the list. I know that insulation of any sort is accepted, and there is a certain cap on how much you can get back.

Just thought I would pass the info along. I am sure someone more knowledgeable will post a link to the actual documents. Just thought I would pass the info along...
__________________

__________________
armor99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-06-2009, 03:06 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
It's a Federal tax deduction, as follows:
Federal Tax Credits for Energy Efficiency : ENERGY STAR
__________________

__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2009, 04:02 PM   #3
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 295
Yes, we got a few Bucks on some of it last yr, but Spending $800 for a new Front Energy Approved Front Door vs just $200 for a better Storm Door? Was a No brainer..
Paying $250 per E Storm Window vs $100 for non approved one's x 8 windows.. and most it really looks like a Scam to me..Like Spending an extra $20,000 for A electric car ( The Volt) ? Will take 12 yrs to get Money Back.. and the Car won't Go more than a 150 miles and last more than 5 yrs..? Don't think so.. My Neighbors SUV Hybrid has need me to Jump it with my Portable Jumper, 4 times this winter and been in the Dealership 3 x this yr.. She's going back to a 6 cycl. SUV as soon as she can find a Sucker to buy her's..., waiting till gas goes back up...LOL I told her, since you only go about 8,000 mi a yr, why bother spending $11,000 more for a hybrid vs a 6cyl one?
__________________
Dennis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2009, 09:26 PM   #4
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebird5825 View Post
It's a Federal tax deduction, as follows:
Federal Tax Credits for Energy Efficiency : ENERGY STAR
Excellent link, thanks.

I should point out that, when possible, these are best taken up to the limit each year over several years instead of doing the project all at once. We built our photovoltaic system over four different tax years and received state/federal credits for over 55% of the cost.
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2009, 11:11 PM   #5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
I feel like a trap has been set for me - here I go

Well, I've looked into these credits a bit, as I am thinking about replacing my water heater. And guess what - there is a 30%/$1,500 credit for the "tankless" water heaters. Sounds promising.

After some research, I found that the saving is probably very small for me. For one thing, the % efficiency does not tell you much, you need to look at your gas bill in detail. Most bills contain some fixed charges each month, and my rates are higher for the first X THERMS, so the savings will really only apply to my "marginal" gas rate, which is lower.

In fact, after studying it all closer, I plan to go with the cheapest, least efficient unit that Sears makes. Hey, 2" of insulation should be so much better than 1" of insulation, but not at over $100 more it isn't! The marginal difference in our gas bill would be just a few dollars per year. The bottom line is, it takes a lot of energy to heat the water in the first place, it really takes very little energy to keep it hot.

It gets worse...

OK, kinda like the car/CAFE thread - what is the GOAL here? To save energy? Well, look what you see when you go to the #1 seller of qualifying Tankless Water heaters:

Quote:
Hot Water For Any Size Home
Endless supply with more volume - not only can a tankless water heater provide an endless supply of hot water, it can also delivery more of it for all your hot water demands. Only Noritz offers a multi-system set-up that can link up to 24 units, which translates to 317 gallons per minute - enough for over 126 showers at once! With this much volume, Noritz tankless water heaters can meet any hot water demand of today’s homes.


Soothing Hot Water For Everyone
When is the last time you relaxed and soaked yourself in a hot steamy bath? More than ever, with today's busy lifestyle, your body deserves a nice stress relieving moment in your hot tub. Unfortunately, a tank water heater can only supply enough hot water to fill a bath tub and may have just enough hot water left over for a shower.


With a Noritz tankless water heater you will get an endless supply of hot water. Tankless water heaters heat water on demand, and that means you never have to worry about running out of hot water. Imagine the luxury of always having enough hot water for everyone to enjoy and relax - hot tubs, showers and still have an endless supply for the rest of your household needs.
Imagine the luxury of always having enough hot water for everyone to enjoy and relax - hot tubs, showers and still have an endless supply for the rest of your household needs.


Oh great. So the govt is going to take my tax money, and give it to some guy so he can waste energy filling his hot tub.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 07:01 AM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rambler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I feel like a trap has been set for me - here I go

Oh great. So the govt is going to take my tax money, and give it to some guy so he can waste energy filling his hot tub.

-ERD50
I hear you. We have 2 tankless heaters in our home. My showers are usually about 3-5 min, with a 2gpm showerhead. We also have a big bathtub, about 80 gallons, but it rarely gets used. When it is used, it is the two of us, never just one. Together we offset about 40 gallons of water, and the tub does not need to be filled to the brim. So we are using maybe 30 gal when it is used. So we do use more, once in a while, but no more than if we used a regular tank style WH.

If I remember right, each one cost about $800 or so, 3 or 4 years ago. We have two, because of the distance the hot water would have to travel from one end of the house to the other...I could be done with my shower before the water began to warm up with only one (same with a tank though).

R
__________________
Find Joy in the Journey...
Rambler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 09:07 AM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I feel like a trap has been set for me - here I go

In fact, after studying it all closer, I plan to go with the cheapest, least efficient unit that Sears makes. Hey, 2" of insulation should be so much better than 1" of insulation, but not at over $100 more it isn't! The marginal difference in our gas bill would be just a few dollars per year. The bottom line is, it takes a lot of energy to heat the water in the first place, it really takes very little energy to keep it hot.

It gets worse...

OK, kinda like the car/CAFE thread - what is the GOAL here?
Yep. I don't know about you, but in my house the water heater is in a basement area that we use a lot, and we normally heat (this computer is in the basement). Hence, any heat that leaks out of the water heater is being used.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 09:08 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler View Post
I hear you. We have 2 tankless heaters in our home. My showers are usually about 3-5 min, with a 2gpm showerhead. ....
R
I didn't mean to imply that everyone who buys these tankless units is using them to throw massive quantities of hot water down the drain. They have their place, and can save some energy under the right circumstances.

I just find it a bit of a scam that these things get a special tax credit for energy conservation, yet the ads promote taking endless showers, filling hot tubs, etc. I think I'll write my Congressperson, but that isn't very satisfying, I usually get a "thanks for your input, blah-blah-blah".

I know that in our house, if every family member has to take a shower within a short time frame, we are all aware that we better keep them short just to be sure the last person (grumpy me) doesn't get stuck with cold water. By doing that it's not a problem. But, that sets an automatic limit on shower times. w/o that limit, I bet that on average people would take longer showers, and I bet that on average, that added water usage with these tankless units exceeds the small savings from efficiency.

It grates me that my tax dollars are being used to support such questionable practices in the name of "conservation". It grates me that Congress wastes their time on these micro-management issues, esp when they clearly do not understand the details, or the unintended consequences. And it grates me that so many "environmentalists" were probably in favor of this great "conservation" bill.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 09:24 AM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
Yep. I don't know about you, but in my house the water heater is in a basement area that we use a lot, and we normally heat (this computer is in the basement). Hence, any heat that leaks out of the water heater is being used.
That is a good point too. Not all that heat is being wasted. We also have a much longer heating season than cooling season. Some goes out the chimney, but that tank insulation is insulating the part that would radiate out to the room.

To a lesser degree, this applies to CFLs - not all that heat is wasted in a regular bulb. But it counts even more during cooling season (but with longer days, less light is used anyway).


I'm kinda looking forward to (in a devious retired-guy kinda way), the salesperson trying to up-sell me on the higher eff model because of all the money I'll save. I'll bring my spreadsheet

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 01:27 PM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,906
I just popped for a new 95% efficient furnace. My old one was 43 years old and overdue for replacement, so the timing was perfect. With the 30% credit, I'll save about $1000.

My original plan was just to let the old one die, but the darn thing was built like a brick and seemed to have no end in sight, meanwhile natural gas cost has steadily increased such that going from 60% to 95% efficiency will have a reasonably quick payback here in the frozen wasteland.

A side benefit is that it is much quieter that the old one, runs on low heat for a longer time with a slow blower speed, resulting in a more even temperature throughout the house. The DC blower motor uses a fraction of the electricity of the old AC induction motor and burning external air stops the steady forced cold air leakage into the house that the old furnace generated. I also got a liner in my chimney, which was starting to show signs of condensation induced brick spalling. That should save me some money on masonry repairs down the road.

The downside, other than the cost, is that I realize it will require more service and that parts are much more expensive, especially given that my total expenses for 20 years of maintenance of the old furnace were 4 drops of oil per year and two V belts. Oh, and a $10 thermocouple.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 02:31 PM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Oh great. So the govt is going to take my tax money, and give it to some guy so he can waste energy filling his hot tub.
You're confusing marketing with the intent of tankless water heaters. It also helps to know the history of the units.

The older versions of tankless water heaters were very weak. They could supply a shower but running the dishwasher at the same time would make for dirty dishes and screaming from the bathroom. For supply, the newer tankless units are now no different from an 80 gallon tank feeding a shower and dishwasher simultaneously. The difference, of course, is obvious. It's pretty silly to have hot water on stand-by when it can be generated instantly. Is it worth $1500? Only you and your gas company can determine that.

As for the "126 showers at once" unit, it sounds ideal for a gym locker room.
__________________
eridanus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 03:22 PM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,201
Quote:
Oh great. So the govt is going to take my tax money, and give it to some guy so he can waste energy filling his hot tub.
If tankless heaters use less energy then your tax money is not being wasted. Whether they are cost-effective is irrelevant and how they are marketed is irrelevant.

Heated Discussion.
__________________
Al
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 04:19 PM   #13
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 39
Travelover - which furnace did you buy? I just got a new gas forced air model to replace my oldie. The new one is fully modulating in gas valve and blower levels, and also has one of those DC motors. It runs long and low and quiet. But, it is "only" 94.1% efficient, missing the 95% mark by 0.9%, and hence disallowing me to claim a 1500 credit. All for 0.9%!
__________________
baldeagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 05:18 PM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,616
I've been trying to figure out how to get some mileage from these energy credits. We need a new front door (which I was going to buy anyway, so this is like getting it for 30% off (which is great, but it doesn't save any energy compared to what I was going to do regardless of rebates). I might blow in some additional cellulose insulation in te attic. We'll be renovating the basement. so this should enable me to save money onthe insulationof the rim joists (again, something I was going to do anyway). Other than that, I would like to find a good, cheap DIY solar water heating system that works reliably in freezing temps (i.e. a system utilizing antifreeze in the collector loop, no drainback system for me).

I'm putting in a new backyard fence and thought about adding those little solar powered yard lights (generating maybe 10 watts with 20 of them) on the posts and deducting 30% of the cost of the fence, but I see the law anticipated this angle and the rebate is based on kWh produced. Drat! I'm still looking for another angle.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 08:28 PM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by TromboneAl View Post
If tankless heaters use less energy then your tax money is not being wasted.
I'm having trouble figuring out if you are serious.

- Al -- Always serious, never joking. No, wait. Never serious... Always... I forget.

Assuming you are serious, or for the benefit of anyone who might think you are, it seems wrong to me on so many levels.

At the simplest level, we can use an extreme example to make the point. A new tax is being introduced, T-Al and each member of his family, and everyone in the US will be taxed $1,000 each year. This will be used to fund a program that saves one gallon of gasoline annually. It must be worth it, because we saved some energy, right?

So, part of it is about opportunity cost - if we want to use tax money to spur conservation we must get the most bang for the buck. If we don't do that, we missed real opportunities to do better. That *is* a waste in my book. There must be so many things ahead of $1,500 for a tankless water heater install.

Quote:
Whether they are cost-effective is irrelevant and how they are marketed is irrelevant.
I disagree on this also. If they are not cost effective, there must be a reason. Usually it is because they take more resources to manufacture (energy is one of those resources) than they save over their lifetime. So that is not a net savings (or a very small one). Again, there ought to be better opportunities out there.

As far as the marketing, it sure seems counter-productive to me to give govt money to people to spend on products to save energy when the marketing is pushing how those products help you to use more energy. How does the public benefit from that?

I spent some time researching these things here and on other forums. I was shocked at how many comments went something like - " I love this thing, used to be I could only get a 10 minute shower, and I was out of hot water. Now, I come home from work and enjoy a 45 minute steaming hot shower. And we have three teenage kids, you know how they like long showers. This is great!".

On average, I bet these things are wasting energy, and our tax dollars, and leaving other opportunities for real savings untouched. A loss all the way around.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 08:35 PM   #16
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldeagle View Post
Travelover - which furnace did you buy? I just got a new gas forced air model to replace my oldie. The new one is fully modulating in gas valve and blower levels, and also has one of those DC motors. It runs long and low and quiet. But, it is "only" 94.1% efficient, missing the 95% mark by 0.9%, and hence disallowing me to claim a 1500 credit. All for 0.9%!
I ended up with a Lennox G61V, two stage. Fortunately I knew the 95% requirement before I shopped. Bummer about your near hit.(miss?). CFB had a good discussion about furnaces a while back, if anyone else is interested in a new furnace. I thought his summary hit the nail on the head.

Gas Furnaces | Home Furnace | Residential Furnace | High Efficiency Furnace | G61V High-Efficiency Gas Furnace | Lennox Residential
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 08:38 PM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldeagle View Post
Travelover - which furnace did you buy? I just got a new gas forced air model to replace my oldie. The new one is fully modulating in gas valve and blower levels, and also has one of those DC motors. It runs long and low and quiet. But, it is "only" 94.1% efficient, missing the 95% mark by 0.9%, and hence disallowing me to claim a 1500 credit. All for 0.9%!
Yep, another 'good' example of bad legislation.

Now, replacing a 65% eff furnace with a high 80's-90's % makes good economic and conservation sense. In fact, no one should need any govt incentive to do this, because it just makes sense. If I had any opportunities like this, I'd jump all over them, govt credit or not.

But, as you go higher and higher in eff, you hit diminishing returns in cost, complexity, maintenance, and usually, the energy it took to make the complex beast.

The more Congress micro-manages these things, the more unintended consequences they produce. I wish they would spend their time doing their jobs instead.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2009, 10:13 AM   #18
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,201
Quote:
At the simplest level, we can use an extreme example to make the point. A new tax is being introduced, T-Al and each member of his family, and everyone in the US will be taxed $1,000 each year. This will be used to fund a program that saves one gallon of gasoline annually. It must be worth it, because we saved some energy, right?
The legislation we're discussing is the opposite of a tax. It is a tax credit. So here's a more appropriate example:

Gov't gives homeowner a $1,000 tax credit to purchase a tankless heater. User installs it, and the payback period is 15 years. House burns down after 10 years, and the owner dies in the fire.

Was it cost effective? No. Did it save energy? Yes. Did it stimulate the economy? Yes. Was it worth $1,000 of taxpayer money? Probably. In any case, the money was not wasted.

BTW, my tankless water heater cost $1,700 installed, and with propane over $2.50/gallon, it has already paid for itself in the few years I've had it.
__________________
Al
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2009, 11:24 AM   #19
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by TromboneAl View Post
The legislation we're discussing is the opposite of a tax. It is a tax credit.
I don't look at it that way. A tax *credit* to one person is a *tax* on the rest of us. So it is a tax. And those with more than ~ $50,000 AGI pay almost all of that tax.

Quote:
So here's a more appropriate example:

Gov't gives homeowner a $1,000 tax credit to purchase a tankless heater. User installs it, and the payback period is 15 years. House burns down after 10 years, and the owner dies in the fire.

Was it cost effective? No. Did it save energy? Yes. Did it stimulate the economy? Yes. Was it worth $1,000 of taxpayer money? Probably. In any case, the money was not wasted.
I don't see how you can say it was worth $1,000 of the peoples money to save some small amount of energy? It must be a small savings if the payback is 15 years. What is your formula for $ in versus energy saved for you to say it was "worth it".

I'd look at it this way - Did that $1,000 save so much energy that it reduced demand so much that the cost of energy was pushed down by $1,000? That would be "worth it" economically. Now, you could factor environmental costs in there also, but that is exactly why I would favor a tax on carbon fuels - then the "true cost" (or at least a "truer" cost") would be built into the price of fuel, and these decisions could be made on economics alone. Simple.

Another view - if the consumer does not think it is worth it to spend/invest the $1,000 to save energy, then why should the govt (YOU and ME!) do it in his name? Makes no sense to me. If it did make sense, we would all go around giving our neighbors $1,000 to install energy saving stuff in their own homes. Why not?


Quote:
BTW, my tankless water heater cost $1,700 installed, and with propane over $2.50/gallon, it has already paid for itself in the few years I've had it.
And this is why everyone should make these decisions for themselves, rather than the govt using a one-size-fits-all approach. In your case, you pay about 3X more per Therm for heating fuel than I do - the payback would be 3X faster. And I suspect that you are not using more hot water just because you can, but that is not true of all people. Another way to look at that, if we just want to save energy is, you had plenty of incentive to go tankless - so why should I give you a tax credit on top of it? We should (if we are giving tax credits) save them for the people who need the incentive to save energy.

I'l go back to the earlier post on the 95% furnace that gets a credit versus the 94.1% that does not. Nothing in there tells us who is saving more energy. Turning the thermostat down 1 degree would have a bigger difference than those eff numbers, it would cost nothing. But we don't provide an incentive for that. That is what a fuel tax would do.

It all comes back to my same argument with mpg and CAFE ratings on cars. Nothing about that tells me if the person is car-pooling, driving conservatively, reducing miles driven, etc. It just does not get to the heart of the problem. And yes, some people will drive more knowing that their car uses less gas, will leave the CFL on when they leave the room, will take longer showers with their tankless, will turn the heat up with their new eff furnace. So the savings is very, very questionable.

Hit 'em in the pocketbook, and it all becomes much clearer.

BTW, I appreciate all the challenges on this, I ended up looking again at water heater choices and found the Sears "shortie" for $10 less! It is the same eff as the standard height one of that model, same specs, but I wanted to get it up off the floor in case of any future basement flooding anyhow. It should be easier to get down there and install also. And I double checked the more eff models - I would have to spend $170 more to use 16 fewer Therms per year. Therms are ~ $1 for me, so over 10 year payback on simple terms. Longer if you consider opp cost of the $170, and the fact that all that heat is not wasted - it goes to heat my house 8 months of the year.


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2009, 01:20 PM   #20
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
It all comes back to my same argument with mpg and CAFE ratings on cars. Nothing about that tells me if the person is car-pooling, driving conservatively, reducing miles driven, etc. It just does not get to the heart of the problem. And yes, some people will drive more knowing that their car uses less gas, will leave the CFL on when they leave the room, will take longer showers with their tankless, will turn the heat up with their new eff furnace. So the savings is very, very questionable.
Your "some people" argument leaves a lot to be desired. Who are "some people" and how many are there?
__________________

__________________
eridanus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
M*'s Sue Stevens: "How Two New Tax Laws Will Affect Your Bottom Line" Nords FIRE and Money 5 09-28-2006 01:44 PM
Helping in-laws sell long time residence Da Nag FIRE and Money 15 08-01-2006 11:20 PM
Forclosure Lein Laws modhatter FIRE and Money 3 06-15-2006 01:21 PM
In-laws may need my money - how to cope? justin Other topics 23 03-19-2006 01:43 PM
401K discrimination laws ? Cut-Throat Other topics 15 01-15-2005 07:14 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:48 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.