<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What is a Required Minimum Distribution (RMD)?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/</link>
	<description>personal finance tips, tricks, and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:53:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Moehringer</title>
		<link>http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/comment-page-1/#comment-135642</link>
		<dc:creator>John Moehringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:52:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/#comment-135642</guid>
		<description>Good article but I still have a few questions..
1. I turned 70-1/2 in 2009, which normally means I would not have to take the RMD till April of 2010, although I have been advised to take the RMD in 2009 to avoid double RMDs in 2010. I assume I do not have to take any RMD in 2009..correct?
Question: What do I do in 2010? Is it considered year one in the RMD table of distribution rates? 
Question: If it is considered year one and I use year one rate of RMD do all subsequent years follow suit?
Question: Does the April rule still apply although it has been pushed back one year?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article but I still have a few questions..<br />
1. I turned 70-1/2 in 2009, which normally means I would not have to take the RMD till April of 2010, although I have been advised to take the RMD in 2009 to avoid double RMDs in 2010. I assume I do not have to take any RMD in 2009..correct?<br />
Question: What do I do in 2010? Is it considered year one in the RMD table of distribution rates?<br />
Question: If it is considered year one and I use year one rate of RMD do all subsequent years follow suit?<br />
Question: Does the April rule still apply although it has been pushed back one year?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sr club</title>
		<link>http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/comment-page-1/#comment-130577</link>
		<dc:creator>sr club</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:28:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/#comment-130577</guid>
		<description>are the ira contributions i made in 1982 thru 1986  considered after tax money in my ira account.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>are the ira contributions i made in 1982 thru 1986  considered after tax money in my ira account.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Resourceful</title>
		<link>http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/comment-page-1/#comment-129560</link>
		<dc:creator>Resourceful</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:33:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/#comment-129560</guid>
		<description>Please clarify.  My husband and I  both reach 70-1/2 in 2009.  With the waiver we can delay RMD to 2010.  My question, in 2010, and we going to have to take out for 2 years, 2009 and 2010,or just one RMD.

Waiting on your response.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please clarify.  My husband and I  both reach 70-1/2 in 2009.  With the waiver we can delay RMD to 2010.  My question, in 2010, and we going to have to take out for 2 years, 2009 and 2010,or just one RMD.</p>
<p>Waiting on your response.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danielle</title>
		<link>http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/comment-page-1/#comment-127380</link>
		<dc:creator>Danielle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2008 21:24:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2008/12/16/what-is-a-required-minimum-distribution-rmd/#comment-127380</guid>
		<description>This was interesting. I had assumed this suspending the RMD changes would only really benefit the well off, those who could afford to live without a distribution. 

After reading this I realize that it goes even deeper than that, not allowing people to live off of less in these hard times.

Thanks for the explanation!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was interesting. I had assumed this suspending the RMD changes would only really benefit the well off, those who could afford to live without a distribution. </p>
<p>After reading this I realize that it goes even deeper than that, not allowing people to live off of less in these hard times.</p>
<p>Thanks for the explanation!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

