Red and Blue Investment PortfoliosWritten by A. Raymond Randall
Some investment time spans leave investors with black and blue investment portfolios causing them to see red. Statements showing a drop in portfolio value weakens resolve of many investors. Usually, this takes place during uncertainty about sudden or expected long-term economic changes. A Presidential elections arouse uncertainty on Wall Street, and all investors read results. Rambling editorials opined about American votes for incumbent on Op-Ed pages with wambling- antidotes after U.S. Presidential election. Characteristic rhetoric flourished as electors fulfilled their collegiate task. On November 3rd, opposition seceded race to incumbent. Although both parties seem inured to exit opinions/polls, electorate is not. Finally, nearly two years of battling leaves one political party with a depleted treasury and an uncertain platform while other presumes a mandate. Does any of this matter to securities markets? On short-term, it did as observed by Bloomberg's Dune Lawrence, "U.S. stocks benefited from "election cycle" last week, when Standard & Poor's 500 Index climbed to its highest level since March 2002. If history is any guide, rally may not last for long," for example, bond market does not like deficit outlook. However, market reaction to current events seems relevant only for moment. Historical market trend studies suggest limits current events impose on market conditions. Reactions do not make trends; long-term investors prefer classic over vogue, long-term over short-term. A conclusion printed by Brinson, Singer, Beebouwer in Financial Analysis Journal (May/June 1991) affirms this observation:
| | “Offshore” in Nevada: Nevada Asset Protection TrustsWritten by Sutton Law Center Attorney - Trevor Stapleton
Are you interested in outstanding asset protection but uncomfortable about costs and red flags of using offshore trusts? Then read on about Nevada’s new onshore asset protection trust. Traditionally, creditor protection is afforded to beneficiaries of a trust through inclusion of a “spendthrift provision.” Spendthrift provisions were developed to protect beneficiaries perceived to be unable to properly manage or protect their funds. In essence, a spendthrift provision provides that as long as property or funds remain in trust, they are not subject to beneficiary’s debts or creditors. While protection for beneficiaries through a properly drafted spendthrift provision is well established, this protection has generally been unavailable to a beneficiary who was also creator of trust. If an individual established a trust of which he or she was also a beneficiary, a “self-settled trust”, trust was ignored for purposes of creator/beneficiary’s debts and liabilities. In response to this common law treatment of self-settled trusts, some foreign jurisdictions created laws that allowed a creator/beneficiary’s assets in a self-settled trust to be protected from creditors. These jurisdictions (such as Bahamas and Cook Islands) gave rise to so-called “offshore trusts” which offered creator/beneficiary’s an additional tool to help protect their assets from claims and liabilities. Unfortunately, some of same features that made offshore
|
