These days, it seems like whenever there’s a good thing going or some attractive opportunity for pecuniary gain or profit, the masses ultimately swarm the offer like locusts until they’ve completely ruined it for everyone else. This is how I feel about credit cards and the credit card industry. Credit card rewards and interest free balance transfers were once the easiest ways to make some free money on the side, but now that the Feds have enacted the new credit card law, all of that’s about to change.

As a big proponent of credit card use and an eager partaker of reward credit cards, balance transfer deals, and credit card arbitrage, I’ve been taking advantage of all that they’ve had to offer for some time now. Over many years, I’ve applied for and been approved for more than 25 credit cards. I’ve owned, carried, and used most of the major credit cards from Capital One, Bank of America, Citibank, Advanta, Discover Card, to American Express. Throughout college and into adult hood, I’ve used my squadron of credit cards to earn more than $10,000 worth of cash back rewards, redeemed point rewards for countless free gift cards, and accrued more than $15,000 of interest profit from balance transfer arbitrage. At its peak, I was carrying more than $100,000 in total credit card balances at one time, taking advantage of 0% APR credit card funds deposited into a high yield savings account to earn free interest money.

However, despite my aggressive credit card usage history, I’ve never paid a single cent in credit card interest, forked over a single late fee, or suffered a major long term FICO credit score hit. Currently, my FICO credit score stands at a very healthy 802, thanks to my solid credit history and lack of any late payments. In fact, I don’t even know what any of my credit card interest rates are as I’ve never had to deal with them before. I have always paid my monthly card balances in full and on time. As a naturally frugal saver, I’ve always lived within my means and eschewed unnecessary material goods . Since I started using credit cards at the age of 18 and made paying off my regular credit card balances a priority in my life, I’ve never had to pay anything to the credit card companies, and instead have managed to profit immensely from them.

Because of all this, I had mixed feelings when the federal government finally issued the new credit card rules and announced its plan to crack down on allegations of unfair and deceptive credit card practices by the credit card industry. While the new rules have the potential to benefit American consumers and essentially protect them from their own spending stupidity and consumerism negligence, the new changes are likely to rain on my parade and spell the end to the credit card party I’ve been enjoying for the past few years. However, despite my personal misgivings and the potential loss of a key cog of my personal finance arsenal, I think the new credit card rules and regulations were probably long overdue. Like the mortgage industry, the credit card sector has been in serious need of a good shakeup for some time. Lax federal oversight and governmental complacency has allowed the industry to get a bit too lax on basic fairness standards, permitting abusive and egregious predatory credit card practices to go unchecked.

Despite the Current Recession, The New Credit Card Law Don’t Go Into Effect Until Summer Of 2010

As evidenced by the huge credit bubble that finally popped recently, America has had a love affair with debt and leverage for the last two decades. This abundance of credit in all forms caused many to become drunk with highly leveraged spending power, leading many down the path of out of control shopping, and encouraging the tapping of home equity to pay off credit card balances. The credit card industry’s practice of packaging and selling credit card debt to investors and hedge funds encouraged the growth of exorbitant risk penalties, over the credit limit fees, and all sorts of balance transfer and cash advance charges. Driven by the natural pursuit of profits, the credit card issuers eagerly raked in the ever increasing interest charges and late payment fees. Eventually the subprime mortgage crisis destroyed the housing market and in turn caused a chain reaction devastation that led many credit card consumers to no longer be able to handle their credit card payments, leading to a rise in defaults and ballooning non payment scenarios.

Wallowing in their own mismanagement mess and inability to control their spending habits, consumers ultimately turned to the federal government for bailout assistance. After bombarding the Fed with over 65,000 public comments (the highest number ever received by the federal government on any one issue offered up for comments), the Fed finally responded and issued an announcement of its approval of new credit card rules to combat what regulators labeled as unfair or deceptive credit card industry practices.

In its combined action and announcement, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Federal Reserve Board approved the new credit card rules, sending a financial tsunami through the the banking and credit card industry. From here on, it is clear that these new rules will fundamentally rewrite the way future credit cards are packaged, marketed, and priced for consumers and small businesses. Despite the significant moves, some lingering critics remain displeased at the effective date of the new rules – July 1, 2010 – and argue that consumers need the new rules now to protect them from overbearing credit practices already in place in light of the current ongoing economic recession and not wait until mid-2010 when the recession may already be over. Of course, the industry has indicated that it needs the lengthy amount of time to adapt to these newly enacted regulations.

How Will The New Credit Card Rules and Regulations Affect You and Make Your Debt Reduction Life Easier?

1) No More Interest Rate Hikes On Existing Balances – Previously, as was the routine practice by the credit card issuers in recent years, credit card interest rates could be increased and jacked up on a whim with only a short notice to the customer in one of those fine print letters that nobody ever actually reads. With the new credit card regulations, interest rate hikes will not be permitted on existing balances and rate increases will only be allowed under limited circumstances such as on future purchases, new cash advances, when a promotional or introductory rate ends, or in response to an actual late payment in violation of pre-existing card agreements. This is one of the biggest changes and one that I wholeheartedly agree with. However, as one who has always paid off his card balances on time and has never paid late fees or credit card interest charges, my advice to all is to always pay off balances on time and in full to avoid having to even worry about credit card interest rates to begin with.

2) Interest Rates Cannot Be Raised Until A Payment Is Over 30 Days Late – Under the new credit card rules, interest rates for existing balances can only be increased if there is an outstanding payment that is over 30 days late. This change eliminates the old practice of allowing credit card companies to increase or double your current APR interest simply if you run up a large balance on your cards (to force you to pay those balances off quicker than you’d like). In addition under the new rules, card lenders must give cardholders at least 45 days of advance notice in the event of interest rate changes, including rate hikes due to 30 day late payments or non payment penalties. Previously, card issuers frequently gave notice of 15 days or less.

3) No More Universal Default – Credit card companies will not longer be permitted to raise current interest rates on cardholders simply because of their payment history or track record with other unrelated creditors such as landlords, utility companies, or even with different credit card issuers. Previously, universal default essentially allowed card issuers to raise rates arbitrarily by alleging cardholders had universally defaulted on all existing loans simply with a single violation against one unrelated debt account. While many card issuers like JP Morgan Chase have already discontinued this practice, this new rule compels the rest to follow.

4) No More Double Cycle Billing – While the immensely illogical practice of two cycle or double cycle billing is predominantly already a thing of the past with most card issuers having already abandoned this ridiculous practice, the new rules will officially end the loophole. Double cycle billing is the practice of calculating interest on daily card balances from more than just the previous 30 days. This billing practice hurts consumers who pay off their balances in full in one month but not in the next, because it irrationally averages multiple month balances to generate interest fees for credit card companies. Thus cardholders end up getting hit with finance charges and interest fees from the previous billing cycle even though they have paid the bill in full.

5) Card Payments Applied To Higher Interest Rate Balances First – One of the most significant new changes (and perhaps the most important), will help compel the practice of fair allocation of payments – a great future benefit to consumers, particularly those that engage in 0% balance transfer offers, cash advances, or ATM withdrawals that carry different interest rates. Any new payment above the credit card bill minimum must automatically now apply to the part of the balance with the highest interest first. For those who have multiple balances on the same account at different interest rates, this new rule will prohibit card lenders from applying payments towards lower interest balances first before applying them to the higher interest ones. This will stop the seemingly unfair industry wide practice of applying monthly payments to the cheaper credit card balances first, while letting more expensive balances accrue interest charges at higher rates.

6) Longer Payment Grace Periods Of At Least 21 Days – Credit card issuers will be required to offer consumers  a reasonable amount of time to make payments on monthly credit card bills – at least 21 days after bills are mailed or delivered. This will help protect consumers from shrinking payment periods and give them a reasonable amount of time to make payments before late charges and interest fees are applied. Personally, I don’t even know how long my credit card grace periods are as all my cards are set up with automatic bill payment that automatic pulls money from my linked checking account to ensure I never have a late payment. I highly encourage the use of automated debit payments. It makes life easier and much more hassle free.

7) No More Unreasonable Fees For Exceeding Credit Limit Because Of Hold On Account – This addresses a basic fairness problem some cardholders have been experiencing, particularly those who travel a lot. Oftentimes when consumers make reservations for rental cars or hotel rooms, merchants will place a hold for a certain credit limit amount on credit cards as a security deposit beyond the purchase amount. While the security deposit hold is in effect, the card’s credit limit is temporarily reduced, making it more likely for the cardholder to accidentally exceed his or her credit limit in the meantime with additional charges and thereby incurring an over the limit charge or fee. The new rules do away with excessive fees in such a scenario.

8) Limitations On Bad Credit Credit Card Fees - This new credit card rule change has the potential to reign in fees for subprime credit cards big time. Subprime credit cards that target people with bad credit will no longer be allowed to charge hefty upfront fees with the new limitations. What was happening was that these subprime credit cards (high interest cards for people with low credit scores with $500 credit limits) were charging applicants with upfront fees that totaled half the credit limit and demanding fee payment in less than a year. The new regulation will severely reign in these fees, but essentially eliminating the future of credit card offers for people with bad credit altogether.

9) Disclosure Of Foreign Currency Transaction Fees – While most people are not aware, international credit card users have had to pay extra fees for credit card transactions charged overseas in foreign currency denominations. While these extra foreign currency fee charges remain perfectly legitimate, the new rules require issuers to clearly list the fees and do a better job of publicizing then to the consumer so that it doesn’t come to them as a surprise.  The disclosure of all fees charged for purchasing goods or services in a foreign currency or for using the credit card outside of the United States will need to be made on a table on credit card applications and marketing solicitations, and not just in tiny fine print when the account is initially opened.

10) Better Overall Disclosure of Credit Card Terms and Conditions -  The new federal rules will require all credit card terms to be disclosed and marketed more clearly to consumers. Card issuers will need to clearly disclose and provide notice regarding important terms and conditions like payment due dates and times, as well as how interest rates and fees will be applied to those making only minimum payments each month. Some credit card issuers have been sneakily shifting around payment due dates and mandating arbitrary payment times, such as setting cut off times at 1:00 pm or on a weekend or holiday. These rules will prohibit such unreasonable and arbitrary practices. As mentioned above, any change to existing credit card terms will need to be expressly disclosed to the consumer at last 45 days before they take effect.

Goodbye Credit Card Rewards, Introductory Teaser Rates, and 0% Balance Transfer Credit Card Offers

The new credit card regulations issued by the federal government will have a significant negative impact on the credit card industry and the future of credit card use in the United States and elsewhere as issuers re-evaluate their existing business and risk pricing models. Because the new rules will severely restrict the ability of card issuers to modify pre-existing interest rates and card terms in response to changes they perceive as credit risk factors (known as interest rate pre-pricing), it is likely all new credit card interest rates will increase as a result, along with a severe reduction in credit availability. All existing rates in place prior to the effective date of July 1, 2010 will likely go up tremendously as well (even for those with excellent credit history scores). Because the new rules do not mandate a ceiling on how much credit card issuers can actually charge for interest fees or late payments, consumers are likely going to be slapped with even higher rates from hereon. With the credit card industry, it comes down to profitability and redistribution of costs. Because of the new rule changes, credit card issuers are likely going to lose a significant amount of money (more than $10 billion a year) in lost interest payments and fees. Instead of eating up the loss and taking their lumps, they are likely going to pass them onto consumers through stiffer interest rates and less favorable credit card reward terms.

The new regulations will have several unintended but perfectly foreseeable consequences as well, including a severe reduction or complete elimination of popular low interest deals, 0% APR balance transfers, and 0% purchase credit card offers, even for those with very high credit scores. The new rules greatly favor those who are irresponsible with credit card usage and those who were never meant to carry credit cards to begin with, and will punish the prime borrowers by eliminating the vast majority of all cash back credit card offers and interest free promotions. Only time will tell whether all such offers will be eliminated en masse, or whether the industry will be able to find a way to stay profitable and continue to offer purchase and usage incentives for consumers.

Despite the fairness benefits of the new credit card rules, here are some of the ways the changes will negatively affect credit worthy consumers:

• It will be much more difficult to qualify for credit cards as credit availability in compliance with the new rules will dry up.
• Substantially higher credit card interest rates overall, even for those with excellent credit scores – primarily to compensate the card issuers for their loss of income under the new rules.
• No more 12 month zero percent balance transfer offers with no balance transfer fees – likely to be replaced with high balance tranfer fees or low interest credit card offers instead.
• There will be a signficiant scaleback of credit card rewards, cash back incentives, and frequent flyer airline mile programs for responsible credit card use. Goodbye juicy credit card promotions.
• Severe reduction or total elimination of bad credit cards, forcing those with poor credit to seek higher credit and riskier options such as payday loans or pay day cash advance.

As always with life, it seems financially responsible individuals such as myself always seem to get the shaft. It’s always the bad home mortgage borrowers, bad credit card users, or the irresponsible spenders who ultimately get bailed out by the government – taking all the credit card goodies enjoyed by the responsible credit card consumers with them.

Source URL: New Credit Card Rules and Regulations – The Good and The Bad

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

Every 4 years it’s the same routine. I head to my designated voting station and pull the lever, poke the appropriate dot, or press the desired digital touch screen button to make my mark as a citizen of this great country. Unfortunately, any excitement or exuberance I may have in exercising my constitutional responsibility to participate in the political process is greatly tempered by the fact that I know my vote in all actuality counts for very little. It’s not because my vote is only one out millions that will ultimately be cast that makes the relative unimportance of my single vote seem so sobering. It’s the fact that I know with near definitive certainty that no matter which way I cast my vote, whether I vote for John McCain of the Republican Party, or whether I vote for Barack Obama of the Democratic Party, my home state of Maryland, a solid blue state as blue states go, will ultimately pass on all of its electoral college votes for the Democratic candidate no matter what. Such is the dilemma and troubling aspect of living in a state with such thoroughly entrenched political and social views, and in a country where Presidential elections are decided based on an electoral college system rather than through a national popular vote.

The Current Electoral College Voting System Unfairly Empowers Small, Rural States With Substantially Less People, With Disproportionate Power Over Larger States With Significantly Larger Populations

This ongoing sham in the electoral process is due to the fact that our founding fathers ratified a constitution that set forth a Presidential election process based on an electoral college system. Currently, instead of allowing citizens like myself the power and right to directly cast our votes for President, we instead merely submit our votes for state electors. Under the current troubled electoral college voting system, each state has a designated and apportioned number of electors based on the number of Senators and Representatives each has in the U.S. Congress. As such, the numbers of electors are generally divvied up based on population size, with more populated states like New York, Texas, and California receiving more electoral votes, and smaller states, like North Dakota and Nebraska  receiving fewer. While there are a few slight variations, the vast majority of states adopt a winner takes all popular voting approach where state voters choose between presidential candidates and the victorious candidate in that state wins all of the state’s electors and thus, electoral votes.

Perhaps, the old electoral college system was needed back in the late 1700’s when our country was passionately divided and individual states were understandably concerned that their individual states’ rights would be usurped and engulfed by a strong, overbearing federal government. However, times have changed and our former collection of rag tag individual states have since coalesced into a unified whole – a true United States. It is time we do away with the old process and abolish the electoral college in favor of a direct voting system based on true, popular vote.

Throughout our nation’s history, our populations have divided themselves among regions that many of us like to call blue states and red states. Blue states are states that tend to exhibit more liberal political practices and tend to have higher minority populations with large urban centers, located mostly on the western Pacific coast and north eastern Atlantic region. Red states tend to be clustered in the mid western and southern states, usually in areas that adopt more conservative political practices and views. However, in between the blue and red state gradients are the so-called wishy-washy purple swing states – states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida that have no solid political leanings. These swing states waffle back and forth from election to election due to the moderate and balanced views of its electorate population. However, because under the current electoral college voting system, there is no advantage gained by winning the majority of the national vote as the winner-takes-all system focuses on winning individual state majorities, the system tends to unfairly offer smaller states and residents of swing states disproportionate voting power.

Now why should my vote in a historically solid blue state like Maryland be essentially penalized and emerge any less important than that of a citizen living in Pennsylvania or Florida? Because of the current electoral college voting system, Presidential candidates have no incentive to spend time or resources in states that they believe they are likely to win or lose by a sizable margin, thus they frequently ignore a huge majority of states with sizable populations and votes (which is just baffling in a country ruled by the concepts of popular rule and democracy). Instead, all of the attention goes to the purple swing states. This to me seems completely counter to the democratic concept of majority vote and rule. Whatever happened to the idea that each person’s vote is just as significant and important as that of any other citizen’s? Why should citizens living in rural areas where populations are nil or merely in the thousands compared to the mega urban centers of larger states with populations in the millions be given such disproportionately overwhelming power over the lives of everyone else?

The Electoral College Voting System Should Be Abolished Via A Much Needed Constitutional Amendment

I view the electoral college system as a form of political disenfranchisement and believe it is time we abolish it altogether. Having scenarios like in 2000 where President George W. Bush won the election by winning the electoral college but failing to actually win the national popular vote was just ridiculous, and completely flies in the face of democracy. What is wrong with an urban focused electoral system when that is where the population centers are? Isn’t that the ultimate democratic way of one man one vote? Concerns about maintaining the separation of powers or maintaining the preservation of state focused rights are unfounded as the reality is that our country has substantially changed over the years and we are much more united and interdependent as a country than during any other time during our history. If we truly want to substantially increase the numbers of Americans who vote and to encourage more to take part in the most important political process in the world, it’s time we amend the Constitution to strike out the electoral college voting system and put in its place, a more equitable and fair direct national voting process. One man/women, one vote – that is the democratic way.

However, despite any lingering frustration I continue to have with the current voting system, I still think it’s paramount that every U.S. citizen continue to exercise his or her civic duty to vote in all relevant local, state, and federal elections. Despite its immense flaws, it’s still the most profound tool we have today to effectuate change and make our country truly our own. But because of its current shortcomings, it’s also why I would still gladly give up my right to vote for a million dollars.

Source URL: My Vote Does Not Matter Because I Do Not Live In A Swing State

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

This post today is not meant to be a political statement. In fact, I hold rather neutral opinions about the U.S. government’s positions and the U.S. military’s actions in the ongoing war in the Middle East. I’m neither supportive, nor am I really against it. I’m not a military strategist, nor am I a foreign policy buff. While I watch and follow CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News, and have developed my own viewpoints like any other guy, I don’t claim to know the answers. So I leave the big foreign policy and homeland defense decisions to the elected bigwigs in Washington D.C. While my foreign policy views are both non committal and neutral, when it comes to supporting our patriotic troops, I’m in it 100%. I think they deserve our full support and admiration, and that includes past veterans, present troops coming back home, and future military personnel who have yet to enter the line of duty.

Our Military Soldiers Are Real People With Real Stories – And Not Just Faceless Statistics

Shortly after law school and my judicial clerkship with a trial court judge, I obtained a job to work as an appellate attorney at the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs in Washington D.C. While I was there I was exposed to the countless stories and lives of the many men and women who fought and sacrificed for our country during her times of need. Because I handled appeals stemming from military service connection and disability rating claims for veterans, I spent my working days reading and becoming intimately aware of war time realities and shared tragedies of our past veterans. While not all injuries or medical ailments sustained by military disability claimants were during the course of an armed conflict overseas, many were. For those who think the current soldiers fighting in the Iraqi and Afghanistan conflict today are sustaining significant casualties or massive injuries, the numbers pale in comparison to the devastating number of lives and limbs lost during past major wars – most notably during the Vietnam War.

The Vietnam War era was a terrible time in our history. Many of the soldiers came back with not only physical bodily damage from lost limbs, impaired sensory organs, or Agent Orange herbicide related diseases, a large number developed post traumatic stress syndrome after having witnessed all sorts of psychologically disturbing wartime brutality overseas. Much of today’s neighborhood to neighborhood close quarters combat experiences in the troubled areas of the Middle East are censored and filtered out by our sanitized television, print, and governmental media so that much of the information never reaches the American public. But as someone who has worked closely with such personal stories and accounts of battles and military engagements during my time of processing veteran disability claims, I’ve learned to greatly appreciate the sacrifices our fighting forces have made for our great nation.

While due to the backlogged and procedural nature of veteran disability cases, and due to the way past injuries and diseases tend to deteriorate over time, many of the appeals cases I handled arose from veterans who served honorably in wars as far back as the Vietnam War and World War II. At the time I was working at the Department of Veteran Affairs in Washington D.C., the war against terrorist forces in Afghanistan and later the invasion and occupation/liberation of Iraq (depending on how you look at it) had not resulted in a significant influx of wartime injuries or casualties yet. But since I’ve left the agency, I know the federal department is now facing a huge rush of returning soldiers from this new war our country is fighting. I can only hope we all continue to throw our admiration and support for our American military men and women as they dutifully do their part in helping to keep this country safe and protect our interests worldwide.

Supporting Our Troops and Veterans Is Not A Political Statement, But A Show Of Respect For The Honorable Sacrifices Made By Those Who Came and Served Before Us

I think many people and anti-war supporters seem to adopt the suggestive notion that somehow acknowledging verbal or written support for our fighting troops and veterans equates to an agreement or condonement of the current George W. Bush foreign policy or political decisions made regarding the nation’s fight against terrorism in the Middle East. Far from it. I support our troops and want to honor their actions because they are putting their lives in harms way for citizens and even non citizens living in the United States like you and I. While some of the soldiers had a choice, others had their choices made for them. I doubt most of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and soldiers from the Marines really wanted to fight abroad, but they made a noble commitment to serve their country should they be called upon to do so. They are simply doing their job and trying to do it the best they can, amidst the political maneuverings in Congress and the White House, the election season wrangling between the Democrats and Republicans, and amidst the dangerous sectarian violence that still plagues the Middle East.

So as we all sit within the comforts, shelter, and protection of our own nation’s borders, let’s not forget the fighting men and women who are still out there doing their jobs, putting their futures and lives on stake for you and I. While we all worry about less life threatening and comparatively petty matters closer to home such as rising gas prices, savings accounts, Roth IRA’s, credit scores, and credit card bills, there are young and old committed military families out there who just want their fathers, sons, and even moms and daughters to come back home in one piece. You don’t have to support the war to support our troops. You don’t even have to wave an American flag high or wear an American flag pin on your suit collar to support our troops. All you have to do is honor the sacrifices made by our past and present veterans in your hearts, and give them all the courtesy, admiration, and respect deserved by those who have served their country dutifully in a time of need. So while we all take this three day Memorial Day weekend to go on a road trip to visit the beach, or see our friends and family, remember, someone out there needs your thoughts and prayers.

Source URL: Memorial Day 2008 – Support Our Military Troops and Veterans

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

So how did I end up doing this type of work instead of using my law degree to pursue a so-called real legal career? Sometimes I ponder about what my dream job might have been had I not gone to law school, since it wasn’t my passion in life to begin with. My decision to attend graduate school was more due to process of elimination. I started out college on the pre-med track to become a doctor, did well in my studies, got bored with chemistry and biology, and eventually shifted gears into computer science. I loved taking programming theory and practice courses and did very well, but after a few semesters, I decided that I couldn’t see myself stuck as a computer programming nerd – so I moved on (how ironic, now that I’ve come full circle again). So then I decided to go the business route and major in finance. After a few more semesters during which I did pretty well, I pondered what else was out there. However, by then I had enough college credits to graduate and my parents were beginning to wave the tuition baton, “encouraging” me to move onto bigger and better things. After looking around, I decided I wasn’t ready to financially support myself just yet. So I took the LSAT exam and sent in my application to a few top tier law schools. Before I knew it, I was attending the state law school and working my way through civil procedure, contracts, and criminal law classes.

Going The Law School Route – But Still Not Sure Where I Wanted To Go Professionally

One thing that I noticed during law school was how incredibly math-adverse law students are. I suppose that’s why they all chose to attend law school to begin with – to avoid having to deal with mathematics or anything related to numbers. However, it just so happened most of my law school friends were of the opposite persuasion – they were mostly into tax law, a legal field riddled with numbers and statistics. I wasn’t particularly fond of all the math involved, but I went with the herd and ended up taking most of the tax law courses available – everything from individual tax planning and corporate tax, to the most difficult law school course I ever took – partnership tax.

After law school I worked for a trial judge and later when on to work for the federal government as an associate attorney for a year or two. After another very short stint working for a crazy female cougar attorney (I’ll share that story one day, as it was a very eye opening experience, but for all the wrong reasons), I ended up choosing to work for myself. After starting up a few profitable blogs such as the personal finance blog you are reading right now and another law related one, I now work as a contract attorney on the side when I’m not working from home. I receive most of my contract attorney assignments from staffing agencies that place me on legal projects that last anywhere from a few weeks to several months. The job description usually entails very simple duties such as legal document review and mindless legal tag coding. Many dread performing contract lawyer work, but the work provides very lucrative pay without the heavy responsibilities (I often refer to it as my “stripper pay”). It’s perfect for my lifestyle at the moment since I don’t want my full time job to hinder the time and effort I devote to my personal small business operations.

The great thing about contract attorney work is that it is extremely stress-free and unlike a traditional lawyer job, my responsibilities and duties end at the end of the day. I never have to run into the office after work or cut a weekend short to file a legal brief or prepare a memo. However there are long term drawbacks to this line of short term work. The biggest downside is that the work is only temporary and isn’t career track oriented. With temping, while meals and transportation are frequently reimbursed, you usually don’t receive any health benefits or job security. But then again, in this day and age as well as economy, do any of us truly have solid job security anymore, or even guaranteed health benefits? The other downside with legal temping is the lack of professional development. However, I simply cannot see myself pursuing the traditional attorney path anyway. Lawyers notoriously burn out fast and work tremendous hours that ultimately take a terrible toll on their health, family wellbeing, and lifespan. Plus, legal employment prospects for attorneys isn’t what it used to be as the market has become extremely saturated. Almost anyone with half a functioning brain can go to law school these days as there are no significant barriers to entry or pre-requisites that need to be overcome to apply. Especially in a major city like Washington DC, you can’t walk in any direction without bumping into a lawyer. It’s utter and complete saturation.

Looking To the Future – Sacrificing Some Income Now To Build Up My Online Blog Businesses and Incubate My Other Real World Ventures

Thus, I’ve come to realize that the key to building wealth and reaching financial prosperity is to build up multiple streams of alternative and passive income, apart from your primary full time employment. Otherwise, you simply run the risk of living your entire life trading hours for dollars. Passive income generation through methods such as blog income or stock market investing help to get around the finite time problem by allowing you to generate income even when you are not actively sitting and working at your office desk.

However, I don’t regret going to law school at all. I was prudent to have attended a state school with relatively lower in-state tuition, and I was very fortunate to have been able to consolidate my student loans at a very low fixed interest rate. My college loans are all paid up and my graduate school loan payments are thankfully quite manageable. Other than tuition issues, law school prepared me for the future by teaching me how to more aggressively and confidently combat conflicts in the legal and business world. Overall my finance, tax, and legal background has helped me to better improve my personal finance blogging tasks, as well as enhance my non traditional legal pursuits. I knew after law school that I didn’t want to pursue the traditional law firm job path since I had a passion for entrepreneurship and running my own business. When I discovered how to make money blogging and developed the ability to tap into the limitless potential of online business income, I knew I had found my calling. It’s a key component part of my solution to end the 9-5 workweek cycle, and the reason why I’m currently sitting at home right now tinkering on the computer instead of collecting a steady paycheck at a stressful full time lawyer position or even at a contract attorney gig.

For now, I plan to only take a short time off to work on my ventures full time as I currently am not yet able to live off of my online income alone. Perhaps that day will someday come, but for now, I plan to return to my legal contracting job after a month or two off. Obviously I don’t see contract attorney work as the future for me since the profession is inherently unstable, unpredictable, and projects do tend to dry up during recessions and slow economic periods. I merely see it as a necessary means to an end for now. Meanwhile, I also realize that by taking a few months off I am forfeiting a substantial amount of contract attorney pay to spend time building my passive income businesses, but I think in the long run and even in a few years from now, the short term financial sacrifice will pay off. The amount of money I am losing by not working full time is quite substantial however. Contract attorneys in my area get top wage rates of $35 an hour with time and a half of $52.50 per overtime hour worked past 40 hours. My contract projects usually require that I bill around 50 or so hours, which comes to a weekly income of $1925.00. I’ve worked at least one extremely time demanding project before in the recent past, during which I worked and billed 96 hours a week for a span of one month. The work was a simple breeze, but the hours were brutal. Of course during that time, I earned $4,340.00 per week before tax. I guess it speaks highly of how much potential I see in online and passive income businesses that I would forsake that wage income now.

Source URL: Working At Home To Build Passive Blog Income And Giving Up Full Time Job Pay

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

- Honorable Learned Hand, U.S. Appeals Court Judge, Helvering v. Gregory, 69 F.2d 809 (1934).

The above quote is one of my favorite tax quotes from law school and one that I concur with wholeheartedly. It was a historical statement from a well known and respected former United States Appeals Court Judge regarding the minimalist extent of our obligation as citizens to pay taxes. The opinion reflects the view that we have no ethical or even patriotic duty to pay taxes beyond what has been legally assessed upon us. Thus, as the message advocates, it is within our compete given right to do everything within legal boundaries to minimize our personal tax liability exposure. If society deems the income and tax bracket disparity to be unfair or unjust, it is our duty as voters to ensure the government legislates fairly, rather than evade individual tax obligations out of protest.

Difference and Distinction Between Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion

The practice of tax avoidance is essentially the credo of most tax attorneys and tax preparers. It is completely legal and there should be no moral or patriotic implications as it is in complete compliance with the law. Tax avoidance is simply the practice of working within the legal confines of tax law and regulations to maximize tax deductions while minimizing tax liability. In contrast, tax evasion works outside the rules by trying to duck legal obligations by hiding income through nondisclosure, or improperly taking deductions that one is not qualified for. There is a clear distinction between the two.

However, many people seem to inaccurately equate legal tax avoidance with the same type of immorality implications of those who practice tax evasion. For example, there are some who point out that wealthier people, through clever tax manipulation and deductions are able to drastically keep their tax liability very low. Even the Oracle of Omaha himself, Billionaire Warren Buffet noted that he only paid a 17.7% tax rate on his $46 million of taxable income in 2006, while his own employees paid an average 32.9% tax rate. His own receptionist reportedly paid a 30% tax rate.

This might not seem fair in my eyes or yours, but none of these moral questions obligate Warren Buffet or anyone else from having to pay more taxes than they are required to do so, as long as they fully comply with all existing tax regulations. If there was truly an injustice or immoral component or dichotomy to the current tax structure, it is the obligation of the federal government to implement a fair taxation policy, and ours as voters to ensure that the government do so.

We Should Not Confuse the Government’s Duty To Create A Fair Universal Tax System As Our Own

It’s been said that there are certain things in life that are simply inevitable, including death and taxes. Society needs taxes to function and requires an empowered government to execute the uniform exaction. Making the tax system voluntary would obviously never work because individuals would not be able to effectively enforce the collection without resorting to vigilante tactics. Thus it’s a necessity to have a strong government that can legislate and enforce tax codes, and mandate obligatory payments based on whatever sliding scale system it deems in the best interest of society. We have expressly given the government this power to legislate fair marginal tax brackets and to create an equitable system of tax deductions and tax credits to promote certain values and interests for the betterment of society.

It is not our own individual duty to draft our own federal tax returns to what we personally think will benefit the government. That duty has already been delegated away. Our responsibility as citizens is to operate in good faith within that tax framework to ensure we legally abide by the rules. If the day comes when we deem change is necessary, then our role is to change the individuals to whom we have delegated this legislative power to. However, our framed roles as taxpayers never expands beyond mere compliance.

So Long As We Abide By All Legal Tax Codes, We Are Free To Maximize Opportunities

Because our tax system is universally applied with every single income producing resident subject to it, we should not feel any moral, ethical, or patriotic duty to pay extra beyond what is demanded of us. So the next time you sit at your desk to prepare your tax return, you should not feel guilty about being able to cleverly duck certain tax obligations through legal manipulation. So long as you are fully abiding by the tax code, you are fully in the right. Our duty is to put the right people in power to make these difficult social and moral choices for the betterment of society. Once the universal tax codes have been laid in place, we are perfectly within our right to use every legal trick, tax loophole and strategy to minimize our own tax assessment to the betterment of ourselves.

As the taxpayer, we are under no obligation to provide any more to the government than we are required to. The tax code and our tax obligation is not in the nature of church tithing that we voluntarily offer out of altruistic feelings or charitable obligation. It’s a regulated and systematic way for the government to mandate fairness and to ensure equality of its citizenry. There is no tip that needs to be paid to the government. This is not a restaurant and the servers are not being paid minimum wage and dependent on our generosity. So long as we abide by legal regulations and aren’t resorting to the illegal practice of tax evasion, we are within our legal and moral right to try to reduce our own tax liability down to zero (if possible).

Thus the next time you feel guilty about being able to successfully and properly claim a whole slew of deductions, don’t be. There is nothing inherently wrong with the legal practice of tax avoidance. Thus, pay what you owe and nothing more. That’s the most responsible thing we can all do.

Source URL: The Difference Between Legal Tax Avoidance and Illegal Tax Evasion

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

Also, read about the prospects and chances of an Obama stimulus check for 2009.

Based on the substantial traffic and comments I’ve been receiving for the article I wrote explaining and breaking down the details of the 2008 Stimulus Rebate Package, it’s clear that everyone in the United States is concerned about their rebate checks. Everybody wants to know how large their own tax rebate check will be and when they can expect to receive it.

There are many questions to be answered and I’ve been trying my best to respond to them all. While most questions have been straightforward, others have been slightly more complicated with issues relating to Chapter 7 and 13 bankruptcy filings, or issues relating to wage garnishment and student loan liens. But I will continue to do my best to answer your flurry of tax rebate comments and e-mails.

Visit The IRS Website For The Official Source Of Tax Rebate News and Updates

While I can’t necessarily state that all answers that I provide are definitive, I do try my best to answer accurately based on research and reasonable information. One thing I have noticed is the vast amount of misinformation and speculation that is available on the internet. There seems to be much conjecture and rumors surrounding the tax rebate, particularly as it relates to timetable and the order that the checks will be sent out. I wish to remind readers that the only definitive source for tax rebate news and updates is the official IRS Economic Stimulus Payments Information Center (official website). There, they’ve done a pretty decent job of addressing the seemingly endless stream of tax rebate inquiries, even providing answers to popular tax rebate questions (Tax Rebate FAQ). The IRS tax rebate website provides stimulus check payment hypotheticals and answers questions pertaining to Social Security recipients and veterans living on disability. They post updates regularly and understandably so. Here’s a quick link to some of the official tax rebate questions and answers for various filing scenarios:

1. Single without children
2. Head of Household, with children
3. Married, with children
4. Married, without children
5. Married Filing Separately, with or without children

Here’s the official information release for recipients of alternative types of income:

1. Recipients of Social Security Retirement Income or Disability
2. Recipients of VA Benefits, Disability, or Survivor Benefits

If you still have unanswered questions, please continue to post comment questions to my original Bush Tax Rebate article. I will try my best to diligently answer each one as best as I can. Keep in mind that while I do have a legal and financial background, you will be best served asking your own tax professional or hired attorney the more substantive tax and legal questions, particularly when it relates to more delicate legal issues surrounding bankruptcy and liens. My informal opinions should only be viewed and regarded as general background information rather than seen as authoritative financial advice.

Source URL: Searching For Answers To Frequently Asked Questions About Your Tax Rebate Check

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.

Much of this anti-lawyer sentiment is based on mainstream public mistrust of trial attorneys and the work that they do. While I agree that our population has evolved into a society a bit too obsessed and even paranoid about lawyers and lawsuits, I think the passionate furor and lemming-like disdain of litigation beguiles its importance as one of the key cornerstones of what makes our country so democratic and free. Lest we forget, it is because of our pro-litigation society that our businesses and services have been able to consistently deliver such quality and corruption free excellence. Not all of society and the business world will forever remain pure and blameless, but should their actions harm or damage any person or entity, we as Americans can always rest assured that the offending parties will be held accountable. No where else in the world is there such a reliable guarantee in place.

A Pro Litigation Society Protects Quality and Advances Our Individual Rights and Freedoms

I frequently hear and read about writers and individuals who like to complain about lawsuits and denounce those who file claims for substantial amounts of money that the writer deem as frivolous. In my opinion, such genuinely frivolous causes of action would ultimately be summarily dismissed by the presiding judge of the case. But before that can happen, everybody must be able to have their entitled day in court. Thereafter, if the suit was initiated without merit or the reasonable likelihood of success, there are counter fines and sanctions available to punish the plaintiff for wasting the court’s time.

Many people like to blame greedy individuals and sleazy lawyers for filing frivolous and wasteful lawsuits. I agree that there are some wrongfully filed claims out there, but the majority are legitimate and in pursuit of damages for legitimate redresses of injury. I think most people in the United States would boldly state that they are against lawsuits – that is, until it is their turn to sue somebody. If the God forbid day should ever arrive when an uninsured business van driver negligently slams into your car, permanently rendering a close family member paralyzed for life, you’ll be glad we don’t live in a society where they tell you to just brush it off and let it go. You’ll be glad we live in a nation where you can personally seek the court’s protection to compensate you and your family member for your injuries and to ensure it never happens again. It is not above revenge, but about justice and fair play.

Without the developed and reliable ability to file individual lawsuits, as citizens, we would be powerless to effect positive societal change beyond begging and lobbying our own governmental representatives to legislate the law in our favor. Living in a litigious society is actually empowering for the lowly individual. It is by this developed common law system of precedence and judicial resolution that has compelled American businesses to become the most safe and reliable in the democratic world.

In the infamous McDonald’s millionaire dollar hot coffee case, a woman accidentally spilled hot coffee on her lap while waiting at a McDonald’s drive-thru and badly burned herself. Although the case seemed trivial and common-sensical, the case set the precedent for more improved temperature safety warnings and control. When we buy American products and utilize the services of American doctors today, we have very high expectations of quality and competence. It’s easy to blindly blame the unrepresentative pool of greedy lawyers out there, but remember, it was the successfully litigated precedents set by the product defect and physician malpractice test cases that made our system so driven towards fighting wrongdoing and rooting out faulty products. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s the best we’ve got for our large diverse population.

Money Is How Our Civilized Society Settles Disputes

This is no longer the wild wild west. When you have a problem with someone, when your personal property is damaged, or when you are injured due to someone else’s negligence, you don’t attempt to duke it out through hand to hand combat or resort to one-on-one pistol duel challenges anymore. More modern and civilized methods of dispute resolution have developed and evolved – culminating into a common law adversarial legal system that centers around the recovery of monetary damages. The reason why we always hear about plaintiff individuals filing lawsuits for money is because money is the primary medium of recovery that our legal system permits. Sometimes when monetary damages is insufficient, the court will permit specific performance or injunctive action, but in the vast majority of cases, the mode of redress is by forcing the losing defendant to pay the plaintiff.

The reason why recovery damages sometimes soar into the millions of dollars is because other than compensatory damages designed to put the plaintiff back in the same position he would have been in had the injury never occurred (thereby “making him whole”), courts sometimes grant additional punitive damages on top of that. These type of punitive or treble damages are usually extremely high, and designed with punishment in mind. In one case I read about, a defendant was found by the court to be liable for intentionally setting his neighbor’s cat on fire and burning the kitty to death. The court awarded a mere $200 of actual damages for the cat, regarded as personal property, but slapped something like an additional $5,000 of punitive damages to punish the defendant for his outrageous action. This is what justice is all about and the type of grievances our pro-litigation society was meant to protect.

Source URL: Positive Comments About Living In A Litigious American Society Obsessed With Filing Lawsuits

Copyright Protected © 2008 Money Blue Book: Personal Finance Blog. All Rights Reserved.