WHITTIER, CA--(Marketwire - May 16, 2008) - Pop N Go, Inc. (OTCBB: POPN), a leading manufacturer of healthy snack vending machines, is pleased to announce the renewal of its underlying utility patent on its award winning popcorn vending machine. Pop N Go's patent, with the continued payment of maintenance fees to the United States Patent Office, will remain in force until the year 2018 and will provide the Company the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling or importing popcorn vending machines using Pop N Go's patented technology until 2018.
"The recent surge in demand for our machines which produce a single cup of freshly popped popcorn on demand makes the protection of the Company's intellectual property rights all the more important, especially as we intend to develop other machines using our core technology. We believe the demand for healthy snack products, freshly made and not prepackaged, will continue to grow as consumers continue to become aware of the importance of healthy eating," said Mel Wyman, Pop N Go CEO.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Pop N Go Renews Popcorn Machine Patent
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Smart Advice for the Investor
*
*
*
Like this story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address
I have wonderful news for you.
Thanks to an exhaustive study by Amit Goyal and Sunil Wahal entitled The Selection and Termination of Investment Managers by Plan Sponsors, I can reveal how real experts pick fund managers.
Imagine how useful this information is. You pick a fund manager when you invest in an actively managed fund. Maybe you rely on the much touted Morningstar star system. More likely, your "investment professional" makes a recommendation and you follow it.
What if you knew the secret criteria used to select the fund managers for over $737 billion in assets?
This study looked at more than 9,000 decisions by 3,591 plan sponsors (retirement plans, unions, endowments and foundations) between 1994 and 2003. Sometimes the decisions were made by plan sponsors themselves, but in most cases they had the benefit of consultants to assist them. I assume they hired the most expensive consultants available.
The study looked not only at who was hired but also at who was fired. More than 900 managers got the boot during the period studied. These terminated managers were responsible for investing over $117 billion in assets.
There was nothing mystical about the way these sophisticated plan sponsors and their elite consultants hired managers. They looked at past performance, just like your "investment professional" does. If a manager had a good track record, she was far more likely to be hired.
The average pre-hire "excess return" (return over benchmark) of the more than 8700 managers hired was 2.91%. Sounds pretty good. These managers must really know what they are doing!
However, when the returns of these managers were measured in each of three years after they were hired, they underperformed their benchmark in each year. The promising "excess returns" disappeared. The assets they managed would have yielded greater returns if they were simply indexed to the benchmark.
What about the performance of the fired managers? These hapless souls had great track records pre-hiring, but significantly underperformed their benchmark post-hiring. It is not surprising that they were fired.
In an interesting twist, the study tracked the performance of these managers post termination.
The terminated managers generally beat their benchmarks and added excess returns.
It gets worse. The post firing performance of these managers was generally better than the performance of the managers hired to replace them!
Here's the bottom line:
Some of the most sophisticated investors in the U.S. (and their consultants) couldn't hire managers who could deliver returns in excess of their benchmark. Whatever criteria they used to fire managers and hire replacements boomeranged. They would have been better offer keeping the terminated managers in place.
Sound familiar?
Every day "investment professionals" tell you to look at track records as a basis for picking an actively managed mutual fund. When that fund underperforms, they often advise switching to another fund.
I view it as a form of three card Monte.
You are unlikely to find the money card -- or the money fund -- trying to pick fund managers who can "beat the markets."
If you prefer a more direct approach, you can also call our toll free hotline to reach a representative at 866-373-3468. We respect your privacy and will never sell or share your confidential information with any other parties.
Tax Advice | Finance | Code 179 | Investing | Equity
Monday, April 28, 2008
Municipal bond funds may be a cure for tax headaches
"The first step," says Kathleen Stepp, a CPA and financial planner with Stepp & Bothwell, in Overland Park, Kansas, "is to determine whether your tax bracket is high enough to make municipal bonds appropriate. If you're in a 15% bracket--the lowest federal bracket--then I wouldn't advise investing in tax-exempt bonds."
In 2000, single taxpayers with up to $26,250 in taxable income were in the 15% bracket, which jumps to $43,850 for joint filers. Above that, tax brackets range from 28% to 39.6%, where municipal bonds may make sense. "The higher your bracket," says Stepp, "the greater the benefit you'll get from individual municipal bonds and muni bond funds."
Still, how can you choose among the 1,845 municipal bond funds tracked by Chicago-based Morningstar Inc.?
National vs. single-state funds. Start by choosing between funds that hold bonds issued around the country and funds with bonds issued only in your state, says Eric Jacobson, a senior analyst at Morningstar. National funds provide diversification, while single-state funds usually deliver income that's exempt from state (and perhaps local) tax as well as federal tax. Thus, after-tax income probably will be higher from a single-state fund. "Single-state funds are riskier," explains Jacobson, "because they can lose value more easily if your state's economy turns down sharply." He adds that many people are attracted by the diversification of national funds, but investors in high-tax states such as California, New York, and Massachusetts may prefer single-state funds.
Short- vs. intermediate- vs. long-term bonds. Some muni funds hold bonds maturing in a few years while others have average maturities of 10 years, 20 years, or more. "Longer-term funds usually have higher yields and may provide greater long-term returns," says Jacobson, "but they have more risk too. If interest rates go up, long-term funds probably will lose the most value." That is, a fund with a share price of $20 might fall to $19 or $18 or go even lower, if rates rise. "I prefer short-term muni funds for clients who will need the money fairly soon, perhaps for a tax payment or a college bill," says Stepp. "For longer-term needs t probably would recommend individual bonds. If you buy and hold individual bonds until maturity you know that you'll get your money back."
High-yield vs. high-quality funds. Like corporate bonds, municipals include junk bonds as well as highly rated issues. As you'd expect, junk muni funds pay higher yields but they pose greater risks. In late 2000, for example, Eaton Vance National Municipals Fund (EVHMX) was yielding 5.6%, according to Morningstar, while its sister, Eaton Vance Municipals Trust II: Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Fund (ETHYX), was yielding 6.5%. On a $50,000 investment, that would be an extra $450 in interest per year. Extra income is appealing but there's no free lunch. "High-yield muni funds may have inherent risks that are not apparent," says Jacobson. "If they hold bonds that are not frequently traded, for example, such funds could experience volatility not related to any fundamental bond traits."
"Look for a fund with an experienced manager, a good record, and very low expenses," says Richard Hammel, managing partner at Hammel Financial Advisory Group in Nashville, Tennessee. For example, Vanguard Insured Long-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VILPX) has an expense ratio of 0.20% (on a $50,000 holding, your expenses would be $100 per year).
Finance
Code 179 |
Private Investing
Private Equity
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Stimulation Plan Impacts Your Business
As a restaurant expert and trainer, I know a TON about the restaurant business and how to make it work for you and other independent restaurant owners like you. But I’m not a tax expert. My good friend and accountant, Tonetta Weaver, is kind enough to keep some of us up to date on newsworthy information from the IRS. I thought this was a good bit of information and wanted to pass it along to you.
From the IRS Newswire…
2008 Economic Stimulus Act Provides Tax Benefits to Businesses
50-Percent Special Depreciation Allowance
Depreciation is an income tax deduction that allows a taxpayer to recover the cost or other basis of certain property over several years. It is an annual allowance for the wear and tear, deterioration or obsolescence of the property.
Under the new law, a taxpayer is entitled to depreciate 50 percent of the adjusted basis of certain qualified property during the year that the property is placed in service. This is similar to the special depreciation allowance was previously available for certain property placed in service generally before Jan. 1, 2005, often referred to as “bonus depreciation.” To qualify for the 50 percent special depreciation allowance under the new law, the property must be placed in service after Dec. 31, 2007, but generally before Jan. 1, 2009.
To reflect the new 50-percent special depreciation allowance, the IRS is developing a new version of the depreciation and amortization form for fiscal year filers. The new form will be designated as the 2007 Form 4562-FY.
Section 179 Expensing
In general, a qualifying taxpayer can elect to treat the cost of certain property as an expense and deduct it in the year the property is placed in service instead of depreciating it over several years. This property is frequently referred to as section 179 property, after the relevant section in the Internal Revenue Code.
Under the new law, a qualifying business can expense up to $250,000 of section 179 property purchased by the taxpayer in a tax year beginning in 2008. Absent this legislation, the 2008 expensing limit for section 179 property would have been $128,000. The $250,000 amount provided under the new law is reduced if the cost of all section 179 property placed in service by the taxpayer during the tax year exceeds $800,000.
The new law does not alter the section 179 limitation imposed on sport utility vehicles, which have an expense limit of $25,000.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
TAX CODE CHANGES THAT CAN AFFECT YOUR RETURN!
The United States tax code is constantly being changed and updated by Congress. Therefore it is essential to stay informed on recent tax changes and how they might affect your next income tax return.
To help our visitors stay prepared this tax season we have put together this list of 12 tax code changes that might affect your tax return.
1. Foreclosure Relief
Over the past year the federal government finally did something to help the thousands of families getting hit with huge tax bills after loosing their house due to foreclosure. According to recent law changes, debt forgiven by a foreclosure, short sale, or loan restructure will no longer be treated as income. The IRS will now allow for up to $2 million of forgiven debt to be excluded from a person’s income. However, it is important to note that this law change only applies to homes used as a principal residence. Vacation homes and property investments are not protected.
2. AMT Exemptions
In 2007 congress increased the AMT exemptions to prevent millions of middle income taxpayers from being hit with the tax. The new exemptions are $44,350 for single taxpayers and heads of households, $33,125 for married filing separately, and $66,250 for married filing jointly. However, this exemption is only for the 2007 tax year and these numbers will drop in 2008 unless congress passes another AMT patch.
3. Higher Income IRA Limits
You can now take a full IRA deduction if your modified AGI (adjusted gross income) is less than $52,00 if you are single or the head of household or $83,00 if you are married filing jointly.
4. Higher 401(k) Limits
In 2007 there was a $500 increase on the limit for employee 401(k) contributions. The limit is now $15,500 for workers under 50, and $20,500 for workers over fifty. The increase also applies to other similar workplace retirement plans including 403(b)s and the federal Thrift Savings Plan.
5. Tax Free Employee Parking
Employer paid parking will no longer be considered as additional income for employees. However, this rule only applies to parking fees up to $215 per month, any additional money paid by the employer will still be considered income.
6. Inflation Indexed Brackets
Due to a high inflation rate in 2007, the 15, 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent tax brackets have all been raised by about 4%.
7. Higher Personal Exemptions
For the 2007 tax year the personal exemption amount was raised by $100 to $3,400.
8. Higher Standard Deductions
In 2007 the standard deductions for taxpayers also increased. You can now deduct $5,350 if you are a single taxpayer, $7,850 if the head of a household, and $10,700 if you are married filing jointly.
9. Reduction of Itemized Deduction Income Limits
The gradual reduction of itemized deductions and exemptions will now begin when a taxpayer’s AGI exceeds $156,400, no matter their filing status. The deductions are reduced by 2% of the amount a taxpayer’s income exceeds the limit. However, the reduction amount cannot exceed 80% of a taxpayer’s itemized deductions.
10. Higher Section 179 Deductions
For 2007 the limit on Section 179 deductions was raised by $17,000 to $125,000. Additionally, the annual investment limit was raised to $500,000.
11. Increased Income Limits for Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits
The amount of a taxpayer’s hope or lifetime learning credit is now gradually reduced if their modified AGI is $47,000 to $57,000 for single taxpayers and $94,000 to $114,000 for married filing jointly. However, taxpayers cannot claim an education credit if their modified AGI is above $57,000 for single taxpayers and $114,000 for married filing jointly.
12. Income from Abroad
The maximum foreign income exclusion was raised from $82,400 in 2006 to $85,700 for the 2007 tax year.
