dave100: that's interesting and had to do some surfing. Cutting & pasting the whole article I found since this was quite readable and, Luddite that I am, my attemps at links go off into cyberspace. Don't throw away anything you've faithfully saved till now - quarterly statements, confirmations, etc. since the buy/sell, gain/loss tracking goes forward and it's still up to you to be able to track your dealings backward. Right? I have a couple of brokerage accounts as well as investments outside brokerages - no problem there as I can see. But I initially received, as a gift, a block of stock in our local power company back in the 70's. (I still have the initial cost basis, etc. paperwork). But I have always reinvested the dividends to purchase more shares and the new cost basis is, of course, reflected on the next statement. I've saved every one of these statements over the approx. 40 years in the event I'd ever sell some of it since any sale is going to involve a real mix of share price. I like hard copies of things; I don't do much online tracking. Consequently I have boxes of "important" investment papers all in good order. The beauty of it is my heirs will not be pulling their hair out trying to find things when THAT TIME comes. (We've done enough sifting in dealing with others' estates to have learned some valuable lessons.) The article: [Broker-dealers, mutual fund companies and fund custodians are updating systems to comply with the cost basis reporting requirements included in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. Brokers must begin reporting cost basis to the Internal Revenue Service and to taxpayers for trades beginning Jan.1, 2011; fund companies have until 2012 to comply. Custodians are not required to comply with the legislation, but they provide the technology as a service to their broker-dealer clients. For their part, wirehouses already track this data so the deadline is a non-issue for them. "The tech implications for cost basis are significant and if firms don't start now, they will never get it done in time," said Sean Cunniff, research director for brokerage and wealth management at Needham, Mass.-based TowerGroup. The aim is to guarantee full reporting of capital gains so the IRS receives its fair cut of investors' profits. Estimates from the Government Accountability Office and IRS put the amount of underreported capital gains at $7 billion to $11 billion per year. REDUCED TAX BILLS Ironically, because the technology allows for improvement of cost basis reporting, many advisers will be able to harvest losses more efficiently, reducing their clients' tax bills. Costs estimates for the enhancement range from $200,000 for a small, self-clearing broker-dealer to a multimillion-dollar expense for custodians, according to a participant who asked not to be identified. Systems within broker-dealers that require overhauls are the account transfer systems that interact with brokerage firms, as well as their order management systems. Historically, tracking cost basis has been a headache, a responsibility of investors who would have to dig through dusty old confirmations to determine the amount they paid for a stock or bond. For many firms, completing the fixes requires a multistep process that can frazzle the nerves of even the calmest, most experienced technologists. "This will take months just to scope out, and then you must build or buy a solution and integrate it with your current system," Mr. Cunniff said. "Then you test. Then you fix the bugs. Then you deliver." At Raymond James Financial Services of St. Petersburg, Fla., the battle to meet the deadline is under way. "We know it's a significant change and that's why we've started working on it already," said Josh Bohlander, senior manager in information technology. Hindering the project, however, are questions about how reporting should be done for wash sales, gifted securities, sales-load-basis deferral adjustments, and for fixed-income securities. "These are items not pinpointed in the current legislation," said Dale Skinner, a technology product manager with Raymond James. "We and the rest of the industry still need more clarification from the Internal Revenue Service on particular areas." Other firms are also waiting for the IRS to set a clear direction for the development effort. "We are still waiting for the IRS to make its final recommendations," said Teri Manton, a director in the product management and development group of Pershing LLC of Jersey City, N.J. Marjorie Qualey: Would like to see the IRS determine the format it wants the reports to use. "We still need to know exactly what format the IRS wants us to report it in," said Marjorie Qualey, vice president of product development and technology at Schwab Institutional in San Francisco. In response, a spokesman for the IRS said it was "continuing to work on the issue." Rather than build the upgrade themselves, some companies are retaining third parties to provide the software, an approach that OppenheimerFunds Inc. of New York pursued. "Due to the complexity of building this into our own systems, we decided that it made more sense to partner with [GainsKeeper]" to build this enhancement, said Christine Polak, vice president of operations at the mutual fund company, who declined to disclose the cost of the software. GainsKeeper, a provider of cost basis and tax software, is a division of Wolters Kluwer Financial Services in Minneapolis. Over the next two years, Ms. Polak will collaborate with the vendor to provide clients with cost basis data, in the form of their choice. Under the legislation, clients can select the way they want to report cost basis data to the IRS, such as the average cost basis or on a first-in-first-out basis. Although earlier attempts to pass the cost basis rules failed, Pershing assumed that passage was inevitable and began working on the project, Ms. Polak said. "The whole idea of these regulations isn't new to us; we are very well-positioned and have been working closely with [the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association of New York and Washington] for several years now in planning for this legislation," said Ms. Manton. So far, the firm has developed a Form 1099 tax and year-end statement that breaks out gains and losses and addresses the bulk of the regulatory requirements, she said. Some broker-dealers, such as Cambridge Investment Research Inc. of Fairfield, Iowa, and Securities America Inc. of Omaha, Neb., receive cost basis information from their custodians, Pershing and National Financial Services LLC of Boston, respectively.] (Davis Jankowski, InvestmentNews, December 14, 2008)

As someone who takes care of her 78 yr. old mother, let me assure you TODAY is the time to put together a thoughtful, cohesive estate plan! Trust me, nothing is harder than trying to get one in place following a major "failure" on the part of a surviving parent. And now that Social Security is about to go belly up, the "rules" surrounding estate planning and gifting change yearly. MOVE NOW! Your mother is legally entitled to gift up to 11k/yr. to any and everyone she so pleases! Once she gifts the money, it's no longer her's... it's a GIFT. But if you are willing to abide by promises you still have the money at your discretion to fund her long term care should it become necessary. A big "but"... ! I see no problem with your mother borrowing money to fund a MIL apartment. BUT, the reality is, whatever she funds will be your's at such time as she either dies or requires care in a facility. That's not such a bad idea... it locks her assets away... safe from the requirements of "long term care". DO NOT PERMIT HER NAME TO APPEAR ON THE DEED TO YOUR HOME! If it appears there the government will swoop in and attach that portion of your home when her assets run out and her long term care requires funding. Don't even go there. So much of this has to do with your mother's frame of mind. My late FIL was bound and determined to die "broke". And he did! when his stepchildren contested his will there were NO assets left... they'd all be "gifted away"! His kids understood and were willing to fund his life with his savings... we had a FIL apartment ready for him. He died of a heart attack before requiring it. Do you have siblings? are you "all on the same page" with respect to your mother? This is key. My husband and BIL were OK with the agreement, my brother and I are OK with Mum and how we're handling things. But, Man! do we ever wish we'd insisted our names were on the deed to Mum's home years ago when the opportunity presented itself... See a lawyer and get it done, NOW. You'll be glad you did... playing "catch up" is not much fun. Trust me, I know.

but prof. nice guy didn't ask about staying or leaving... exactly. He said he wanted to meet a woman who was more fun *& that his therapist encouraged him to do so*. which sounds like a lie. In fact, his initial post reads a little like a singles ad ("my sisters-in-law describe me as 'funny & sweet'", "I want to meet a woman who likes to laugh", etc) His request for 'advice' reads a lot like he's fishing for permission/approval/blessing,("it would be nice to keep my marriage but be emtionally close to someone, too") Snort! & his statement that his wife is willing to have sex without emotional involvement but he wants the involvement sounds really really strange, since it's backwards to what usually happens (woman wants emotional closeness, man willing to have sex without it). like he made it up & he's seeing what response it'll get. One of the worst experiences of my life was many years ago, when I was young & inexperienced & a married man caused me a lot of aggravation, but, as a result, my "married man on the prowl" detector still works pretty well:. I had been dating this guy for several weeks when I learned that he was married. only, as he said, since it didn't have anything to do with what went on between us, he didn't think he needed to mention it. He saw nothing wrong with lying to me, lying to his wife, complicating my life, his wife's life, his children's lives, heck, he wasn't worried about complicating *anybody's* life, as long as he could have dinner/clean house/charming children...& dates. It was degrading to be manipulated & lied to like that, it was mortifying to discover that I was the "other woman", & it was humiliating to extricate myself from the situation & answer the questions my friends asked about the "new guy" I had been so happy about. but the guy sort-of mentally shrugged & decided that I was just as crazy/needy/irrational as his wife, *since I was having a good time*... until I found out about this little bit of (irrelevant & superfluous) information. This is a married man on the prowl, looking for approval/justification, & he posted this to see what kind of objections he'd get, so he can refine his approach to the next "woman who likes to laugh" that he runs into in the real world. betcha.

Dick and the way he handles his payments or lack of them is really no concern to you...and really doesn't affect what Nick owes. Not only are you taking on Nick's problems, but also Cari's, (who you barely know). Their payments and arrangements are their business and aren't an excuse or reason for Nick to not pay, or pay less. I wouldn't get involve with their legalities just on Cari's word and what you see (maye the in-laws bought the car, someone died and left an inheritance, etc). Nick and Jane's arrangements (and their kids) are the only thing you should even be thinking or worried about. You're focusing too much on personalities and who is right or wrong, what is fair, what should be, etc...when, in fact, you should be focusing on solving the actual problems.... getting all the orders to stop, getting money back if due for the oldest when not in school, making sure the billing is set up right for the kid's medical bills, and making sure your stuff is protected if you marry, right? How Jane is living, and how big a bit&h she and Dick may be really doesn't matter. Your hatred for them is going to drive you crazy. They are not worth worrying about. Repeat, they are NOT worth it. Quit thinking about fairness and try to resolve only what needs to be resolved that you can afford to do. Life isn't fair and people aren't nice and you will probably never be able to change Dick and Jane...They've taken enough from you financially, don't let them take your psyche and relationship too.