Some Economists Doubt Dire Effects From Tax Increases

As anxious investors assess their portfolios in light of expected tax increases on investment income, hedge fund manager Douglas Kass has a simple message: Relax.

Mr. Kass, the founder of Seabreeze Partners Management, thinks much of the investing world has overestimated how hard the markets and investors would be hit if tax rates on dividends and capital gains rise at the end of the year, as the White House has proposed.

Mr. Kass can look for support to several economists who have studied past changes in tax rates and found that the shifts had less of an impact on investor behavior than was initially expected.

That’s largely because a dwindling number of investors are subject to the taxes on investment gains that are set to rise at the end of the year, with most stocks held in accounts that are exempt from taxes.

For example, only 14.7 percent of American households have mutual funds in taxable accounts, down from as high as 23.9 percent in 2001, according to data from the Investment Company Institute. Douglas A. Shackelford, an economist who has examined the 2003 legislation that lowered the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, said that when those changes were being put in place “people thought this would be revolutionary,” sparking a wave of changes in the way companies rewarded their investors, and how investors evaluated companies.

In the end, “it made a difference, but it certainly was not revolutionary,” said Mr. Shackelford, a professor of taxation at the University of North Carolina’s business school. The limited number of investors who were subject to the changes in 2003 has grown even smaller today, he said.

While data on the tax status of all stockholders is hard to come by, many economists agree than an increasing proportion of the entire equities market is now held by retirement investors whose holdings are not subject to current tax law; by foreign investors who don’t pay American taxes, or by institutional investors like insurance companies and pension funds that are exempt from taxes.

Sam Stovall, the chief investment strategist at S&P Capital IQ, said that even among individual investors who do pay the taxes, many have incomes under $250,000 and would not be subject to the increased rates on investment income proposed by the White House. The result Mr. Stovall is anticipating is that the coming changes will cause “a lot less of a hit than most people are making it out to be.”

Mr. Stovall and others who share his views are not discounting the potential disruption to the financial markets if the White House and Congress fail to reach any agreement on the broad set of tax increases and spending cuts scheduled to hit at the start of the year. The largest of these changes are not on investment income. An increase in the payroll tax, for example, could remove $95 billion from the take-home pay of Americans.

But even if a broad agreement is reached, many strategists are expecting that taxes will rise on investment income, with the White House proposing that for households earning over $250,000 the rate on dividends rise to a peak of 39.6 percent from the current 15 percent, and the rate on capital gains increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent.

Wealthy households will face an additional 3.8 percent charge on most investment income to help pay for the recent health care legislation.

Neil J. Hennessy, the founder of Hennessy Funds, said at a year-end investing event last week that if politicians allow the rates to rise as much as the White House has proposed, dividends will become much less attractive and there could be “disastrous effect” on the willingness of investors to put money into stocks.

Some companies have already acted ahead of the changes, with Costco and Las Vegas Sands leading the way in issuing special dividends before the end of the year so their shareholders can take advantage of current tax rates. Some investors have sold off stocks that issue regular dividends expecting the companies to become less valuable once a greater proportion of dividend income is lost to taxes.

Andrew Garthwaite, an analyst at Credit Suisse, has predicted that if the White House’s view on investment taxes prevails, it could lead to a long-term reduction in the value of the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index of as much as 5 percent. Mr. Garthwaite cautioned that the figure is likely to be lower, and that investors have already incorporated some of those losses into the market by selling stocks.

Mr. Kass disputed Mr. Garthwaite’s estimates in a note to clients, and said he was looking at market losses of at most 1.6 percent and more likely closer to 0.8 percent. Part of the disagreement arises from Mr. Kass’s contention that many people who are subject to tax are either uninformed about tax law — and unlikely to respond to changes — or more focused on the long-term performance of their portfolio than on short-term tax payments.

Mr. Kass said that even the losses he has predicted assume that wealthy people will be willing to cash out of their stock positions and stay out, something that he said is unlikely given the small returns available in other financial investments.

But an even larger source of misunderstanding has come from the difficulty of ascertaining the amount of all United States stocks held by people who will have to pay the new, higher tax rates. Foreign investors controlled 12.4 percent of American stocks in 2011, up from 8.8 percent in 2004, Treasury Department data shows.

Among the stocks that are held in the United States, 48 percent are held directly by households, down from 65 percent in 1988, according to Federal Reserve figures. In contrast, 40.7 percent of households have mutual funds in tax-exempt accounts.

But only some of these have income over $250,000 a year, and a portion of those people have their money in accounts protected from taxes. Eric Toder, a co-director of the Tax Policy Center, said as a result market prices should have little to do with the taxes paid on gains because prices are largely “being determined by tax-exempt investors and by foreign investors.”

Read More..

North Korea Is Preparing to Launch Another Long-Range Rocket

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea said Saturday that it would try to launch another long-range rocket later this month, as the country prepares to commemorate the death a year ago of its longtime ruler Kim Jong-il, and as his son Kim Jong-un works to bolster his credentials as a leader.

The launching, which North Korea said would take place between Dec. 10 and Dec. 22, is likely to prompt international condemnations and heighten tensions with Washington and its allies. Critics consider North Korea’s launching of a Unha-3 rocket a cover for testing technology for intercontinental ballistic missiles that could eventually be used to carry nuclear weapons.

In April, North Korea launched a rocket, only to have it disintegrate shortly afterward, failing in its stated goal of putting an earth-observation satellite into orbit.

Saturday’s announcement came at a delicate time in the region. South Korea is gearing up for a presidential election on Dec. 19, and Japan plans parliamentary elections on Dec. 16. In Washington, President Obama will begin his second term in January.

“For Kim Jong-un, a successful rocket launching may be the best he can think of to show his achievements in his first year in power,” said Kim Yong-hyun, a professor of North Korean studies at Dongguk University in Seoul and a visiting scholar in international studies at Johns Hopkins University. Kim Jong-un took over after the death of his father last Dec. 17.

The North’s announcement also came a day after Mr. Kim met a delegation sent by China’s new leader, Xi Jinping. South Korean news media had speculated that one of the missions of the Chinese delegation might be to try to persuade Pyongyang to refrain from launching a rocket again, with satellite photos appearing to indicate launching preparations.

If so, North Korea’s apparent rejection would be particularly brazen, given that Mr. Xi has just been elevated. China is North Korea’s only real ally, and a source of much-needed aid and trade, but Pyongyang has ignored some of China’s requests in the past.April’s launching led to the collapse of a deal under which Washington promised to ship humanitarian aid to North Korea in return for North Korea’s promise to suspend nuclear and missile tests, as well as uranium enrichment, and allow United Nations monitors back into its main nuclear complex.

The official Korean Central News Agency quoted an unidentified spokesman for the Korean Committee for Space Technology as saying that North Korea had “analyzed the mistakes” made in April and had improved the precision and reliability of the rocket and satellite. The rocket is expected to take the same path as that abortive launching, traveling between China and the Korean Peninsula, and North Korea said Saturday that it would conduct the launching “transparently.”

South Korea expressed “serious concern” about the plan, calling it “a grave provocation” in defiance of international warnings. “The North must realize that its repeated provocations have only deepened its isolation,” the South Korean Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

In Washington, the Obama administration also denounced the planned launching. “A North Korean ‘satellite’ launching would be a highly provocative act that threatens peace and security in the region,” Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, said in a statement on Saturday. She added that the United States was consulting with allies on the issue.

Since 1998, North Korea has launched several long-range rockets, which the United States and South Korean officials say have all exploded in midair or failed in their stated goal of putting satellites into orbit. North Korea, however, has insisted that two satellites were circling the earth.

North Korea has often used nuclear and missile threats during changes of power in the region as a way to try to force the new governments to engage in talks and possibly offer concessions. North Korea has also been accused of using military provocations to influence elections in the South.

This time, the announcement about the launching “could very well have to do primarily with domestic political considerations, that Kim Jong-un wants a demonstrable feat to boost his legitimacy, and his technicians have assured him they are ready,” said John Delury, a North Korea expert at Yonsei University in Seoul.

“It doesn’t hurt that South Korea is in the middle of a string of aborted efforts at launching a satellite of their own; should Pyongyang succeed, it scores points in the ongoing inter-Korean rivalry, but also highlights what it sees as the hypocrisy of banning one Korea from doing what the other Korea does freely,” he said.

Mr. Kim, the analyst, said it would be hard to predict how the planned rocket launching would affect the election in South Korea, which pits Park Geun-hye, the conservative candidate from the governing Saenuri Party, against Moon Jae-in, the liberal opposition candidate.

The North’s planned action may be a disadvantage for Ms. Park, who has never served in the military, but at the same time it could help rally conservative voters. Mr. Moon could try to use the planned launching to rally liberal voters who oppose the conservatives’ hard line and prefer a more aggressive engagement with North Korea as the best means of taming its behavior.

Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting from Washington.

Read More..

Police: Chiefs' Belcher kills girlfriend, self

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher killed his girlfriend Saturday morning and minutes later, holding a gun to his head, thanked his general manager and coach before shooting himself outside the team's practice complex.

Authorities did not release a motive for the murder-suicide, though police said that Belcher and his girlfriend, 22-year-old Kasandra M. Perkins, had been arguing recently. The two of them have a 3-month-old girl who was being cared for by family.

Belcher thanked general manager Scott Pioli and coach Romeo Crennel before pulling the trigger, police spokesman Darin Snapp said. Officers had locked down the Chiefs facility by midmorning.

The team said it would play its home game against the Carolina Panthers as scheduled on Sunday at noon local time "after discussions between the league office, Head Coach Romeo Crennel and Chiefs team captains."

A spokesman for the team told The Associated Press that Crennel plans to coach on Sunday.

Belcher was a 25-year-old native of West Babylon, N.Y., on Long Island, who played college ball at Maine. He signed with the Chiefs as an undrafted free agent, made the team and stayed with it for four years, moving into the starting lineup. He had played in all 11 games this season.

"The entire Chiefs family is deeply saddened by today's events, and our collective hearts are heavy with sympathy, thoughts and prayers for the families and friends affected by this unthinkable tragedy," Chiefs chairman Clark Hunt said in a statement.

"We sincerely appreciate the expressions of sympathy and support we have received from so many in the Kansas City and NFL communities, and ask for continued prayers for the loved ones of those impacted," Hunt said. "We will continue to fully cooperate with the authorities and work to ensure that the appropriate counseling resources are available to all members of the organization."

The NFL released a statement that also expressed sympathy and said, "We have connected the Chiefs with our national team of professional counselors to support both the team and the families of those affected. We will continue to provide assistance in any way that we can."

Authorities reported receiving a call Saturday morning from a woman who said her daughter had been shot multiple times at a residence about five miles from the Arrowhead Stadium complex. The call came from Belcher's mother, who referred to the victim as her daughter, leading to some initial confusion.

"She treated Kasandra like a daughter," Snapp said. Belcher's mother, who is from New York, had recently moved in with the couple, "probably to help out with the baby," Snapp said.

Police then received a phone call from the Chiefs' training facility.

"The description matched the suspect description from that other address. We kind of knew what we were dealing with," Snapp said. The player was "holding a gun to his head" as he stood in front of the front doors of the practice facility.

"And there were Pioli and Crennel and another coach or employee was standing outside and appeared to be talking to him. It appeared they were talking to the suspect," Snapp said. "The suspect began to walk in the opposite direction of the coaches and the officers and that's when they heard the gunshot. It appears he took his own life."

The coaches told police they never felt in any danger, Snapp said.

"They said the player was actually thanking them for everything they'd done for him," he said. "They were just talking to him and he was thanking them and everything. That's when he walked away and shot himself."

At the home of Belcher's mother on Long Island, relatives declined to talk to reporters. An SUV in the home's driveway was flying a small Kansas City Chiefs flag.

The somber mood lightened somewhat as darkness fell, with music playing and people drinking from Styrofoam cups. Belcher's family turned the front yard into a shrine, with a large poster of the player, an array of his trophies, and jerseys and jackets from Kansas City, Maine and West Babylon High.

"He was a good, good person ... a family man. A loving guy," said family friend Ruben Marshall, 42, who said he coached Belcher in youth football. He was stunned by the shooting and suicide. "You couldn't be around a better person."

At least 20 people gathered for a large group hug in the driveway.

"I still can't believe it," neighbor Roy Brown said. "I don't believe it."

Perkin's Facebook page shows the couple smiling and holding the baby.

"His move to the NFL was in keeping with his dreams," said Jack Cosgrove, who coached Belcher at Maine. "This is an indescribably horrible tragedy."

Belcher is the latest among several players and NFL retirees to die from self-inflicted gunshot wounds in the past couple of years. The death of the beloved star Junior Seau, who shot himself in the chest at his California home last May, sent shockwaves around the league.

Seau's family, like those of other suicide victims, has donated his brain tissue to determine if head injuries he sustained playing football might be linked to his death.

Belcher did not have an extensive injury history, though the linebacker showed up on the official injury report on Nov. 11, 2009, as being limited in practice with a head injury. Belcher played four days later against the Oakland Raiders.

Earlier this year, the NFL provided a grant to help establish an independently operated phone service that connects players, coaches, team officials and other staff with counselors trained to work through personal and emotional crises. The NFL Life Line is available 24 hours a day.

Kansas City Mayor Sly James said that he spoke to Pioli after the shooting.

"I can tell you that you have absolutely no idea what it's like to see someone kill themselves," James said. "You can take your worst nightmare and put someone you know and love in that situation, and give them a gun and stand three feet away and watch them kill themselves. That's what it's like.

"It's unfathomable."

The season has been a massive disappointment for the Chiefs, who were expected to contend for the AFC West title. They're just 1-10 and mired in an eight-game losing streak marked by injuries, poor play and fan upheaval, with constant calls the past several weeks for Pioli and Crennel to be fired.

The Twitter account for a fan group known as "Save Our Chiefs" recently surpassed 80,000 followers, about 17,000 more than the announced crowd at a recent game. The group was organizing a "Can Scott Pioli" food drive for Sunday that has since been canceled.

___

Associated Press writers Heather Hollingsworth and Frank Eltman contributed to this report.

__

Online: http://pro32.ap.org and http://twitter.com/AP_NFL

Read More..

Opinion: A Health Insurance Detective Story

I’VE had a long career as a business journalist, beginning at Forbes and including eight years as the editor of Money, a personal finance magazine. But I’ve never faced a more confounding reporting challenge than the one I’m engaged in now: What will I pay next year for the pill that controls my blood cancer?

After making more than 70 phone calls to 16 organizations over the past few weeks, I’m still not totally sure what I will owe for my Revlimid, a derivative of thalidomide that is keeping my multiple myeloma in check. The drug is extremely expensive — about $11,000 retail for a four-week supply, $132,000 a year, $524 a pill. Time Warner, my former employer, has covered me for years under its Supplementary Medicare Program, a plan for retirees that included a special Writers Guild benefit capping my out-of-pocket prescription costs at $1,000 a year. That out-of-pocket limit is scheduled to expire on Jan. 1. So what will my Revlimid cost me next year?

The answers I got ranged from $20 a month to $17,000 a year. One of the first people I phoned said that no matter what I heard, I wouldn’t know the cost until I filed a claim in January. Seventy phone calls later, that may still be the most reliable thing anyone has told me.

Like around 47 million other Medicare beneficiaries, I have until this Friday, Dec. 7, when open enrollment ends, to choose my 2013 Medicare coverage, either through traditional Medicare or a private insurer, as well as my drug coverage — or I will risk all sorts of complications and potential late penalties.

But if a seasoned personal-finance journalist can’t get a straight answer to a simple question, what chance do most people have of picking the right health insurance option?

A study published in the journal Health Affairs in October estimated that a mere 5.2 percent of Medicare Part D beneficiaries chose the cheapest coverage that met their needs. All in all, consumers appear to be wasting roughly $11 billion a year on their Part D coverage, partly, I think, because they don’t get reliable answers to straightforward questions.

Here’s a snapshot of my surreal experience:

NOV. 7 A packet from Time Warner informs me that the company’s new 2013 Retiree Health Care Plan has “no out-of-pocket limit on your expenses.” But Erin, the person who answers at the company’s Benefits Service Center, tells me that the new plan will have “no practical effect” on me. What about the $1,000-a-year cap on drug costs? Is that really being eliminated? “Yes,” she says, “there’s no limit on out-of-pocket expenses in 2013.” I tell her I think that could have a major effect on me.

Next I talk to David at CVS/Caremark, Time Warner’s new drug insurance provider. He thinks my out-of-pocket cost for Revlimid next year will be $6,900. He says, “I know I’m scaring you.”

I call back Erin at Time Warner. She mentions something about $10,000 and says she’ll get an estimate for me in two business days.

NOV. 8 I phone Medicare. Jay says that if I switch to Medicare’s Part D prescription coverage, with a new provider, Revlimid’s cost will drive me into Medicare’s “catastrophic coverage.” I’d pay $2,819 the first month, and 5 percent of the cost of the drug thereafter — $563 a month or maybe $561. Anyway, roughly $9,000 for the year. Jay says AARP’s Part D plan may be a good option.

NOV. 9 Erin at Time Warner tells me that the company’s policy bundles United Healthcare medical coverage with CVS/Caremark’s drug coverage. I can’t accept the medical plan and cherry-pick prescription coverage elsewhere. It’s take it or leave it. Then she puts CVS’s Michele on the line to get me a Revlimid quote. Michele says Time Warner hasn’t transferred my insurance information. She can’t give me a quote without it. Erin says she will not call me with an update. I’ll have to call her.

My oncologist’s assistant steers me to Celgene, Revlimid’s manufacturer. Jennifer in “patient support” says premium assistance grants can cut the cost of Revlimid to $20 or $30 a month. She says, “You’re going to be O.K.” If my income is low enough to qualify for assistance.

NOV. 12 I try CVS again. Christine says my insurance records still have not been transferred, but she thinks my Revlimid might cost $17,000 a year.

Adriana at Medicare warns me that AARP and other Part D providers will require “prior authorization” to cover my Revlimid, so it’s probably best to stick with Time Warner no matter what the cost.

But Brooke at AARP insists that I don’t need prior authorization for my Revlimid, and so does her supervisor Brian — until he spots a footnote. Then he assures me that it will be easy to get prior authorization. All I need is a doctor’s note. My out-of-pocket cost for 2013: roughly $7,000.

NOV. 13 Linda at CVS says her company still doesn’t have my file, but from what she can see about Time Warner’s insurance plans my cost will be $60 a month — $720 for the year.

CVS assigns my case to Rebecca. She says she’s “sure all will be fine.” Well, “pretty sure.” She’s excited. She’s been with the company only a few months. This will be her first quote.

NOV. 14 Giddens at Time Warner puts in an “emergency update request” to get my files transferred to CVS.

Frank Lalli is an editorial consultant on retirement issues and a former senior executive editor at Time Warner’s Time Inc.

Read More..

Media Decoder Blog: Robert Thomson to Be Chief of News Corporation's New Publishing Company

2:53 p.m. | Updated

Robert Thomson, the top editor at The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones and a confidante of News Corporation’s chairman and chief executive, Rupert Murdoch, is expected to be named chief executive of the media conglomerate’s newly spun-off publishing company.

Mr. Thomson will run the separate, publicly traded company, which will include The Journal, The New York Post, HarperCollins and a suite of lucrative television assets in Australia. The announcement is expected as early as Monday, according to a person briefed on the company’s decision-making.

Mr. Thomson took over at The Journal in 2008, soon after News Corporation completed its $5.6 billion acquisition of Dow Jones. He serves as managing editor of The Journal and editor in chief of Dow Jones, which also publishes Barron’s and the Dow Jones Newswires.

Gerard Baker, a deputy managing editor at the Journal, will take over for Mr. Thomson at The Journal, said the person briefed on the decisions, who could not discuss private conversations publicly.

At The Journal, Mr. Baker has overseen Washington and political coverage, among other topics. He previously wrote a neoconservative column for The Times of London, also owned by News Corporation, and served as Washington bureau chief at The Financial Times, where Mr. Thomson was the top editor of the United States edition.

Mr. Thomson began his career at News Corporation in 1979 as a reporter at The Herald in Melbourne, Australia. He and Mr. Murdoch are both Australian, and have taken family vacations together. Mr. Murdoch is often seen in Mr. Thomson’s office in the Journal newsroom.

In his tenure at The Journal, Mr. Thomson increased circulation by broadening the newspaper’s focus beyond business to include more general-interest and lifestyle news. He oversaw an expansion of the newsroom budget, added photographs to go along with the paper’s signature dot drawings and introduced a local New York section.

Mr. Murdoch will serve as chairman of the publishing company and remain chief executive of the entertainment company, which will include News Corporation’s movie studio, Fox Broadcasting and cable channels like FX and Fox News.

News Corporation plans to complete its split, which was announced in June, in mid-2013. Additional announcements about the publishing company’s board and cash structure are expected before the end of the year.

A News Corporation spokeswoman declined to comment. Reuters was the first to report on the expected appointments.

Read More..

Israel Moves to Expand Settlements in East Jerusalem

Rina Castelnuovo for The New York Times

From his home in East Jerusalem last year, Haj Ibrahim Ahmad Hawa looked at the separation barrier surrounding Jerusalem with the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim in the background. More Photos »

JERUSALEM — Israel is moving forward with development of Jewish settlements in a contentious area east of Jerusalem, defying the United States by advancing a project that has long been condemned by international leaders as effectively dooming any prospect of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

One day after the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to upgrade the Palestinians’ status, a senior Israeli official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the government would pursue “preliminary zoning and planning preparations” for a development that would separate the West Bank cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem from Jerusalem — preventing the possibility of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state.

The development, in an open area known as E1, would connect the large settlement town of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem. Israel also authorized the construction of 3,000 new housing units in parts of East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The timing of the twin actions seemed aimed at punishing the Palestinians for their United Nations bid, and appeared to demonstrate that hard-liners in the government had prevailed after days of debate over how to respond. They marked a surprising turnaround after a growing sense in recent days that Israeli leaders had acceded to pressure from Washington not to react quickly or harshly.

“This is a new act of defiance from the Israeli government,” Saab Erekat, the Palestinians’ chief negotiator, said in a statement. “At a moment where the Palestinian leadership is doing every single effort to save the two-state solution, the Israeli government does everything possible to destroy it.”

Much of the world considers settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank to be illegal under international law, and the United States has vigorously opposed development of E1 for nearly two decades. On Friday, Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, condemned the move, citing Washington’s “longstanding opposition to settlements and East Jerusalem construction and announcements.”

“We believe these actions are counterproductive and make it harder to resume direct negotiations or achieve a two-state solution,” Mr. Vietor said. “Direct negotiations remain our goal, and we encourage all parties to take steps to make that easier to achieve.”

The office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to comment on the zoning and construction decisions, which were made Thursday night around the time of the General Assembly vote. But Israel has long maintained its right to develop neighborhoods throughout East Jerusalem and the West Bank — more than 500,000 Jews already live there — and Mr. Netanyahu, responding to the United Nations speech by President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, said, “Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.”

While Israel has frequently announced settlement expansions at delicate political moments, often to its detriment, the E1 move came as a shock, after a week in which both Israelis and Palestinians toned down their rhetoric about day-after responses to the United Nations bid. Avigdor Lieberman, the ultranationalist foreign minister who for months denounced the Palestinian initiative as “diplomatic terrorism” and said Israel should consider severe sanctions against the Palestinian Authority, told reporters in recent days that there would be “no automatic response.”

Mr. Erekat’s spokesman declined to discuss whether the Palestinians would use their upgraded status, as a nonmember observer state with access to United Nations institutions, to pursue a case in International Criminal Court regarding E1 or the other settlement expansion. Less contentious moves were already in progress: the Palestinian Authority has begun changing its name to “Palestine” on official documents, contracts and Web sites, and several nations are considering raising the level of diplomatic relations, giving Palestinian envoys the title of ambassador.

All but one European country voted with the Palestinians or abstained in Thursday’s United Nations vote, many of them citing concerns about settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem territories Israel captured in the 1967 war. The settlement of E1, a 4.6-square-mile expanse of hilly parkland where some Bedouins have camps and a police station was opened in 2008, could further increase Israel’s international isolation.

Peter Baker contributed reporting from Hatfield, Pa.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: November 30, 2012

An earlier version of this article misspelled the given name and surname of the leader of the Israeli Labor Party. She is Shelly Yacimovich, not Shelley Yachnimovich.

Read More..

NBA fines Spurs $250,000 for sending starters home

The NBA fined the San Antonio Spurs $250,000 on Friday for sending four players home Thursday before their game Thursday night in Miami.

Commissioner David Stern said in a statement that the Spurs "did a disservice to the league and our fans" when they didn't bring Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili or Danny Green to Miami for the final game of their six-game road trip.

"The result here is dictated by the totality of the facts in this case," Stern said. "The Spurs decided to make four of their top players unavailable for an early-season game that was the team's only regular-season visit to Miami. The team also did this without informing the Heat, the media, or the league office in a timely way."

Teams are required to report as soon as they know a player will not travel because of injury.

The league's statement said the Spurs were in violation of league policy reviewed with the board of governors in April 2010 against resting players in a manner "contrary to the best interests of the NBA."

After that meeting, Stern said owners had discussed the issue of sitting healthy players but that there was "no conclusion reached, other than a number of teams thought it should be at the sole discretion of the team, the coach, the general manager, and I think it's fair to say I agree with that, unless that discretion is abused."

The Heat rallied late to beat the Spurs 105-100.

Read More..

Hockey Coaches Defy Doctors on Concussions, Study Finds

Despite several years of intensive research, coverage and discussion about the dangers of concussions, the idea of playing through head injuries is so deeply rooted in hockey culture that two university teams kept concussed players on the ice even though they were taking part in a major concussion study.

The study, which was published Friday in a series of articles in the journal Neurosurgical Focus, was conducted during the 2011-12 hockey season by researchers from the University of Western Ontario, the University of Montreal, Harvard and other institutions.

“This culture is entrenched at all levels of hockey, from peewee to university,” said Dr. Paul S. Echlin, a concussion specialist and researcher in Burlington, Ontario, and the lead author of the study. “Concussion is a significant public health issue that requires a generational shift. As with smoking or seat belts, it doesn’t just happen overnight — it takes a massive effort and collective movement.”

The study is believed to be among the most comprehensive analyses of concussions in hockey, which has a rate of head trauma approaching that of football. Researchers followed two Canadian university teams — a men’s team and a women’s team — and scanned every player’s brain before and after the season. Players who sustained head injuries also received scans at three intervals after the injuries, with researchers using advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques.

The teams were not named in the study, in which an independent specialist physician was present at each game and was empowered to pull any player off the ice for examination if a potential concussion was observed.

The men’s team, with 25 players and an average age of 22, played a 28-game regular season and a 3-game postseason. The women’s team, with 20 players and an average age of 20, played 24 regular-season games and no playoff games. Over the course of the season, there were five observed or self-reported concussions on the men’s team and six on the women’s team.

Researchers noted several instances of coaches, trainers and players avoiding examinations, ignoring medical advice or otherwise obstructing the study, even though the players had signed consent forms to participate and university ethics officials had given institutional consent.

“Unless something is broken, I want them out playing,” one coach said, according to the study.

In one incident, a neurologist observing the men’s team pulled a defenseman during the first period of a game after the player took two hits and was skating slowly. During the intermission the player reported dizziness and was advised to sit out, but the coach suggested he play the second period and “skate it off.” The defenseman stumbled through the rest of the game.

“At the end of the third period, I spoke with the player and the trainer and said that he should not play until he was formally evaluated and underwent the formal return-to-play protocol,” the neurologist said, as reported in the study. “I was dismayed to see that he played the next evening.”

After the team returned from its trip, the neurologist questioned the trainer about overruling his advice and placing the defenseman at risk.

“The trainer responded that he and the player did not understand the decision and that most of the team did not trust the neurologist,” according to the study. “He requested that the physician no longer be used to cover any more games.”

In another episode, a physician observer assessed a minor concussion in a female player and recommended that she miss the next night’s game. Even though the coach’s own playing career had ended because of concussions, she overrode the medical advice and inserted the player the next evening.

According to the report, the coach refused to speak to another physician observer on the second evening. The trainer was reluctant to press the issue with the coach because, the trainer said, the coach did not want the study to interfere with the team.

Read More..

Wealth Matters: Defined-Benefit Plans Allow Fast Retirement Saving, but With Risks

Kevin Moloney for The New York Times

John Rogers, a Denver businessman, used a defined-benefit contribution to catch up on his retirement savings late in his career.

WITH the prospect of significant changes in tax rates and deduction limits, taxpayers have been coming up with all sorts of strategies to save on their taxes, some riskier than others.

So I couldn’t help but be skeptical when I was told about a plan aimed at small-business owners in their 50s who have saved little for retirement but can now afford to put aside a lot of money each year. They can then deduct that money as a business expense, resulting in a significant tax savings.

But I checked with the Internal Revenue Service, and the plan is indeed legitimate.

It is a defined-benefit plan, much like the one large employers once regularly offered their workers, that guarantees a set monthly payment in retirement. In this case, though, the plan works best for really small businesses — those that employ just one or two people.

The I.R.S. allows a maximum annual contribution to the plan of about $255,000 for people in their 50s. (For younger workers, the contribution limit is lower, because the calculation is based on the number of years until retirement. In some cases, the limit is so low that other retirement savings options might be better.) Total holdings in the plan are limited to $2.3 million to $2.4 million, enough to cover the maximum allowed payment in retirement of $200,000 a year.

Advisers said the plans were less effective in companies with more employees, particularly older ones, because the owner would be required to make contributions for all of them, and at a high level, since older employees are typically better paid and closer to retirement. (If the additional employees were young and low-paid, the cost of offering the plan to them might be low enough for it to make sense.)

“It’s not too good to be true,” said Lisa C. Germano, president and general counsel at Actuarial Benefits and Design Company in Midlothian, Va. “But you need to be able to fund the plan and fund it for an indefinite period. It’s a commitment. That’s one of the reasons you get the reward.”

Some advisers like Ms. Germano were worried that, like other generous deductions, this one could be threatened in the current tax and budget negotiations. But regardless of how the talks in Washington turn out, this is still the time of year when many small-business owners need to decide whether to set up a defined-benefit plan or stick with more traditional forms of retirement savings, like SEP I.R.A.’s for the self-employed or a profit-sharing plan.

Here is some of what I learned.

UPSIDE Defined-benefit plans are mainly a way for small-business owners who neglected to save for retirement to catch up. The ideal candidates can put away $100,000 to $150,000 a year for at least 10 years, said Leigh Goldblatt, vice president and chief compliance officer at Glazer Financial Network.

This was the case with John Rogers, a Denver businessman. “I was in my late 50s and I didn’t have a penny saved for retirement,” he said.

He lost his life savings in his 40s, he said, in a recycling company he started with friends. He also raised six children, four of whom he said he put through college.

But by 2006, he was six years into being an independent contractor for Univera, a company that makes nutritional supplements. (The company’s sales model is similar to Amway’s, where people like Mr. Rogers sell to individuals or find other people to sell for them.)

With his business providing steady, predictable income — he and his wife are ranked as top sellers for the company — he wanted to start saving. He said a defined-benefit plan was attractive for both deferring taxes and for saving for retirement.

“Our adviser tells us at the beginning of the year what we have to contribute,” said Mr. Rogers, 63. “We’re very disciplined. We pay our defined-benefit plan first and then our business expenses.”

But even though the I.R.S. assumes the plan will make monthly payments in retirement, which is why it allows people to save so much over a short period of time, owners shut down most of these plans and roll the money in them to a regular retirement account, said Mr. Goldblatt, whose firm advised Mr. Rogers. This reduces expenses and gives the owner control over how to withdraw the money.

DOWNSIDES Such a chance for a retirement savings do-over, as it were, does not come without catches. And skeptics say these plans lure people with the prospect of quick and large retirement savings without discussing the risks.

Read More..

General Assembly Grants Palestine Upgraded Status in U.N.

Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority spoke at the United Nations before the General Assembly voted on Palestine's status as a “nonmember observer state” on Thursday.

UNITED NATIONS — More than 130 countries voted on Thursday to grant Palestine the upgraded status of nonmember observer state in the United Nations, a stinging defeat for Israel and the United States and a boost for President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, who was weakened by the recent eight days of fighting in Gaza.

The new ranking could make it easier for the Palestinians to pursue Israel in international legal forums, but it remained unclear what effect it would have on attaining what both sides say they want — a two-state solution.

Still, the vote offered a showcase for an extraordinary international lineup of support for the Palestinians and constituted a deeply symbolic achievement for their cause, made even weightier by arriving on the 65th anniversary of the General Assembly vote that divided the former British Mandate of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab — a vote that Israel considers the international seal of approval for its birth.

In the West Bank city of Ramallah, about 2,000 Palestinians gathered to celebrate in a central square named after the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Security forces fired into the air and people applauded, danced in the streets and honked car horns when the results were broadcast to the crowd.

“We are witnessing exceptional moments after 65 years of injustice, suffering and pain,” said Jibril Rajoub, the member of Fatah Central Committee. “We are going to witness an Israeli American efforts to keep this resolution ink on paper.”

The tally, in which 138 members voted yes, 9 voted no and 41 abstained, took place after a speech by Mr. Abbas to the General Assembly, in which he called the moment a “last chance” to save the two-state solution amid a narrowing window of opportunity.

“The General Assembly is called upon today to issue a birth certificate of the reality of the state of Palestine,” he said before the vote.

But in the run-up to the vote, he and Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, blamed the other side for not doing enough to pursue peace.

”We have not heard one word from any Israeli official expressing any sincere concern to save the peace process,” Mr. Abbas said.

“On the contrary, our people have witnessed, and continue to witness, an unprecedented intensification of military assaults, the blockade, settlement activities and ethnic cleansing, particularly in occupied East Jerusalem, and mass arrests, attacks by settlers and other practices by which this Israeli occupation is becoming synonymous with an apartheid system of colonial occupation, which institutionalizes the plague of racism and entrenches hatred and incitement.”

“The moment has arrived for the world to say clearly: enough of aggression, settlements and occupation,” he said.

Mr. Prosor, speaking after Mr. Abbas but before the vote was taken, said the United Nations resolution would do nothing to advance the process.

“Today the Palestinians are turning their back on peace,” he said. “Don’t let history record that today the U.N. helped them along on their march of folly.”

As expected, the vote won backing from a number of European countries, and was a rebuff to intense American and Israeli diplomacy. In an indication of the bitterness of the blow to the Israelis, the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a statement calling Mr. Abbas’s speech “defamatory and venomous” that was “full of mendacious propaganda against the IDF and the citizens of Israel.”

“Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner," the statement continued.

Among the countries that had forecast their yes votes were France, Spain and Switzerland. Germany and the United Kingdom were among the countries that abstained, and a few countries joined Israel and the United States in voting no.

After the vote, Susan E. Rice, the American ambassador to the United Nations, explained the American vote as a reaction to an “unfortunate and counterproductive” resolution that placed “further obstacles in the path to peace.”

Reporting was contributed by Michael R. Gordon and Mark Landler from Washington, Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem, Khaled Abu Aker from Ramallah, and Nicholas Kulish from Berlin.

Read More..