THE REVERE ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2023 LAW | FROM Page 7 401(K) MONIES M ore and more employees who are off ered a 401(k) plan at work are participating. Years ago, only 20% to 25% of all employees eligible to participate in their company’s 401(k) plan did not. That percentage is much higher today. Given that many companies off er some type of match, contributing to a 401(k) plan makes a lot of fi nancial sense. For participants who contribute, this will result in a larger retirement nest egg than they might otherwise have built up. Plan participants need to understand the concept of dollar cost averaging and how time reduces the risk of loss and can more often than not be an investor’s best friend. They also need to appreciate the value of asset allocation and of having a diversifi ed portfolio. While it is always important to understand the value of saving and investing for the future, so too often people do not react to an off er of future benefi t/detriment. Often times, people have diffi culty envisioning the value of making a change for the future. It is diffi cult for some to relate to how today’s behavior will hurt a future that may be 20, 30 or 40 years away. Consequently, to enhance 401(k) participation, potential plan participants need to understand the current benefi ts of participation. They need to recognize the signifi cant savings in income taxes as well as the value added by the company’s matching contribution. By participating at least up to the full company match offered, employees are in essence giving themselves what amounts to a tax-deferred raise. Fear of stock market declines also makes it more diffi - cult for people to bite the bullet and engage in meaningful retirement savings. In the late 1990’s, there was the fi rst signifi cant bear market to hit the American investor since self-directed 401(k)’s became prolific in corporate America. Then the market rebounded. Once again, there was a signifi cant drop in the Dow Jones Industrial average during the fi nancial crisis that hit us in the second half of 2007. The Dow Jones had dipped to 6,800 points. As of this writing, it is back up to 34,000. The fact that the bear market in the late 1990’s hit after the biggest boom in the stock market in history made it hurt all the more, since many workers were convinced they could self-manage their assets and were oblivious to the inherent risks in so doing. Furthermore, many employers invested in their own company stock, often times ignoring the risks of doing so. As a result of the previous market downturns (2022 included), many investors decided to hold their money on the sidelines or invest in safer, lower-yielding products. Some analysts believe this to be a selfdefeating strategy given that when the market is down, it typically represents the best buying opportunity. Now is the time to invest for retirement, not the time to sit on the sidelines. It is always great to invest when the market is low and of course retire when the market is high. No diff erent than the old adage “buy low and sell high”. Plan participants run the risk of missing an enormous opportunity if they wait for solid reassurance that there will no longer be bear markets. Bear markets often recover rapidly. Take advantage of the benefi ts of not only 401(k) plans, but of the many other retirement plans available today such as Individual 401(k) plans, traditional IRA’s, Roth IRA’s, Simple IRA plans, profi t-sharing plans, etc. A systematic savings program is the only way to ensure that you will meet your retirement objectives, regardless of whether the market is currently up or down. When you have a long investment horizon (10 or more years), you should consider the value of investing in a diversified portfolio which over that period will more often than not outpace infl ation and help you get to where you want to be. Joseph D. Cataldo is an Estate Planning/Elder Law Attorney, Certifi ed Public Accountant, Certifi ed Financial Planner, AICPA Personal Financial Specialist and holds a Master’s Degree in Taxation. the paper. He fabricated the Blue Suit, yes.” “You’ve seen that Mr. Resnek has admitted that he attributed quotes to people that were not actually real quotes; correct?” “Yes. That was in the newspaper,” replied Philbin. “You’ve seen that Mr. Resnek has stated that he manufactured notes; correct?” “I saw that too,” he replied. “You’ve seen that Mr. Resnek has admitted that he altered notes; correct?” asked Robbins. “Yes. I think that was in the paper as well.” Atty. Robbins continued his line of questioning, asking Philbin if he was aware that Resnek had admitted that he made false statements about having “confi - dential sources” about DeMaria; admitted that he gave false testimony in his deposition; admitted to fabricating articles about the mayor; and manufactured quotes, manufactured notes and altered notes. Philbin could only say it’s what he read in the paper. Philbin then stated that he had indeed spoken to Resnek about his testimony, asking him, “What the hell was that?” Resnek told him that “They took it all out of context.” When asked if he had taken any disciplinary action against Resnek about his conduct against Mayor DeMaria, Philbin stated that he did not – never considering replacing him. Philbin was again asked if he asked Resnek to consider publishing a retraction or issue an apology, or a clarifi cation of any kind, Philbin stated he did not. “Fundamentally, you’re suffi - ciently content with the work product to keep Mr. Resnek on as the editor and the publisher; correct?” asked Robbins. “Yes. Right now, yeah,” Philbin replied. Atty. Robbins then asked Philbin if he knew that his newspaper asserted that the mayor committed extortion and solicited kickbacks. Philbin said he did. When asked if he was aware that his newspaper asserted that Page 13 the mayor stole money and engaged in criminal activity, Philbin replied, “I don’t know that I know that.” Philbin claimed that he preferred that the mayor wasn’t called “Kickback Carlo” in the many articles; Robbins replied that he [Philbin] was the one who could have prevented it as it was published in his newspaper. “Do you have any evidence at all that Mr. DeMaria ever took a kickback?” asked Robbins. “Kickback? No, I don’t. No,” replied Philbin. When asked if he had any proof that the mayor had committed extortion, Philbin replied that he did based only on what Sergio Cornelio had told him, despite never having any texts, taken any notes in two meetings with Cornelio – no evidence whatsoever. Cornelio also refuted claims in his own deposition, testifying that Resnek made up the story and quotes that the mayor extorted him into paying him for his partnership in a real estate deal. In fact, Philbin could not recall what year, month or day when he had the conversations about the real estate deal with Cornelio. Back Up The Bus Philbin stated that he believed that Resnek had performed all the background and collected all the evidence in order to publish his articles on the DeMariaCornelio land deal that accused the mayor of extortion, among other things. Asked if he knew that Resnek had gone to the City Clerk’s Office to look at the disclosure forms that the mayor had fi led about the Corey Street deal, Philbin stated he did. Philbin claimed Resnek told him that he had – including the fi lings of a confl ict of interest with the State Ethics Commission – claiming Resnek told him that they were not there at the City Clerk’s Offi ce. Philbin claimed that Cornelio told him that the mayor never fi led. “And there’s no record of any kind, no writing, no e-mail, no text of any communication between you and Mr. Resnek informing Mr. Resnek what Mr. Cornelio had supposedly said; correct?” asked Robbins. “No. I called him on the phone,” was Philbin’s reply. Enough Said “There’s no writing, no record, no e-mail, no text, no notes, no nothing of any kind in writing that refl ects what you told Mr. Resnek Mr. Cornelio had supposedly said; am I right?” “No. Not that I recall,” replied Philbin. “What I’ve said is correct? asked the attorney. “Yes,” stated Philbin. “Do you have any evidence of any kind that Mr. DeMaria ever committed a crime?” “No. I have no evidence,” stated Philbin. Cold-Hearted To Say The Least Philbin was asked if he was aware that the articles being printed by his newspaper laced with false accusations of the mayor committing crimes week after week had any eff ect on the mayor, his wife, children and his elderly parents, who all reside in Everett. “Did you ever consider the eff ect of these articles that your newspaper published about Mr. DeMaria would have on his wife, his children, and his parents?” asked Robbins. “No. I did not,” replied Philbin. Philbin was then asked about the private investigator who was hired to follow the mayor, which was mentioned by Resnek during his deposition where he claimed he would provide information on the mayor’s daily activities. Philbin claimed he had no knowledge. But when he was presented with his answer to the amended complaint against Philbin fi led by the mayor’s attorney, Philbin agreed that it was his signature following his review. The paragraph in the legal documented – signed by Philbin – states: “Philbin admits that he knew that Resnek subjected Plaintiff to surveillance.” “And this is the answer that you reviewed before it was fi led; right?” asked the attorney. “That’s correct,” replied Philbin. Next week: Philbin’s business plan was not about making money. ~ LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC SALE ~ 1039 BROADWAY REVERE, MA 02151 YEAR MAKE MODEL VIN# 1983 HARLEY DAVIDSON FXR 1HD1EBK160Y112444
14 Publizr Home