You said "I don't understand the point you're trying to make."
However, 4 posts before that, I said...
I think you're missing the point. The initial questions was "Can the owner of the custodial 529 also be the beneficiary?"
The answer is "yes"
The follow-up post was "I would think that it would be very difficult for the beneficiary to not be the owner."
This is not the case. That was my point. Everyone else took it way beyond where it should have gone.
I agree that the argument was pointless, since I answered the question that was posted. I was not the one who pursued it. anonymous said I was wrong, achase said I was wrong, you said I was wrong, and lurker thought I was wrong until s/he realized what the initial question was. Everything I said was true and accurate. The only part left to interpretation was my editorial on your knowledge of 529 plans, which I only criticize because you open yourself up to it. You should not be posting information that you do not know to be accurate... especially if you work as a program manager. What would your compliance/legal department say if they knew that someone within their firm was spreading incorrect information/advice in print? If you're unsure about something, wait a few minutes and someone will probably respond with the correct information. If you do actually post something and someone corrects you, have a little humilty and concede that you were wrong.