It depends on the broker, each one's rules may vary. Your broker should be able to answer this question for how they handle such a situation. The broker I used would execute and immediately sell the stock if the option was 25 cents in the money at expiration. If they simply executed and news broke over the weekend (option expiration is always on Friday), the client could wake up Monday to a bad margin call, or worse.


No, it is never impossible to get credit so long as there are no price controls or quotas. In most of the United States, the impetus for housing is so strong that it's one sector of credit that has nearly no price regulation, price in this case being interest rates. Corporate banks will not touch you now because Dodd-Frank now makes them liable to you and investors if you default on the mortgage.  Also, Fannie & Freddie, who ultimately finance most mortgages in the US now require banks to buy back loans if they fail, so banks are only financing the most creditworthy. All is not lost because markets are like rivers if not fully dammed: they find a way through. In your case, you can get a fully-financed mortgage if you're willing to pay interest rates probably double what you could otherwise get in the market with good credit. If the foreclosure process is quick and benefits the lender more in your state, the interest rate will be even lower. Your creditors will most likely be individuals you find at mortgage investment clubs and religious institutions.  If you shop around, you'll be surprised at how low a rate you might get. Also, since the cost of your prospective home is so low, it's very easy for an investor flush with cash and few investments to take a flier on a mother committed to her children who only needs $50,000. The FHA has been vastly expanded, and since your individual credit is clean, there may be a chance to get financing through it, but be prepared for red tape.


> the Fed left open the possibility it could wait until the fall.   Right... because the easiest way to demonstrate that the Fed isn't required to support treasury bond auctions is to stop buying/rolling debt over right when the next budget crisis happens.


It's really not. You have to realize that current rates are an outlier. The average on the 10yr since 1960 is 6.7%. Even on the 1yr it's still 5.7%. The average on the 30Yr from '77-present is 7.6%. You can use your own discretion about the length of time to consider for the average, but you don't just take the current rate as the risk free rate.


The simplest solution to fire-and-forget is to pick something like a Target Date mutual fund made up of low-overhead index funds (within your 401k or a Roth IRA, perhaps) and set up automatic purchase to that.  If you're talking about limit orders and so on, that ain't simple.


Usually payments are applied towards:


Additionally, it used to be the case that savings accounts would have a noticeably higher interest than checking accounts (if the checking account paid any at all).  So you would attempt to maximize your cash working for you by putting as much as you could into the savings account and then only transferring out what you needed to cover bills, etc into the checking account.


If you want to retire in 7 years at age 35 and only currently have 150k, and you need to ask this question of how to invest your money (risk free), then you will not be retiring at age 35 nor buying your house.  It is possible to do (but not risk free - in fact you will need to take quite a bit of risk) but you would need to have a detailed plan about how you would go about to achieve this goal, what assets you would be investing in, and what risk management you would have in place. If you have to ask this question all you have is a goal but no plan. You probably will need to do plenty of research in the types of investment you prefer and develop a plan to take you to your destination. This could take you a year or 10 years, depending on how motivated you are in acheiving your goals.


The very term 'market conditions' is subjective and needs context.  There are 'market conditions' that favor buying (such as post crash) or market conditions that favor selling (such as the peak of a bubble).  Problem with mutual funds is you can't really pick these points yourself; because you're effectively outsourcing that to a firm.  If you're tight on time and are looking for weekly update on the economy a good solution is to identify a reputable economist (with a solid track record) and simply follow their commentary via blog or newsletter.


"Your goals are excellent. I really admire your thoughts and plans, and I hold you in high esteem. Good credit is indeed an important thing to have, and starting young is THE smart idea with respect to this. I see that you have as a goal the purchase of a home. Indeed, another fine ambition. (Wow, you are a different breed from what I normally encounter on the internet; that's for sure !) Since this won't happen overnight, I would encourage you to think about another option. At this point in your life you have what few people have: options, and you have lots of them. The option I would like to suggest you consider is the debt free life. This does NOT mean life without a credit card, nor does it mean living with ones parents all their days. In its simplest form, it means that you don't owe anybody anything today. An adapted form of that; with the reality of leases and so on, is that you have more immediate cash in the bank than you have contractual responsibilities to pay others. e.g., if the rent on a place is X, and the lease is 12 months, then you don't sign until you have 12X in the bank.  That's the idea. If there is anything good that these past 10 years of recession and financial disasters have provided us as a nation, it is a clear picture presented to our young people that a house is not a guaranteed way to riches. Indeed, I just learned this week of another couple, forced out by foreclosure again. Yes, in the 1970s and 1980s the formula which anyone could follow was to take a mortgage on a single family house; just about any house in any community; and ten years later double your money, while (during those ten years) paying about the same (and in a few years, actually less) amount of money as you would for an apartment with about half the space. Those days were then, not now, and I seriously doubt that I will ever see them again in my lifetime. You might, at your age, one day. In the mean time, I would like to suggest that you think about that word options again; something that you have that I don't. If your mind is made up for certain that a house is the one and only thing you want, okay; this does not apply. During this time of building your credit (we're talking more than a year) I would like to encourage you to look at some of the other options that are out there waiting for you; such as... I also encourage you to take a calculator and a spreadsheet (I would be surprised if there is no freeware out there to do this with a few clicks) and compare the past 30 years of various investments. For example... It is especially educational if you can see line charts, with the ups and downs along the way. One last thing; about the stock market, you have an option (I love that word when people your age are actually thinking) called ""dollar cost averaging"". If you are not aware of this concept, just ask and I will edit this post (although I'm confident it has been explained by others far better than myself on this very site). Hit just about any solid stock market investment (plain old mutual fund, even with a load, and it will still work) and I believe you'll see what I'm trying to get across. Still, yes, you need a roof, and a young person should clearly plan on leaving parents in a healthy and happy way; so again, if the house is the one and only goal, then go for it kid (uhm, ""kid"", if you're still under 18). All the best. Do remember that you will be fixing the pipes, not the maintenance guy."


I recall the following business from the AIDS crisis: viatical settlement But because there were life-extending treatments developed in the 1990s, many third parties which engaged in these took a bath and it's not as common.


Its participating preferred with a 1x liquidation preference. Very unfriendly for the company owner. Most startups these days are seeded with convertible notes because there's less thinking about the valuation of the company; that question is booted to the series A. its also easier to draw up the legal docs; pretty much a standard loan agreement. Finally, it can be far friendlier for the owner depending on if the note is an uncapped note. This is expensive financing and your friend can definitely find cheaper money if he looks for it.


I just read this: Housing and inflation  Adjusted for inflation the price of a house has increased a miniscule amount. A better investment would be an ETF that buys REIT stocks. You would be investing in real estate but can cash in and walk away at any time.  Here is a list of mREITs: Stockchart of REITs


A synthetic position mimics the payout of a financial instrument.  Synthetics are attractive when the liquidity/availability of an instrument is low or there is a mismatch in fees or values of the synthetic's components which could lead to arbitrage.    In speculative trades, the seller of a CDS takes a positive view of the credit worthiness of the underlying security.  The buyer of a CDS has a negative view of the credit of the underlying.    So in this example, there is a limit on buying or shorting corporate bonds by how many bonds the company has issued, and the value you have to invest in the bond itself, so if you wanted heavy exposure to this company's credit; you would be limited by how many you could buy.  Whereas with a CDS you can mimic the performance with a synthetic position; and as long as there is someone to take the other side of it, you can buy or sell however many you want and have more exposure than the debt the company issued would allow on its own.  Hope that makes some sense.


The only real consideration I would give to paying off the debt as slowly as possible is if inflation were much higher than it is now.  If you had a nice medium to low interest (fixed rate) loan, like yours, and then inflation spiked to 7-8%, for example, then you're better off not paying it now because it's effectively making you money (and then when inflation calms back down, you pay it off with your gains). However, with a fairly successful and active Federal Reserve being careful to avoid inflation spikes, it seems unlikely that will occur during your time owing this debt - and certainly isn't anywhere near that point now.  Make sure you're saving some money not for the return but for the safety net (put it in something very safe), and otherwise pay off your debt.


You can't own fractional shares. If the Reverse Split resulted in you having less a full share (for example, if you had 500 shares, and they did a 1000:1 reverse split), your fractional share was cashed in (sold). That could be that 'money market' activity shown on the next day? It is your responsibility to be prepared for a reverse split, by either selling at your desired price, or buying more shares, so you end with an integer number of shares after the reverse split.


Another unmentioned reason: flexibility and liquidity.  There is a fundamental difference between installment and revolving debt, such that it could be rational to pay revolving debt before an amortizing loan.   Lets say you have 100K in cash, a 100K mortgage at 4% and 4 25K credit cards at maximum balance and a 0% promotional rate (at least for now).   If you pay off the mortgage, you may not get liquidity if you need it.  This path is not necessarily reversible.   If you pay off the credit cards, you have 100K of credit available to you.  You can reverse to the case of having 100K in cash, and 200K in debt.


"High liquidity doesn't necessarily mean that ""everybody is getting rid of the stock"", since somebody is obviously buying whatever stock that is being sold. Also, as mentioned, low liquidity may mean that you would have trouble selling the stock in the future."


"Do you think that your bank has a separate vault for just your money?   Of course not. The bank just has one big pot of money that everything gets dumped into.   They know exactly how much money each person is supposed to have. The problem is when they add up all the money in the vault... well lets just say a lot of it is missing.   That's why they are supposed to have two vaults, one with the customer's money and one with the investor's money. But since all the account tracking is done internally it becomes real easy to ""borrow"" from one vault to fund the other.  Vault: MF Global's at another bank"


You want to sell for 61.15, but the most the best buyer will pay is 61.10? The HFT trader forces you both to trade over a gap of a nickel AND makes a nickel in profit??      How does he do that, with magic?


The problem with this plan is that in order for your children to put money in their own IRA, they need earned income of their own.  If your child doesn't have $3000 in earned income for the year, you won't be able to put the $3000 into their Roth IRA.


"> The economic term for this concept is ""velocity of money"", and it gets into stuff that I didn't really cover above.  I noticed that it wasn't covered, and it seems to me that this actually has something to do with the original question, about where all the money has gone.   It's my understanding that the velocity of money has slowed, with corporations, being uncertain of future prospects (both due to the economy itself as well as to an uncertain regulatory environment) and thus hesitant to make new investments.  However, this doesn't make complete sense to me. It's not that they're hiding the money under a mattress; they must have it invested into something, and presumably the holders of those investments are themselves doing something with it."


Obviously, there's some due diligence and quantitative analysis. However, it's mostly just what they can secure, for how much and how quickly. For instance, if you had a bakery that was netting 200,000/yr and needed 750,000 to open a new location. The bank will give you the loan over 10 years at 1.1%. Well, it's probably a good idea to take on debt. That's 6938 a month (I think).  Edit: Or issue debt yourself.  However, let's say you're merging with someone in the same industry. They have a market cap of 10 billion. Your company has a market cap of 62 billion and revenue of 11.8 billion a year. It's probably a good idea to secure with equity. Especially because you believe the merger will help you expand.


Companies do not support their stock. Once the security is out on the wild (market), its price fluctuates according to what investors think they are worth. Support is a whole different concept, financially speaking: Support or support level refers to the price level below which, historically, a stock has had difficulty falling. It is the level at which buyers tend to enter the stock. So it is the lowest assumed price for that stock. Once it reaches its price, buyers will rush to the stock, raising its price. The company wants to keep the stock price at acceptable levels, as it can be seen as the general view of the company's health. Also several employees/executives in the company have stock or stock options, so it is in their interest to keep their stock price up. A bond that goes down in value may indicate a believe the bond issuer (government in this case) won't honor the bond when it matures. As for bonds, there is a wealth of reading in this site: Can someone explain how government bonds work? Who sets the prices on government bonds?  Basic understanding of bonds, values, rates and yields


What are those maximums, and do all countries have them? Usury, lending money for any interest at all, used to be anti-biblical: it wasn't a Christian thing to do, and so in Christian countries it was Jews who did it (Jews who were money-lenders). Asking for interest on loans is still anti-Koranic: so Islamic banks don't lend money for interest. Instead of your getting a mortgage from the bank to buy a house, the bank will buy the house, which you then buy from bank on a rent-to-own basis. Further details:


Doesn't matter what the product is, whether it's a tangible good or a service, a business is still a business and must be run as thus. If you don't run a hospital properly, as a business that provides a service, then that hospital is soon to be threatened with closure or state take-over.


It's the gifter who is liable for gift tax, not the recipient. The recipient just needs to file a certain form for reporting purposes if the gift exceeds a certain amount.


My 0,02€ - I probably live in the same country as you. Stop worrying. The Euro zone has a 100.000€ guaranty deposit. So if any bank should fail, that's the amount you'll receive back. This applies to all bank accounts and deposits. Not to any investments. You should not have more than 100.000€ in any bank. So, lucky you, if you have more than that money, divide between a number of banks. As for the Euro, there might be an inflation, but at this moment the USA and China are in a currency battle that 'benefits' the Euro. Meaning you should not invest in dollars or yuan at this time. Look for undervalued currency to invest in as they should rise against the Euro.


> Operations includes dividends and interest from investing  The graph included dividends as operations income.  I hope there is a written story that justifies this nonsense, because Buffet has long praised the dividend paying stock.  It is an investment strategy.


The U.S. bankruptcy laws no longer make it simple to discharge credit card debt, so you can't simply run up a massive tab on credit cards and then just walk away from them anymore.  That used to be the case, but that particular loophole no longer exists the way it once did. Further, you could face fraud charges if it can be proven you acted deliberately with the intent to commit fraud.   Finally, you won't be able to rack up a ton of new cards as quickly as you might think, so your ability to amass enough to make your plan worth the risk is not as great as you seem to believe. As a closing note, don't do it.  All you do is make it more expensive for the rest of us to carry credit cards.  After all, the banks aren't going to eat the losses.  They'll just pass them along in the form of higher fees and rates to the rest of us.


"The ""ideal world"" index fund of any asset class is a perfect percentage holding of all underlying assets with immediate rebalancing that aligns to every change in the index weighting while trading in a fully liquid market with zero transaction costs. One finance text book that describes this is Introduction to Finance: Markets, Investments, and Financial Management, see chapter 11.  Practically, the transaction costs and liquidity make this unworkable. There are several deviations between what the ""ideal world algorithm"" (""the algorithm"") says you should do and what is actually done. Each of these items addresses a real-world solution to various costs of managing a passive index fund. (And they are good solutions.) However, any deviation from the ideal index fund will have a risk. An investor evaluating their choices is left to pick the lowest fees with the least deviation from the ideal index fund. (It is customary to ignore whether the results are in excess or deficit to the ideal). So your formula is: This is also described in the above book."


"Don't worry about it.  The State doesn't care about rounding error.  All you need to do is say ""We charge our prices with tax included"" - you know, like carnivals and movie theaters.   Then follow the procedures your state specifies for computing reportable tax.  Quite likely it wants your pre-tax sales total for the reporting period. To get that, total up your gross sales that you collected, and divide by (1 + tax rate).  Just like DJClayworth says, except do it on total sales instead of per-item.  If you need to do the split per-transaction for Quickbooks or something, that's annoying.  What Quickbooks says will be pennies off the method I describe above.  The state don't care as long as it's just pennies, or in their favor."


Many brokers offer a selection of ETFs with no transaction costs. TD Ameritrade and Schwab both have good offerings. Going this route will maximize diversification while minimizing friction.


Get a lawyer.  If you're having legal issues - get a lawyer. If you're having contract issues - get a lawyer.


"If you are a telecommuter and in good terms with your employer, then all you need is contact your employer and explain your situation. Ask them for a short letter that indicates: ""1. they require you to work from a privately rented office (or from a home office for those who prefer working from home), 2. this is one of the terms of your employment, and, 3. they will not reimburse you for this expense."" With this letter in your hand, you satisify both the ""convenience of employer"" test AND the deduction of the rent for your private office as a unreimbursed employee expense.  The IRS cannot expect your employer to open an office branch in your city just for your sake, nor can they expect you to commute to your employer's city for work, which is an impossiblity considering the distance. Additionally, the IRS cannot ""force"" telecommuters to work from home. The key is to get a letter from your employer. You'd be surprised how easily they are willing to write such letter for you."


"This comment is too long to put in comments. Sorry. I suggest you also do a dry run of your taxes with the rental as part of it. When you rent a house, you take depreciation each year. This means that even if you are breaking even, the rent paying the mortgage, property tax, etc, you may still show a ""tax loss."" In which case, planning and knowing this, might suggest you adjust your withholding so instead of a large refund, you get better cash flow each month.  Also, pull a copy of Schedule E and the Instructions. You'll be wiser for having read them.  Last. If you have decent equity in the existing house, it may pay to refinance to save a bit there, or even pull some cash out. When you buy the new one, you want to be in the best position you can be, and not risk cutting it too close."


does it still count as a capital gain or loss? Yes. Is it essentially treated like you sold the stock at the price of the buy-out?  Yes. Do you still get a 1099-B from your broker? Yes.


"The responses here are excellent. I'd add just a couple points. Debt is not generic. It ranges from low (my HELOC is 2.5%) to insane (24% credit card, anyone?).  When I read about the obsession to be completely debt free, I ask questions. Are you saving in your 401(k) at least up to the match? I disagree with the ""debt is evil"" people who advise to ignore retirement savings while paying off every last debt. My company offers a dollar for dollar match on the first 5% of income deposited. So a $60K earner will see a $3000 deposit doubled. 5 years of this, and he has 1/2 a year's income in his retirement account, more with positive returns. (note - for those so fearful of losses, all 401(k) accounts have to offer a fixed income, low risk choice. currently 1% or less, but the opposite of ""I can lose it all"".) After that, paying off the higher debt is great. When it's time to hack away at student debt and mortgage, I am concerned that if it's at the risk of having no savings, I'd hold off. Consider - Two people in homes worth $250K. One has a mortgage of $250K and $100K in the bank. The other has his mortgage paid down to $150K.  When they lose their jobs, the guy with the $100K in the bank has the funds to float himself through a period of unemployment as well as a house the bank is less likely to foreclose on. The guy with no money is in deep trouble, and the bank can sell his house for $150K and run away (after proper foreclosure proceedings of course.) My mortgage is one bill, like any other, and only a bit more than my property tax. I don't lose sleep over it. It will be paid before I retire, and before my 11yr old is off to college. I don't think you stupid for paying your low interest debt at your own pace."


This question came up again (Living in Florida working remotely - NY employer withholds NYS taxes - Correct or Incorrect?) and the poster on the new version didn't find the existing answers to be adequate, so I'm adding a new answer.   NYS will tax this income if the arrangement is for the convenience of the employee. If the arrangement is necessary to complete the work, then you should have no NYS tax. New York state taxes all New York-source salary and wage income of nonresident employees when the arrangement is for convenience rather than by necessity (Laws of New York, § 601(e), 20 NYCRR 132.18). Source: http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2009/jun/20091371.html Similar text can also be found here: http://www.koscpa.com/newsletter-article/state-tax-consequences-telecommuting/ The NYS tax document governing this situation seems to be TSB-M-06(5)I. I looked at this page from NYS that was mentioned in the answer by @littleadv. That language does at first glance seem to lead to a different answer, but the ruling in the tax memo seems to say that if you're out of state only for your convenience then the services were performed in NYS for NYS tax purpose. From the memo: However, any allowance claimed for days worked outside New York State must be based upon the performance of services which of necessity, as distinguished from convenience, obligate the employee to out-of- state duties in the service of his employer.


There are some that are already under similar restrictions.  Highly comp-ed employees can only put a small portion of the traditional limit in their qualified plans.  Some may have very high incomes, that if limited to 18K, would be saving inadequately.   Others may have high incomes and not have a 401K.  What do they do? I see only two options: The reduction in the contribution limit would certainly improve the attractiveness of real estate as an investment.


There are several factors that can help you make a decision.  How friendly are the laws to tenants as opposed to landlords?  How easy will it be for you to collect rent?  How much management is needed?  Do you desire to own rental properties?  What does your schedule look like? Based upon pure numbers I would keep this property.  It looks like you can earn 3K per year, which you may have done some math wrong, on about a 15,000 per year investment.  About 20%, very good.  Even if you only collect half your profits due to maintenance or missed rent checks the numbers still look really good. If you don't need the extra funds, you can always pay more on the mortgage.  The other thing to consider is the rest of your fiances.  Can you cover a couple of months of missed rent?  Do you have an emergency fund?  Do you have other debts?


If you guys are so convinced this is only good for banks, why don't you just invest in banks?    Same thing with net neutrality. It screws the average guy but a smart investor can recoup money lost


If you know that your tax situation is not easily handled by the standard withholding table then you can use that line to ask for additional funds be withheld. You could also ask for less money to be withheld.   Why would somebody do this? They had a small side business that made them extra income, and wanted to withhold extra money from their full time job to cover the extra income. They might have been awarded a big bonus and it caused too much in taxes to be withheld so they wanted to not have as much taxes from their regular pay check. Given the fact that you are young, in your first real job, and almost the entire tax year ahead of you, it is likely that the standard tax tables will be close enough. So leave the line blank or put zero.


(I'm assuming the tag of United-states is accurate) Yes, the remaining amount is tax free -- at the current price.  If you sell at exactly the original price, there is no capital gain, no capital loss.  So you've already payed the taxes. If you sell and there is a capital gain of $3000, then you will pay taxes on the $3000.  If 33% is your marginal tax rate, and if you held the stock for less than a year, then you will keep $7000 and pay taxes of $1000.  Somehow, I doubt your marginal tax rate is 33%. If you hold the stock for a year after eTrade sold some for you to pay taxes, then you will pay 15% on the gain -- or $450. eTrade sold the shares to pay the taxes generated by the income.  Yes, those shares were considered income.  If you sell and have a loss, well, life sucks.  However, if you sell something else, you can use the loss to offset the other gain.  So if you sell stock A for a loss of $3000, and sell stock B at a gain of $4000, then you pay taxes on the net of $1000.


That makes no sense at all. They try to compare and that's exactly the same as comparing apples versus oranges. Mortgage is long-term loan, so for the first many years the huge part of the payment will go to repaying interest, so that ratio 1 will indeed be something like 20% or more despite the fact that the interest rate on the mortgage is much lower - something around 6%. HELOC will have the interest rate of 6%, but it will have the same structure so that you have equal payments, so if you compute that ratio 1 it will be very close to that of the mortgage. The bottom line is - if HELOCs were that great noone would apply for mortgages. You should stick to making extra payments towards the principal on the mortgage.


"Paying someone to look after your money always costs something - it doesn't matter whether you're inside a pension or not. Fees are highest for ""actively managed"" funds and lowest for passively managed funds or things where you choose the investments directly - but in the latter case you might pay out a lot in dealing fees. Typically pensions will have some small additional costs on top of that, but those are hugely outweighed by the tax advantages - payments into a pension are made from gross salary (subject to an annual limit), and growth inside the pension is tax free. You do pay income tax when you take the money out though - but by then your marginal tax rate may well have dropped. If you want to control your own investments within a pension you can do this, subject to choosing the right provider - you don't have to be invested in the stockmarket at all (my own pension isn't at the moment). I wrote an answer to another question a while ago which briefly summarises the options As far as an annuity goes, it's not as simple as the company taking the money you saved when you die. The point of an annuity is that you can't predict when you'll die. Simplifying massively, suppose the average life expectancy when you retire is 20 years and you have 100K saved, and ignore inflation and interest for now. Then on average you should have 5K/year available - but since you don't know when you'll die if you just spend your money at that rate you might run out after 20 years but still be alive needing money. Annuities provide a way of pooling that risk - in exchange for losing what's left if you die ""early"", you keep getting paid beyond what you put in if you die ""late"". Your suggestion of taking the dividends from an index tracker fund - or indeed the income from any other investment - is fine, but the income will be substantially less than an annuity bought with the same money because you won't be using up any capital, whereas an annuity implicitly does that. Depending on the type of investment, it might also be substantially more risky. Overall, you only need to secure the income you actually need/want to live on. Beyond that level, keeping your money outside the pension system makes some sense, though this might change with the new rules referred to in other answers that mean you don't have to buy an annuity if you have enough guaranteed income anyway. In any case, I strongly suggest you focus first on ensuring you have enough to live on in retirement before you worry about leaving an inheritance. As far as setting up a trust goes, you might be able to do that, but it would be quite expensive and the government tends to view trusts as tax avoidance schemes so you may well fall foul of future changes in the rules."


Myself I am in a similar position. I've had a few good conversations about this with people in the financial services industry.  It all depends how much time you want to spend on yielding your profits and how much risk you would like to take. High time and high risk obviously means higher expected gain, but also has a high chance of creating a loss. Option 1: You could buy a home now and take out a mortgage with a high down payment (thus lower interest rates) and rent it out. By the time you are ready to have your own house, you can decide to either take out a mortgage on your second house and make money off your first house, and keep renting it out. Or you could move in there yourself.  If you use an asset-back mortgage (i'm not sure if that is the term, but a mortgage where in the worst case you give your home back to the bank), you generally carry least risk. If you keep doing this you can have 2 houses paid off if everything goes well. Option 2:  You could also invest in stocks. This all depends on the risk you want to take and the time you want to put in it.  Option 3:  You could also put the money in a savings account. Some banks will give you better interest rates if you lock the money for a set amount of years.  Option 4:  You could buy a foreclosure and try to flip it, though this is very risky and requires a lot of time. Also, it is important to also have some sort of emergency fund, so whatever you do, don't spend all your money.  Save some for a rainy day :-) Hope it helps..


"As proposed: Buy 100 oz of gold at $1240 spot = -$124,000 Sell 1 Aug 2014 Future for $1256 = $125,600 Profit $1,600 Alternative Risk-Free Investment: 1 year CD @ 1% would earn $1240 on $124,000 investment. Rate from ads on www.bankrate.com ""Real"" Profit All you are really being paid for this trade is the difference between the  profit $1,600 and the opportunity for $1240 in risk free earnings.  That's only $360 or around 0.3%/year.   Pitfalls of trying to do this: Many retail futures brokers are set up for speculative traders and do not want to deal with customers selling contracts against delivery, or buying for delivery. If you are a trader you have to keep margin money on deposit.  This can be a T-note at some brokerages, but currently T-notes pay almost 0%.   If the price of gold rises and you are short a future in gold, then you need to deposit more margin money.  If gold went back up to $1500/oz, that could be $24,400.  If you need to borrow this money, the interest will eat into a very slim profit margin over the risk free rate.   Since you can't deliver, the trades have to be reversed.  Although futures trades have cheap commissions ~$5/trade, the bid/ask spread, even at 1 grid, is not so minimal.  Also there is often noisy jitter in the price.  The spot market in physical gold may have a higher bid/ask spread. You might be able to eliminate some of these issues by trading as a hedger or for delivery.  Good luck finding a broker to let you do this... but the issue here for gold is that you'd need to trade in depository receipts for gold that is acceptable for delivery, instead of trading physical gold.  To deliver physical gold it would likely have to be tested and certified, which costs money. By the time you've researched this, you'll either discover some more costs associated with it or could have spent your time making more money elsewhere."


A second mortgage is a loan taken out on your house while you still have another mortgage secured by your house. They are a secured loan as they use the borrower’s home as security. Some advantages of Second Mortgages: Some important points to consider when you take a second mortgage If you stop making payments, your lender will be able to take your home through foreclosure, which can cause serious problems for you and your family. Second mortgages can be expensive. You’ll need to pay numerous costs for things like credit checks, appraisals, origination fees, and more. The mortgage rates are typically lower than credit card interest rates, but they’re often slightly higher than your first loan’s rate.


If the price has gone up from what it was when the person bought, he may sell to collect his profit and spend the money. If someone intends to keep his money in the market, the trick is that you don't know when the price of a given stock will peak. If you could tell the future, sure, you'd buy when the stock was at its lowest point, just before it started up, and then sell at the highest point, just before it started down. But no one knows for sure what those points are. If a stockholder really KNOWS that demand is increasing and the price WILL go up, sure, it would be foolish to sell. But you can never KNOW that. (Or if you have some way that you do know that, please call me and share your knowledge.)


I've talked to several very experienced accountants that deal with startup shares, stock 83(b)'s, etc. weekly (based in SF, CA) as this issue would have had a massive impact on me.  The most important part of filing an 83(b) is notifying the IRS within 30 days. The law requires the written notification within the 30 day window. Adding it to that years tax return is an IRS procedure. Forgetting to include a copy of that years tax return is apparently a common occurrence when no tax was owed (0 spread, you actually paid the FMV). And the accepted method to resolve this is to simply file a blank amendment for that years return and include the copy of the 83(b) election.


"An endowment is a large chunk of capital (i.e. money) held by  a university or other nonprofit.  It is meant to hold its value forever against inflation, and invested to generate income: from interest, dividends and appreciation.   They seem like a contradiction: closely scrutinized by Boards of Directors, managed to a high and accountable standard, closely regulated -- and yet, invested aggressively for growth: ignoring short-term volatility to get the highest growth long-term.  The law, UPMIFA (P for Prudent), requires growth investment, and says taking up to 7% of current value per year is prudent, even in down times when total value is shrinking.  On average, this lets the endowment grow with inflation.  7% is the high end of ""prudent"".  An endowment is watched, and the taken income is adjusted to keep the endowment healthy. 5% is very safe, assuming the endowment must pace inflation until the heat death of the universe. If you plan to die someday, drawing an extra 1-2% is appropriate.  There you go.  Invest like a university endowment, and count on up to 7% per year of income.  That's $21,000 a year. There'll be taxes, but the long-term capital gain rate at $21,000/year is pretty low.  That's pretty tight, but possible if your idea of entertaining is Netflix.  It would work very effectively for #VanLife, or the British version, living on a Narrowboat."


There is no rule of thumb (although some may suggest there is). Everybody will have different goals, investment preferences and risk tolerances. You need to figure this out by yourself by either education yourself in the type of investments you are interested in or by engaging (and paying for) a financial advisor. You should not be taking advice from others unless it is specifically geared for your goals, investment DNA and risk tolerance. The only advice I would give you is to have a plan (whether you develop it yourself or pay a financial advisor to develop one). Also, don't have all your savings sitting in cash, as long-term you will fall behind the eight ball in real returns (allowing for inflation).


Margin accounts do not have the problem you are imagining, which is unique to cash accounts


~~Dividends~~  edit:  Sorry; misunderstood your question.  Subsidiary losses. If NI is -$1000 and you own 80%, then your adjustment for year 20XX is $-200. If the accumulated minority interest is <$200, the end balance of non-controlling interest at 20XX+1 would be negative.   I can also imagine a scenario due to negative value of the sub's net identifiable assets using partial goodwill method.


"For 3X, it's about 114, and for 4X, 144, which naturally, is twice 72.  These are close, back of napkin, results. With smart phone apps offering scientific calculators, you should get comfortable just taking the nth root of a number for a more precise answer.  Update in response to Brick's comment. The rule of 72 says that (n)(y)=72 to double your money. It answers both questions, how much time do I need, given a rate, and how much return do I need, given a time?  Logic tells me that if 72 is the number to double, 144 is the 4X. But I'm a math guy, and my logic might not be logical to OP. So -  Let's take the 20th root of 4.   This is the key to use. 4, (hit key) 20, equals. The result is 1.07177 or 7.177%. And this is the precise rate you'd need to quadruple your money in 20 years) Now (n)(y)= 20* 7.177 = 143.55 which rounds to 144. ""Rule of 144"" to quadruple your money.  This now answers OP's question, ""How to derive a Rule of X"" for a return other than doubling.  One more example? I want 10X my money. Of course I need the initial guess to enter one calculation. People like 8%, in general. It's a bit below the 10% long term S&P return, and a good round number. The Rule of 72 says 9 years to double, so, 18 years is 4X, and 36 years is 8X. For my initial calculation, I'll use 40 years. The 40th root of 10. I get 5.925% (Again the precise rate that gives 10 fold over 40 years) and multiplying this by 40, I get a ""Rule of 237"" which I'm tempted to round to 240.  At 6%, 237/6= 39.5 yrs,  1.06^39.5 = 9.99 At 6%, 240/6= 40.0 yrs,  1.06^40.0 = 10.29 You can see that you lose some accuracy for the sake of a number that's easier to remember, and manipulate. 72 to double is pretty darn accurate, so I'll stick with ""Rule of 237"" to get 10X my money.   To close, the purpose of these rules is to create the tool that lets you perform some otherwise tough calculations away from any electronic device. Of course I know how to use logs, and in real life I'm paid to explain them to students who are typically glad when that chapter is over. I've shown above how the ""Rule of X"" can be formulated with a power/root key, which, for most people, is simpler. Ironically, log calculations as @jkuz offered, force a continuous compounding which may not be desired at all. It would give a result of 230 for my 10X return example, and the following (using the first equation he offered) - At 6%, 230/6= 38.3 yrs,  1.06^38.3 = 9.31 which is further away from the desired 10X than my 237 or rounded 240."


"Okay, yes! That would seem to make sense. So something like a Dupire local vol model.   In the context of term structure modelling, you can also incorporate a volatility surface into the pricing of European and even exotic options (e.g. through a SABR or an LMM-SABR for exotics), which I suppose means by your criteria there are actually varying degree of ""arbitrage free-ness"" when it comes to picking a model. By that I mean there are varying degrees of what your model takes as ""given"". If it takes the market price of risk as given, it's an equilibrium model. If it takes the observed term structure as given, it's an arbitrage free model. If it takes the volatility structure as given, it's something else.  Nawalkha, Beliaeva and Soto wrote a paper called ""A New Taxonomy of the Dynamic Term Structure Models"" in the Journal of Investment Management that basically coincides with what we're saying.  So yes, it sounds right to me."


how is it double taxation when you didn't start off with that extra $100?  it's double taxation if they taxed you on the total amount you pulled out of the market, not the profit you made.   explain the math on your last part, please.


Incredible article, tons of data. Thank you!   It does answer the above posters question if you're willing to read through. It provides data with and without 'revolving debt'.  Side note; interesting to see how age and income trend. Debt increasing during the family-middle aged years, and during the peak income earning years.  I'd say you want these credit card debt lower overall and on average; but with the distribution it may be sustainable.


I have had this happen a couple of times because of splits or sales of portions of the company.  The general timeline was to announce how the split was to be handled; then the split; then a freeze in purchasing stock in the other company; then a freeze in sales; followed by a short blackout period; then the final transfers to funds/options/cash based on a mapping announced at the start of the process. You need to answer two questions: To determine if the final transactions will make the market move you have to understand how many shares are involved compared to the typical daily volume. There are two caveats: professional investors will be aware of the transaction date and can either ignore the employee transactions or try and take advantage of them; There may also be a mirroring set of transactions if the people left in the old company were awarded shares in your company as part of the sale. If you are happy with the default mapping then you can do nothing, and let the transaction happen based on the announced timeline. It is easy, and you don't have to worry about deadlines. If you don't like the default mapping then you need to know when the blackout period starts, so you don't end up not being able to perform the steps you want when you want.  Timing is up to you. If the market doesn't like the acquisition/split it make make sense to make the move now, or wait until the last possible day depending on which part they don't like. Only you can answer that question.


There are ways to avoid having federal income taxes withheld:  In order to avoid withholding altogether, you’ll have to fall into   both of the following categories: you have no tax liability this year   and you had no tax liability in the previous tax season, so all of the   federal income tax you paid was given back to you. Generally, you can   say you have no tax liability when you’re not required to file an   income tax return or you owe zero taxes. You may also be able to claim   an exemption if your earned income for the year is extremely low   ($1,050 or less). If those conditions apply to you, you can write “exempt” in line 7.   Keep in mind that the exemption only eliminates your federal income   taxes, not your Medicare or Social Security. If your parents use an accountant to prepare their taxes, I'm sure he/she would be able to give you a solid answer on how to fill it out.


In the first case, if you wish to own the stock, you just exercise the option, and buy it for the strike price. Else, you can sell the option just before expiration, it will be priced very close to its in-the-money value.


The commission is per trade, there is likely a different commission based on the type of security you're trading, stock, options, bonds, over the internet, on the phone, etc.  It's not likely that they charge an account maintenance fee, but without knowing what kind of account you have it's hard to say. What you may be referring to is a fund expense ratio.  Most (all...) mutual funds and exchange traded funds will charge some sort of expense costs to you, this is usually expressed as a percent of your holdings.  An index fund like Vanguard's S&P 500 index, ticker VOO, has a small 0.05% expense ratio. Most brokers will have a set of funds that you can trade with no commission, though there will still be an expense fee charged by the fund. Read over the E*Trade fee schedule carefully.


"They aren't actually. It appears to be a low interest rate, but it doesn't cover their true cost of capital. It is a sales tactic where they are raising the sticker price/principal of the car, which is subsidizing the true cost of the loan, likely 4% or higher. It would be hard to believe that the true cost of a car loan would be less than for a mortgage, as with a mortgage the bank can reclaim an asset that tends to rise in value, compared to a used car, which will have fallen in value. This is one reason why you can generally get a better price with cash, because there is a margin built in, in addition to the fact that with cash they get all their profit today versus a discount of future cash flows from a loan by dealing with a bank or other lending company. So if you could see the entire transaction from the ""inside"", the car company would not actually be making money. The government rate is also so low that it often barely covers inflation, much less operating costs and profit. This is why any time you see ""0% Financing!"", it is generally a sales tactic designed to get your attention. A company cannot actually acquire capital at 0% to lend to you at 0%, because even if the nominal interest rate were 0%, there is an opportunity cost, as you have observed. A portion of the sticker price is covering the real cost, and subsidizing the monthly payment."


"There are two ways that mortgages are sold: The loan is collateralized and sold to investors. This allows the bank to free up money for more loans. Of course sometime the loan may be treated like in the game of hot potato nobody want s to be holding a shaky loan when it goes into default. The second way that a loan is sold is through the servicing of the loan. This is the company or bank that collects your monthly payments, and handles the disbursement of escrow funds. Some banks lenders never sell servicing, others never do the servicing themselves. Once the servicing is sold the first time there is no telling how many times it will be sold.  The servicing of the loan is separate from the collateralization of the loan. When you applied for the loan you should have been given a Servicing Disclosure Statement Servicing Disclosure Statement. RESPA requires the lender or mortgage   broker to tell you in writing, when you apply for a loan or within the   next three business days, whether it expects that someone else will be   servicing your loan (collecting your payments). The language is set by the US government: [We may assign, sell, or transfer the servicing of your loan while the   loan is outstanding.] [or] [We do not service mortgage loans of the   type for which you applied. We intend to assign, sell, or transfer the   servicing of your mortgage loan before the first payment is due.] [or]   [The loan for which you have applied will be serviced at this   financial institution and we do not intend to sell, transfer, or   assign the servicing of the loan.] [INSTRUCTIONS TO PREPARER: Insert   the date and select the appropriate language under ""Servicing Transfer   Information."" The model format may be annotated with further   information that clarifies or enhances the model language.]"


The IRS demands and expects to be paid tax on all taxable activity, including illegal activity.  If they expect drug dealers, hit men, and smugglers to pay tax, they expect you to pay tax on your basement apartment. The flip side of this is that the IRS keeps reported tax activities confidential.  They only share what is required (for example, your taxable income with your state).  You can read the details in their disclosure laws.   Deductions will work just as they would if your apartment was perfectly legal.  In the eyes of the IRS, whether your income is legal or not is none of their business.  They care only about whether it is being taxed appropriately. They will not share any information with your zoning authority without a court order.


I have been working at a pest control company. I just know that working blue collar jobs is not for me and I should be going back to school. Finance interests me, and I also would like to make a comfortable living :)


Anybody that offers a bigger return than a deposit claiming 100% safe is a fraud.  There is always a risk: Yes, you can gain 30% in a year, but nobody can guarantee that you'll repeat that gain the next. My own experience (and I do take risks), one year I go up, the next year I go down...


The first issue is if the stock has returned 8% since you purchased it that could be either very good (8% in two days) or very bad (8% over 20 years).  Even just measured over the past year it could be relatively very good (up 8% and the market is down 5%) or very bad (up 8% and the market is up 16%). Either way, the good rule of thumb is that you shouldn't choose your positions using the returns of the stock in the past, but only on your view of the future returns of the stock.  For instance, if the stock has gone up 8% in two months, but you think it has another 8% to go in the next two months you probably shouldn't take your earnings. As for the $5k, at first glance that is not an unreasonable amount.  If you use a discount broker the fees shouldn't be so large that you will eat up any return on a $5k amount.  Also, from what you describe it is not such a large amount that mistakes will put your retirement in danger.


From an article I wrote a while back: “Dalbar Inc., a Boston-based financial services research firm, has been measuring the effects of investors’ decisions to buy, sell, and switch into and out of mutual funds since 1984. The key finding always has been that the average investor earns significantly less than the return reported by their funds. (For the 20 years ended Dec. 31, 2006, the average stock fund investor earned a paltry 4.3 average annual compounded return compared to 11.8 percent for the Standard & Poor’s 500 index.)” It's one thing to look at the indexes. But quite another to understand what other investors are actually getting. The propensity to sell low and buy high is proven by the data Dalbar publishes. And really makes the case to go after the magic S&P - 0.09% gotten from an ETF.


One of the simplest things is to lock your money e.g. put on time deposit which has some penalty when you broke them pre-maturily. Also create a portfolio in a site, this will spark interest on saving and investment.


I have heard of this, but then the broker is short the shares if they weren't selling them out of inventory, so they still want to accumulate the shares or a hedge before EOD most likely - In that case it may not be the client themselves, but that demand is hitting the market at some point if there isn't sufficient selling volume.    Whether or not the broker ends up getting all of them below VWAP is a cost of marketing for them, how they expect to reliably get real size below vwap is my question.


There are two things to consider: taxes - beneficial treatment for long-term holding, and for ESPP's you can get lower taxes on higher earnings. Also, depending on local laws, some share schemes allow one to avoid some or all on the income tax. For example, in the UK £2000 in shares is treated differently to 2000 in cash vesting - restricted stocks or options can only be sold/exercised years after being granted, as long as the employee keeps his part of the contract (usually - staying at the same place of works through the vesting period). This means job retention for the employees, that's why they don't really care if you exercise the same day or not, they care that you actually keep working until the day when you can exercise arrives. By then you'll get more grants you'll want to wait to vest, and so on. This would keep you at the same place of work for a long time because by quitting you'd be forfeiting the grants.


Hi u/Sagiv1,  Short answer: Yes, you do have to pay taxes in Israel for all your worldincome.  Long answer: All countries within the OCDE consider you as a fiscal resident in the country where you spend over half a year in (183 days and up). If you do not spend that much time in any country, there are other tying measures to avoid people not being fiscal residents in any country.  Since you are living in Israel, you will have to pay all your worlwide generated income in Israel, following the tax regulation that is in place there. I am no Isarely Tax Lawyer so I cannot help you there.  Having a lot of business internationally brings other headaches with it. Taking for example the U.S. there is a possibility that they withold taxes in their payments. It is unlikely, though, as they have a Tax Treaty to prevent double taxation. You can ask for this witholded money to be returned from the U.S. or other countries through each country's internal process.  Another thing to take into account is that you can be taxed in other countries for any revenue you generate in said country. This is especially relevant for revenue that comes from Real Estate. The country where the real estate is will tax you in the country and you will have to deduct these taxes paid in your country, Israel in this case. If there is no tax treaty you might possibly be paying twice.  I know you said you do promotion, but I have to warn you about this, because I ignore what other countries tax or do not tax. So been giving more info won't hurt.  If the US is the main and/or only country you will be doing business with, I strongly recommend you real the Tax treaty with lots of love and patience. You can find it here: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/israel.pdf or here:  Treaty:http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005118.pdf Amendment: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005120.pdf  If you are from Israel and prefer it in Hebrew, here are the treaties in your language:  Treaty: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005119.pdf Amendment: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005121.pdf   Normally most IRS Departments have sections with very uselful help on these sort of matters. I'd recomment you to take a look at yours.   Last, what I've explained is the normal process that applies almost all over the world. But each country has their own distinctions and you need to look carefully. Take what I said as a starting point and do your own research or ideally try to find a tax consultant/lawyer who helps you.  Best of luck.


I think our definition of investor is different. I don't typically think of the pre school teacher who pays into union pension is an investor, but they technically are. Which is where this disagreement stems from. Right, the person who doesn't know what the Dow and S&P are probably don't need to see statements periodically although can still invest with an advisor. So what develops trust other than track record? clients stay with him for a long time could be an answer. But why do they stay with them? B/c performance. Will a money manager who consistently loses money not get fired bc performance is a bad indicator? How do people determine good vs bad job other than based on their performance of that job?


"I don't look to Super or Pension, I am working on self funding. My method is work in Sydney and buy a house in Sydney (I bought 6 years ago). Let my property rise on this stupidly insane Sydney growth (my place has risen by 76% in the last 6 years and thats in a ""bad"" economic climate). Each time the equity hits a certain point get an investment property on an interest only home loan and rent it out. Build this portfolio up as much and as quickly as you can. Repeat over and over until I decide to retire. Sell up investment properties and buy NOT IN SYDNEY where it is much cheaper and move there, keep the main house I always lived in as by this time I will own it outright, rent it out for an income that will more than sustain me in my retirement. Although there is also merit in the idea of sell the one you lived in and use the money to pay of one of the investments, this way you avoid capital gains tax. This idea came to me last night :)"


To add to this, that risk is really only a problem if you don't have the cash flow to service the debt. If the surplus dips but your ultimately profitable on whatever trade you made, you're okay. If you default, you're not okay.  Volitility relative to loan term effectively.


The U.S. treasury sells Treasury Bonds directly to consumers at: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/


For ESPP, the discount that you get is taxed as ordinary income. Capital gains is taxed at the appropriate rate, which is different based on how long you hold it. So, yes, if the stock is going up,


"These warrants do not have a fixed expiration date, rather their expiration date is dependant upon the company completing an acquisition.  Thirty days after the acquisition is complete the warrants enter their exercise period.  The warrants can then be exercised at any time over the next five years.  After five years they expire. From the ""WARRANT AGREEMENT SOCIAL CAPITAL HEDOSOPHIA HOLDINGS CORP."": A Warrant may be exercised only during the period (the “Exercise Period”) (A) commencing on the later of: (i) the date that is thirty (30) days after the first date on which the Company completes a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, reorganization or similar business combination, involving the Company and one or more businesses (a “Business Combination”), and (ii) the date that is twelve (12) months from the date of the closing of the Offering, and (B) terminating at the earliest to occur of (x) 5:00 p.m., New York City time on the date that is five (5) years after the date on which the Company completes its initial Business Combination, (y) the liquidation of the Company in accordance with the Company’s amended and restated memorandum and articles of association, as amended from time to time, if the Company fails to complete a Business Combination, and (z) 5:00 p.m., New York City time on, other than with respect to the Private Placement Warrants, the Redemption Date (as defined below) as provided in Section 6.2 hereof (the “Expiration Date”); provided, however, that the exercise of any Warrant shall be subject to the satisfaction of any applicable conditions, as set forth in subsection 3.3.2 below, with respect to an effective registration statement Source : lawinsder.com"


"Years ago I wrote an article Risk, Reward, Coin Flipping which explains from a 'game theory' perspective how diversifying works to minimize standard deviation in one's returns.  It's long and tedious, not easy to summarize, but it holds up well, I'm pleased with how the analogy does its job.  Update - the above is too ""link-only"", written over 5 years ago. The article I wrote offers a mathematical approach via an understandable example of coin flipping. With just 2 options, a 'head' is a 10% loss, while a 'tail' is a 30% gain. This actually represents the market fairly well as it results in a 10% average gain and 28% standard deviation for just 2 flips. The article shows how by 'diversifying', choosing to make multiple smaller bets, the average 10% stays the same, but the standard deviation is brought down dramatically, 7.6% when we use a sample experiment with 7 coins."


http://www.scottrade.com/online-brokerage/interest-margin-rates.html  Rates fluctuate based upon the federal funds rate.


The sale of shares on vesting convolutes matters. In a way similar to how reinvested dividends are taxed but the newly purchased fund shares' basis has to be increased, you need to be sure to have the correct per share cost basis. It's easy to confuse the total RSU purchase with the correct numbers, only what remained.  The vesting stock is a taxable event, ordinary income.  You then own the stock at that cost basis. A sale after that is long or short term and the profit is the to extent it exceeds that basis.  The fact that you got these shares in 2013 means you should have paid the tax then. And this is part two of the process. Of course the partial sale means a bit of math to calculate the basis of what remained.


"Congrats on the upcoming wedding! Here is the official answer to this question, from the IRS. They note that you can choose to treat your spouse as a US resident for tax purposes and file jointly if you want to, by attaching a certain declaration to your tax return.  Though I'm not a tax expert, if your partner has significant income it seems like this might increase your taxes due. You can also apply for an SSN (used for tax filings, joint or separate return) at a social security office or US consulate, by form SS-5, or file form W-7 with the IRS to get a Taxpayer Identification Number which is just as useful for this purpose.   Without that, you can write ""Non Resident Alien"" (or ""NRA"") in the box for your partner's SSN, and mail in a paper return like that.  See IRS Publication 17 page 22 (discussions on TurboTax here, here, etc.)."


You will pay taxes in both states!!! Where you bought the ticket as soon as you claim it.  and your residence state at the end of the year! Its called state Income Tax.


"At one point in my life I sold cars and from what I saw, three things stick out.  Unless the other dealership was in the same network, eg ABC Ford of City A, and ABC Ford of City B, they never had possession of that truck. So, no REAL application for a loan could be sent in to a bank, just a letter of intent, if one was sent at all. With a letter of intent, a soft pull is done, most likely by the dealership, where they then attached that score to the LOI that the bank has an automated program send back an automatic decline, an officer review reply, or a tentative approval (eg tier 0,1,2...8). The tentative approval is just that, Tentative. Sometime after a lender has a loan officer look at the full application, something prompts them to change their offer. They have internal guidelines, but lets say an app is right at the line for 2-3 of the things they look at, they chose to lower the credit tier or decline the app. The dealership then goes back and looks at what other offers they had. Let's say they had a Chase offer at 3.25% and a CapOne for 5.25% they would say you're approved at 3.5%, they make their money on the .25%. But after Chase looks into the app and sees that, let's say you have been on the job for actually 11 months and not 1 year, and you said you made $50,000, but your 1040 shows $48,200, and you have moved 6 times in the last 5 years. They comeback and say no he is not a tier 2 but a tier 3 @ 5.5%. They switch to CapOne and say your rate has in fact gone up to 5.5%. Ultimately you never had a loan to start with - only a letter of intent. The other thing could be that the dealership finance manager looked at your credit score and guessed they would offer 3.5%, when they sent in the LOI it came back higher than he thought. Or he was BSing you, so if you price shopped while they looked for a truck you wouldn't get far. They didn't find that Truck, or it was not what they thought it would be. If a dealership sees a truck in inventory at another dealer they call and ask if it's available, if they have it, and it's not being used as a demo for a sales manager, they agree to send them something else for the trade, a car, or truck or whatever. A transfer driver of some sort hops in that trade, drives the 30 minutes - 6 hours away and comes back so you can sign the Real Application, TODAY! while you're excited about your new truck and willing to do whatever you need to do to get it. Because they said it would take 2-5 days to ""Ship"" it tells me it wasn't available. Time Kills Deals, and dealerships know this: they want to sign you TODAY! Some dealerships want ""honest"" money or a deposit to go get the truck, but reality is that that is a trick to test you to make sure you are going to follow through after they spend the gas and add mileage to a car. But if it takes 2 days+, The truck isn't out there, or the dealer doesn't have a vehicle the other dealership wants back, or no other dealership likes dealing with them. The only way it would take that long is if you were looking for something very rare, an odd color in an unusual configuration.  Like a top end model in a low selling color, or configuration you had to have that wouldn't sell well - like you wanted all the options on a car except a cigarette lighter, you get the idea. 99.99% of the time a good enough truck is available. Deposits are BS. They don't setup any kind of real contract, notice most of the time they want a check. Because holding on to a check is about as binding as making you wear a chicken suit to get a rebate. All it is, is a test to see if you will go through with signing the deal. As an example of why you don't let time pass on a car deal is shown in this. One time we had a couple want us to find a Cadillac Escalade Hybrid in red with every available option. Total cost was about $85-90k. Only two new Red Escalade hybrids were for sale in the country at the time, one was in New York, and the other was in San Fransisco, and our dealership is in Texas, and neither was wanting to trade with us, so we ended up having to buy the SUV from one of the other dealerships inventory. That is a very rare thing to do by the way. We took a 25% down payment, around $20,000, in a check. We flew a driver to wherever the SUV was and then drove it back to Texas about 4 days later. The couple came back and hated the color, they would not take the SUV. The General Manager was pissed, he spent around $1000 just to bring the thing to Texas, not to mention he had to buy the thing. The couple walked and there was nothing the sales manager, GM, or salesman could do. We had not been able to deliver the car, and ultimately the dealership ate the loss, but it shows that deposits are useless. You can't sell something you don't own, and dealerships know it.  Long story short, you can't claim a damage you never experienced. Not having something happen that you wanted to have happen is not a damage because you can't show a real economic loss. One other thing, When you sign the paperwork that you thought was an application, it was an authorization for them to pull your credit and the fine print at the bottom is boiler plate defense against getting sued for everything imaginable. Ours took up about half of one page and all of the back of the second page. I know dealing with car dealerships is hard, working at them is just as hard, and I'm sorry that you had to deal with it, however the simplest and smoothest car deals are the ones where you pay full price."


When I invest in a business valued at $50,000, I pay $25,000 and receive 50% equity. Does that $25,000 go to the current owner of the business, or into the capital of the business itself?  Who receives the money depends on who is selling you the equity.  There are a couple of different scenarios that can fit your question. You could buy existing shares from the current owner(s) of the company.  In this case, the current owner(s) would be receiving the funds from you, and in return giving you their stake in the company.  So if you all agree that the value of the business is $50,000, and you give $25,000 to the current owner(s), they give you half of their shares.  The value of the company has not changed. The company could be issuing new shares.  This is called stock dilution, or an increase in authorized share capital.  Let's say that everyone agrees that the value of the business is $50,000.  The company could create new shares and sell them to you for $25,000.  In this case, the value of the company has jumped to $75,000; you now control one-third of the company, and the existing owner(s), who previously owned 100% of the company, now only own two-thirds.  In order for you to end up with 50% of the company in this case, you would have to invest $50,000 instead, which would result in the company being valued at $100,000.   If you are wondering why the current owners would agree to this second scenario, there are two questions that address this:


"Others have pointed out that the entities loaning money to the government are typically people and institutions.  Recently, however, the US federal government borrowings were largely funded by money printed by the Federal Reserve.  The government had to borrow $1.1 trillion from October, 2010 through June, 2011.  During this period the FED printed around $0.8 trillion new dollars to purchase US debt.  Thus, the US government was not borrowing money from people, it was being funded by money printing.  The central bankers call this ""quantitative easing""."


"Close... Warning, I may be off a bit here; I'm sure someone will correct me if so. Traditional 401k or IRA: money goes in pre-tax (so, yes, you avoid paying tax on it now), grows untaxed, taxes are due when you retire and start taking money back out of the account -- but your income, including these withdrawals, is likely to be lower than your peak earning years so your tax rate will be lower. You don't avoid all the tax, but you delay it and hopefully reduce it, and by doing so there's more money in your account earning returns. Roth 401k or IRA: money goes in after taxes (you do pay income tax now). However, all returns on the money are untaxed (I believe), and you pay no tax when you're eligible to withdraw the funds.  Either or both kinds of 401k may be eligible for some percentage of matching funds from your employer (there are some incentives for them to offer this benefit). I believe that even if you're doing a Roth 401k, the matching funds legally have to go in as traditional plan. And yes, as that implies, it is possible to split your contribution between the two styles. Note: the matching funds are ""free money."" If your plan offers a match, it is highly recommended that you contribute enough to your 401k to capture the maximum match."


I get Goldman allowing a yacht as collateral, at that size it's basically real estate. But an Andy Warhol? Fine art prices are so subjective and manipulated, it seems ridiculous to think that a company would allow it as collateral against a loan.


You're conflating the amount of money the American economy makes with the amount of debt the American *government* accrues. The deficit is not 2.3% of tax receipts.  Really, your story is about somebody who makes $29,000, has their parent's co-signed on a mortgage for $170,000, and spent $38,000 last year. They just put the extra $9 on their parents' credit card and ignored all the times their parents have tried to sit down and talk about their spending habits over the years.  The total *American* debt is $60 trillion, which is 350% of GDP.


One way to look at a butterfly is to break it into two trades. A butterfly is actually made up of two verticals... One is a debit vertical: buy 490 put and sell the 460 put.  The other is a credit vertical: sell a 460 put and buy a 430 put.  If someone believes Apple will fall to 460, that person could do a few things. There are other strategies but this just compares the three common ones: 1) Buy a put. This is expensive and if the stock only goes to 460 you overpay for it. 2) Buy a put vertical. This is less expensive because you offset the price of your put. 3) Buy a butterfly. This is cheapest of the three because you have the vertical in #2 as well as a credit vertical on top of that to offset your cost.  The reason why someone would use the butterfly is to pay less upfront while capitalizing on a fall to 460. Of the three, this would be the better strategy to use if that happens. But REMEMBER that this only applies if the trader is right and it goes to 460. There is always a trade off for every strategy that the trader must be aware of. If the trader is wrong, and Apple goes to say 400, the put (#1) would make the most money and the butterfly(#3) would lose money while the vertical (#2) would still gain. So that is what you're sacrificing to get the benefits of the butterfly. Also helps to draw a diagram to compare the strategies.


"In the United States, the Fair Credit Reporting Act allows companies to buy your credit information for ""legitimate business needs."" The legitimate use of credit scores and credit reporting varies state to state, but like it or not, you can expect a lot more non-lending use of your credit information in the future. Companies and individuals use credit reports as an assessment of general behavior because, unfortunately, they work. You've seen the disclaimers about ""past performance…"", but unfortunately in this case… past performance really has been shown to be a pretty reliable indicator of future behavior. So…"


401k contributions are exempt from employee and employer FICA withholding.  The employer withholding is approximately 7% of the gross.  The closer the employer match ratio is to 7%, the closer it is to paying for itself.  Example: Assuming an employee is match-maximizing and in very round numbers grosses 100,000 per year.  A 50% match schedule is about $350 cheaper per employee than a 100% match schedule: Default non participant: The employee will see about 7000 deducted for FICA, and the employer will pay 7000 to FICA if they don't participate.   First case: the match is 100%, 1-for-1 to a 5% cap, the employee will deduct 5000, and have 6650 withheld for FICA.  The employer will pay 6650 to FICA.  The total employer cost of withholding and match is 11,650.   Second case: If the match is 50%, 1-for-2 to a 5% cap, the employee will deduct 10000, and have 6300 withheld for FICA.  The employer will pay 6300 to FICA.  The total employer cost of withholding and match is 11,300.


"Just like all employee benefits there is a focus on removing or limiting owners of businesses' ability to abuse tax preferences under the guise of an employee benefit. As you point out there is an overall plan maximum 401(k) for employer contributions and match contributions.  There is a nondiscrimination test for FSA programs (there is also a nondiscrimination test for medical plans under sections 125 and 105(h)).  Employer contributions are counted toward the total of HSA contributions.   Why an HSA has a different maximum arrangement than 401(k) is anyone's guess.  But the purpose of the limit is to prevent owners of companies from setting up plans that do little more than funnel tax free funds to themselves.  An owner/employee could pay themselves a wage, contribute the maximum, then have the ""employer"" also match the maximum, so there are limits in place."


One way that is common is to show the value over time of an initial investment, say $10,000.  The advantage of this is that it doesn't show stock price at all, so handles splits well.  It can also take into account dividend reinvestment.  Fidelity uses this for their mutual funds, as can be seen here.  Another option would be to compute the stock price as if the split didn't happen.  So if a stock does a 2:1 split, you show double the actual price starting at that point.


I have asked myself this exact same question many times. The analysis would be simple if you invested all your money in a single day, but I did not and therefore I would need to convert your cash transactions into Index fund buys/sells. I got tired of trying to do this using Yahoo's data and excel so I built a website in my spare time. I humbly suggest you try my website out in the hopes that it helps you perform this computation: http://www.amibeatingthemarket.com/


Reddit doesn't have a ton of resources to offer you as you learn about where to invest, you want to start reading up on actual investing sites.  You might start with Motley Fool, StockTwits, Seeking Alpha, Marketwatch, etc.     I agree with hipster's take, if all countries are going to keep printing money and expanding their debts and craziness, gold has a bright future.    Land, petroleum, commodities, and precious metals have an intrinsic worth that will still be there regardless of what currencies are doing,  versus bonds which are merely promises to pay, which will be paid off in devalued money, or stocks which are just promises of future earnings.     Think about spreading your risk in a few different places, one chunk here, one chunk there.   Some people in the US now are big on dividend paying stocks in lieu of bonds which only pay a percent, which is negative return after inflation.    Some people buy 'royalty trust' units, which throw off income from oil leases as dividends.   You might want to park a portion in a different currency, but dollar funds aren't going to pay interest and Switzerland plans to keep devaluing its currency as people keep bidding the price up.   I don't know if you are allowed to buy CEF, a bullion-backed fund out of Canada in your country, but that's one way to own gold & silver.  But with the instability out there, you might prefer a bit of the real thing stashed in a safe place.  Or if you have a bit of family land, maybe just be sure you can pay the taxes to keep it; or pursue any other way to own 'real stuff' that will still be worth something after all hell breaks loose.


First of all an IRA is a type of account that says nothing about how your money is invested. It seems like you are trying to compare an IRA with a market ETF  (like Vanguard Total Market Admiral VTSAX), but the reality is that you can have both. Depending on your IRA some of the investment options may be limited, but you will probably be able to find some version of a passive fund following an index you are interested in. The IRA account is tax advantaged, but you may invest the money in your IRA in an ETF.  As for how often a non-IRA account is taxed and how much, that depends on how often you sell. If you park your money in an ETF and do not sell, the IRS will not claim any taxes from it. The taxable event happens when you sell. But if you gain $1000 in a year and a day and you decide to sell, you will owe $150 (assuming 15% capital gains tax), bringing your earnings down to $850. If your investments go poorly and you lose money, there will be no capital gains tax to pay.


You should consult a US CPA to ensure your situation is handled correctly.  It appears, the money is Israel source income and not US source income regardless if you receive it while living in the U.S. If you file the correct form, I suspect the form is 1040NR and your state form to disclose your income, if any, in 2015 and 2016, it should not be a problem. Having said that, if you do earn any type of income while in the U.S. , you are required to disclose it to both the IRS and state.


I didn't say you can't do whatever you want, I say it's a waste to society.   You and your friends spend your entire lives trying to beat each other at an imaginary game and you take home billions of dollars.  That money comes from somewhere - namely all the other people who didn't make quite as much on each trade.    How do you not see this?


There has been a lot of research on the effects of stock splits. Some studies have concluded that: However note that (i) these are averages over large samples and does not say it will work on every split and (ii) most of the research is a bit dated and more recent papers have often struggled to find any significant performance impact after 1990, possibly because the effect has been well documented and the arbitrage no longer exists. This document summarises the existing research on the subject although it seems to miss some of the more recent papers. More practically, if you pay a commission per share, you will pay more commissions after the split than before. Bottom line: don't overthink it and focus on other criteria to decide when/whether to invest.


I'll add a little to the already great advice here. It certainly sounds like you are in need of consolidation here. Having 11 different cards vying for your attention sounds like a nightmare to manage. I also concur that it is a bad idea to cash out your retirement accounts to deal with this. I know it's frustrating to have the debt hanging over your head (I have student loans I'm personally working on) but getting a loan to consolidate that level of noise sounds like a much smarter move that can help greatly if you have high interest cards (most likely the case here). Since you mentioned that you are not interested in selling the house, have you considered a home equity loan to consolidate this? Best of luck to you.


"A good measurement would be to compare to index's. Basically a good way to measure your self would be to ask ""If I put my money somewhere else how much better or worse would I have done?"" Mutual funds and Hedge funds use the SP500 as a bench mark. Some funds actually wave their fee if they do not outperform the SP or only take a fee on the portion that has outperformed the SP500. in today's economy i dont know how to expect such a return The economy is not a good benchmark on what to expect from the stock market. For example in 2009 by certain standards the economy was worse then today but in 2009 the market rallied a great deal so your returns should have reflected that. You can use the SP500 as a quick reference to compare your returns (this is also considered the ""standard"" for a quick comparison). The way you compare your performance is also dependent on how you invest your money. If you are outperforming the SP500 you are doing well. Many mutual funds DO NOT outperform the SP500. Edit Additional Info: Here is an article with more comprehensive information on how to gauge your performance. In the article is a link to a free tool from morning star. Use the Right Benchmark to Accurately Measure Investment Performance"


A Roth IRA is intended for retirement. Before age 59.5 (I think), you can only withdraw the amount you deposited without penalty. It's great you're saving in a Roth, but you shouldn't put savings in there that you will need before you reach sufficient age. And since it's long-term, you can invest in things you expect to grow over the long term, like equities. You should keep emergency funds either in federally insured, extremely liquid accounts (bank savings) or money market funds (which aren't insured, but are close enough to zero-risk). Yes, the interest rates are terrible right now. But anything else would potentially leave you with insufficient funds in the event of, you know, an emergency.


Its very silly of you to have house savings while you have these debts.  Your total (listed) debt is 1657, with a savings of 2000, and a tax refund of 985.   I'd be done with the Apple loan and CC tomorrow.  Does that accomplish the goal of making a significant difference in your debt?  Yes it does. This will leave you with 1328.  I'd keep 500 or so in an emergency fund, and put the rest to the car.  Although 828 will not help much with the car it would probably knock a month off.   Next work like crazy to pay off the car.  Get a second job or work overtime. Then save a emergency fund of 3 to 6 months of expenses as if you already owned the house.  I would tend to go on the high side as I suspect you are single. Only then does it makes sense to save for a down payment.   Although it is an American institution, the book The Millionaire Next Door might be helpful for you.  Your most powerful wealth building tool is your income.  When one handicaps that tool with payments and exorbitant lifestyle choices you greatly reduce your ability to become wealthy. These amounts are so small, you should just knock them out.


>Could you have transfered millions of dollars worth of tulips around the world in minutes, securely and for pennies on the dollar?   The only reason that is more complicated with dollars has to do with our underlying financial infrastructure. It has little to do with any real technological problems.  >Authorities don't get say whether Bitcoin is *allowed* to exist or not.  Why not? Criminal court cases have already found Bitcoin as something akin to a commodity. There is no reason someone in government can't regulate or outright ban it the way China did. And as the head of a major bank Dimon is in an excellent position to manipulate the value of Bitcoin and destroy it if he chose to do so.   >Why would Bitcoin be better for *only* those things?  Bitcoin has not done anything other than be a commodity people purchase as an investment. It's ballooned too high on value to be useful for cash transctions for any normal person.


Most important: Any gains you make from risking this sum of money over the next few years will not be life changing, but if you can't afford to lose it, then losses can be. Rhetorical question: How can you trust what I say you should do with your money? Answer: You can't. I'm happy to hear you're reading about the stock market, so please allow me to encourage you to keep learning.  And broaden your target to investing, or even further, to financial planning.  You may decide to pay down debt first.  You may decide to hold cash since you need it within a couple years. Least important: I suggest a Roth IRA at any online discount brokerage whose fees to open an account plus 1 transaction fee are the lowest to get you into a broad-market index ETF or mutual fund.


"For the most part, saving money usually depends upon having a budget and being able to stick to it. The toughest part of budgeting is usually setting it up (how much do I need for X) and sticking to it each month. In regards to sticking to it, there is software that you can use that helps figure out how much you are spending and how much you have left in a given category and they all pretty much do the same thing: track your spending and how much you have left in the category. If you are good with spreadsheets you might prefer that route (cost: free) but software that you can buy usually has value in that it can also generate reports that help you spot trends that you might not see in the spreadsheet. Sticking to a budget can be tough and a lot of what people have said already is good advice, but one thing that helps for me is having ""play money"" that can be used for whatever I want. In general this should be a fairly nominal amount ($20 or $40 a week) but it is enough that if you see a new book you want or what to go out for lunch one day you can do it without impacting the overall budget in some way. Likewise, having bigger savings goals can also be useful in that if times get tough it is easier to stop putting $100 a month to the side for a vacation than it is to cut back your grocery budget."


This is tax fraud, plain and simple. I recently wrote an article The Step Transaction Doctrine, in which I explain that a series of events may each be legal, but aggregate to one transaction and the individual steps are ignored.  In this case, it goes beyond that, by accepting $5/mo you are already outside the tax code. As littleadv noted, you can't work for a legitimate business for free and not expect to have some kind of issue. The $14K/yr gift isn't a bona fide gift, but ties to that work.


> Turns out inside updates via the SIP are received faster than the prop market data feed, and faster than updates received over an order entry connection. Under these circumstances the street knows a trade occurred before the participants in the trade.  You're saying if IEX is the inside quote you see it disappear on a sip feed before you see it disappear from iex's MD feed? AND if it's your quote, even before you receive the trade report?


What can you give them as security?  1. A fixed/floating charge over assets 2. Negative covenants/Non-subordination agreements 3. Real Mortgage 4. Chattel Mortgage 5. Personal or inter-business Guarantees  Essentially a bond is just a debt agreement, it is when you sell standardised bonds over a market that regulation comes into it.  Now I am from Australia, so I can't comment on US policies etc...


The rounding should always follow the same rule. If the value ends in .01 or .02 then you round to .00. Doesn't matter if it's 10.01 rounding to 10.00 or 0.01 to 0.00. The decision on what a company wants to do if an invoice total is $0.01 or $0.02 would be up to the company. The POS system should follow the rule and round to $0.00 if the method of payment is cash, but the company has the right to not give things away for free.  They can impose a minimum cash invoice amount of $0.05. But you would do this by requiring the customer to add more items to their purchase. You couldn't just round the invoice up to $0.05 and to charge them $0.05 for a $0.01 item It would be similar to companies having a minimum purchase amount when paying by credit card. If their minimum amount is $10.00 and you want to buy something that's $5.00, you either pay cash or add something to your order. They don't just charge you $10.00 for your $5.00 item. I think this would be a extreme edge case where you have an invoice with a total of $0.01 or $0.02, without any discounts, partial payments, etc. If the customer's total was $10.01 and they paid with a $10.00 gift card, the final amount owing of $0.01 would round down to $0.00 and they wouldn't owe any more. If they had paid cash, the total would have rounded to $10.00 anyway.  Similarly, if the customer returned an item and bought a new item, or used coupons, and the total owing was $0.01 or $0.02, then you would round down to $0.00 and they wouldn't pay anything. As BobbyScon said, you can implement some options to allow the company to decide how they want to handle this. You could have an option that doesn't allow a sale to be processed if the total amount is less than $0.03 and the sale doesn't include any discounts, returned items, coupons, etc. The option could be to completely block the sale, require a supervisor override, or just display a warning to the cashier. Best bet is to talk to as many of your current or potential clients as you can to see how they would like this edge case handled. For many, it's probably a mute case since they wouldn't have items that have a unit price less than $0.03. Maybe a place like a hardware store that sells individual nuts, bolts, and washers.


Simple math. Take the sale proceeds (after trade expenses) and divide by cost. Subtract 1, and this is your return. For example, buy at 80, sell at 100, 100/80 = 1.25, your return is 25%. To annualize this return, multiply by 365 over the days you were in that stock. If the above stock were held for 3 months, you would have an annualized return of 100%.  There's an alternative way to annualize, in the same example above take the days invested and dive into 365, here you get 4. I suggested that 25% x 4 = 100%. Others will ask why I don't say 1.25^4 = 2.44 so the return is 144%/yr. (in other words, compound the return, 1.25x1.25x...) A single day trade, noon to noon the next day returning just 1%, would multiply to 365% over a year, ignoring the fact there are about 250 trading days. But 1.01^365 is 37.78 or a 3678% return. For long periods, the compounding makes sense of course, the 8%/yr I hope to see should double my money in 9 years, not 12, but taking the short term trades and compounding creates odd results of little value.


You will not necessarily incur a penalty.  You can potentially use the Annualized Income Installment method, which allows you to compute the tax due for each quarter based on income actually earned up to that point in the year.  See Publication 505, in particular Worksheet 2-9.  Form 2210 is also relevant as that is the form you will use when actually calculating whether you owe a penalty after the year is over. On my reading of Form 2210, if you had literally zero income during the first quarter, you won't be expected to make an estimated tax payment for that quarter (as long as you properly follow the Annualized Income Installment method for future quarters).  However, you should go through the calculations yourself to see what the situation is with your actual numbers.


The tax is only payable on the gain you make  i.e the difference between the price you paid and the price you sold at. In your cse no tax is payable if you sell at the same price you bought at


"It would have to be made as a ""gift"", and then the return would be a ""gift"" back to you, because you're not allowed to use a loan for a down payment. This is not to evade taxes.  This is to evade a credit check.  The problem is that banks don't like people to have too much debt.  The bank could void the loan and go after your friends for damages under certain circumstances, as this is a fraud on the bank.  Perhaps you might be guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud or similar.   I'm willing to assume for the sake of argument that there is zero chance of your friend not paying you back intentionally.  But even so, there are still potential problems.  What if your friends end up without the money to pay?  Worse, what if something happens to them?  This is an off-books transaction.  You couldn't make a claim against the estate, as there can't be a paper trail.  You'd be left out the money in those circumstances.   You'd both be safer if your friends saved up for the next opportunity rather than trying to grab this one.   An alternative would be to buy a share of their current rental house.  That would give them the necessary money and would give you paper showing your money.  It's not a gift, it's a purchase.  You'd have to pay capital gains tax on the 15% profit that they're promising you.  But you'd both be above board and honest."